JG-TC.com > Opinion > LETTER: 'New Deal' spending will deepen recession

TODAY'S HEADLINES

SPECIAL SECTION

ONLINE POLL

ONLINE EXTRAS

SITE TOOLS

OTHER LINKS

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Lee Enterprises

Monday, December 15, 2008 9:19 PM CST
LETTER: 'New Deal' spending will deepen recession

By LEONIDAS H. MILLER, Mattoon

“From 1929 to 1939, adult unemployment averaged 18 percent.” James D. Davidson & Wm. Rees-Mogg, “The Great Reckoning,” p. 347.

With the blindness and deceptions fading from the heated passions of the election, we can begin to hope. We can hope for the cold light of reason to illuminate our thinking, using both lessons from the past and a vision of future prospects to consider in the court of public opinion.

We can hope that Barack Obama has some clear understandings of the job he takes on Jan 20. We can hope that with President Bush giving more details about the job, Obama has certain newly formed attitudes.

With our approval we can hear him say that what we need are lowered income tax rates for all who pay income tax. Such rate decreases helped the American economy with Presidents Harding, Coolidge, Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush. Compare. Rate increases harmed the economy with Presidents Wilson, Hoover and Roosevelt. The Hoover-FDR increases prolonged and deepened the depression of the 1930s with the unemployment cited as quoted.

FDR’s New Deal did not bring recovery. It hindered recovery. Pro New Dealers should see the private sector as the real job creators, not the government.

Programs such as the New Deal rely on extreme central planning combined with extreme government spending. No matter how bright the central planners are, they really cannot deal with the size and complexity of the American economy.

Having a million and one private planners across the miles of America, making thousands of business decisions is much better as a recovery plan. Not all will succeed, but the ones who do succeed will provide better directions toward recovery. The ones who fail will not bring mischief for all as do Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

A hopeful Obama plan for Ford Motor et al would not include a political czar. What would help would be repeal of the extreme regulations controlling fuel efficiency and environmental controls. Their extreme burdens of union labor should be removed.

Ford workers should have the same wages and benefits as do workers for Toyota and Honda—-no more. With more profitable assets overseas, Ford et al could restructure with only a brief visit to chapter 11 bankruptcy.

This is important because a certain question has not been asked. Has the US already maxed out its credit card? New Deal type spending could be out of the question.

Add your comments

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Not already registered?
Then click Here.

Comment policy:

JG-TC.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed. Comments posted on Saturday may not be reviewed until Sunday afternoon.

In order to keep the page a set width, long lines (mostly long links) will be chopped. Try putting spaces in your links or consider using tinyurl.com to make a smaller link that you can include.

We will never edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to remove comments that violate our code of conduct.

No comment may contain:

* Potentially libelous statements; such as accusing somebody of a crime, defamation of character, or statements that can harm somebody's reputation.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults, threats, harassment or inciting violence.
* Commercial product promotions.

If you have any questions, please contact our moderator.

The Question wrote on Dec 16, 2008 4:59 AM:

" Ever heard of an economic problem that cannot be solved by another tax cut to billionaires, Miller? If you cut taxes by 100 percent, how much would government revenue rise, in your view? By 1,000 percent? "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 16, 2008 7:29 AM:

" Let 'em eat cake! "

Cognitus wrote on Dec 16, 2008 10:32 AM:

" Miller:"Pro New Dealers should see the private sector as the real job creators"
Would Leonidas please list the private sector businesses in Charleston-Mattoon who are creating jobs this week -- or are likely to do so within the next month -- or next year????

"We can hope that with President Bush giving more details about the job, Obama has certain newly formed attitudes"
Leonidas, Bush HAS no details about the job; you're not noticed that the guy is an ignoramus. Ever listen to him try to explain any aspect of his problem;

"Having a million and one private planners across the miles of America, making thousands of business decisions is much better"
That's what we have, and it doens't seem to have worked very well; if you think otherwise, ask the auto companies, the housing industry which has thousands of half-built homes standing in half-built subdivisions (I saw this first-hand at Thanksgiving in Northern Virginia a couple of weeks ago.). "

sapient wrote on Dec 16, 2008 11:05 AM:

" Econ 101, lowering taxes increases revenue because when people have more money they spend it. Those to whom they spend it pay taxes on it and spend it. Then they pay taxes on it and spend it, and on and on. Whether it was Kennedy, Reagan, or Bush the tax cuts increased revenue. The rich (and I'm not one of them nor am I jealous of them) provide jobs for the rest of us. By overtaxing them they reduce the number of jobs for the middle class and poor people. Roosevelt's social programs prolonged the depression years longer than it would have lasted otherwise. You hit the nail on the head Mr. Miller. "

The Question wrote on Dec 16, 2008 11:24 AM:

" "Econ 101, lowering taxes increases revenue because when people have more money they spend it."
----
So when you lower taxes to zero, just how much vast government revenue to you generate, O Sappy the Economist?
And, by the way, when American billionaires spend their money in India, how much do the people there pay in U.S. taxes? "

The Question wrote on Dec 16, 2008 11:38 AM:

" Yep, tax cuts sure will generate revenue, Reagan and two Bushes told us.
The national debt tripled under eight years of the tax-cutting man from Hollywood. Then came George H. W. Bush for another four years, and Americas national debt during 12 years and three Republican terms quadrupled.
But nobody can spend borrowed money like George W. Bush. America has long since surpassed the $10 TRILLION milestone. According to the U.S. National Debt Clock, we are now at $10.7 trillion. The Bush national debt increases to the tune of about $4 BILLION A DAY.
And that's how tax cuts increase revenue, kids.
Republicans like to talk about madness consisting of doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. They should know. "

father bob wrote on Dec 16, 2008 11:54 AM:

" these do-gooder neocons on their rant about government spending is just too comical.

just what the he11 has taken place the last 8 years....???? how many trillions do we owe china?

get a grip. and just how many people would possibly take george wft bush's advice on anything?.....ROFLMAO!! "

father bob wrote on Dec 16, 2008 12:48 PM:

" sapient wrote on Dec 16, 2008 11:05 AM:
"By overtaxing them they reduce the number of jobs for the middle class and poor people."
_______________

yeah well, why don't you open that little econ 101 text and do a little studying? the rich aren't going to be "overtaxed" anymore than the rest of us. as i recall most of the fortune 500 companies were flourishing during the clinton years.....which is the level of taxation obama is initially proposing.

as far as taxes farther down the road, i want you to tell me WHO do you think is going to have to pay for bush's 9.5 trillion loan from china plus his war, and now the financial bailouts???

it's going to be strapped right on YOUR back and mine regardless of who's in office. quit parroting the talking points of the wealthy who finance the GOP, and start using that 2 cell brain of yours. "

Becky wrote on Dec 16, 2008 1:18 PM:

" I'll make a deal with you Miller. When the politicians take a huge pay cut, denounce their own health care and cut their own retirement in half, then they can start telling their working constituents how to do it. Otherwise, they just need to shut up. "

father bob wrote on Dec 16, 2008 2:45 PM:

" The most urgent task for the new president will be to restore the economy's strength. Given our national debt, it is especially important to do that in ways that maximize the bang for our buck and help address at least one of the major deficits. Tax cuts workif they workby increasing consumption, but America's problem is that we have been on a consumption binge; prolonging that binge just postpones dealing with the deeper problems. States and localities are about to face real budget constraints as tax revenues plummet, and unless something is done, they will be forced to cut spending, deepening the downturn. At the federal level, we need to spend more, not less. The economy must be reconfigured to reflect new realitiesincluding global warming. We will need fast trains and more efficient power plants. Such expenditures stimulate the economy while providing the foundation for long-term sustainable growth.

There are only two ways to pay for these investments: raise taxes or cut other expenditures. Upper-income Americans can well afford to pay higher taxes, and many countries in Europe have succeeded because of, not despite, high tax ratesrates that have enabled them to invest and compete in a globalized world.

But needless to say, there will be resistance to tax increases, and so the focus will shift to cuts. But our social expenditures are already so bare-bones that there is little to spare. Indeed, we stand out among the advanced industrial countries in the inadequacy of social protection. The problems with America's health care system, for example, are well recognized; fixing them means not only greater social justice, but greater economic efficiency. (Healthier workers are more productive workers.) That leaves but one major area in which to cutdefense. We account for half of all the world's military expenditures, with 42 percent of tax dollars spent directly or indirectly on defense. Even nonwar military expenditures have soared. With so much money spent on weapons that don't work against enemies that don't exist, there is ample room to increase security at the same time that we cut defense expenditures. "

father bob wrote on Dec 16, 2008 2:50 PM:

" i love this suggestion:

Hundreds of thousands of old shoes mailed to and thrown over the White House fence into the yard before 01-20-09 would be a lovely going away protest gift for the war profiteers and criminals who have dirtied the place up over the last eight years. And then of course war crimes trials for them all! "

The Question wrote on Dec 16, 2008 4:44 PM:

" You right wingers always want to cut taxes further, but you never want to talk about where you're supposed to get the revenue to pay for your $10 billion-per-month wreckage and occupation of Iraq.
Oh, that's right, according to the Bush administration, the Iraq invasion will "pay for itself," right? It's been a half-dozen years now. When do you think that "pay for itself" stuff might start kicking in, O right-wing warmonger economists? "

Raptor wrote on Dec 16, 2008 5:08 PM:

" Lower taxes. Lower barriers to trade. Fewer union rules. More small business. That is my opinion.

What we are doing is relying more on the government for solutions. What is about to happen is the printing of more money.

The idea is that if we print and spend the new money into the economy then we will not have inflation and we will prevent deflation. Nobody really knows if this will work.

The US currently has 70% of it's economy built on the service sector. That is about to change. We have too little based on industry, technology and creating products that contribute to GDP. Fortunately in East Central Illinois we have agriculture. Commodities will be our sustaining component.

More of my opinion is that the Dollar will decline and inflation will rise.

Whatever happens it will be interesting and exciting. Some entrepreneurs will make money. And some won't. "

medic57 wrote on Dec 16, 2008 5:13 PM:

" Father Bob

Sorry, we've been sold down the river so much in the last 20 years, there is no American Economy left, it is a Global economy now, and that will be the ruination for a lot of Americans. Funny, about a year ago, the leader of Iran said, the easiest way to destroy America is to destroy wall street. For the idiot that most people thought he was, he was exactly right. "

father bob wrote on Dec 16, 2008 5:25 PM:

" interestingly, i was looking at bailout articles this morning.

there was talk by bush in february about bailing out wall street. and they say it happened overnight giving them no time to prepare. BS!!!

google "bush financial bailout" under news....and see for yourself "

Mike P wrote on Dec 16, 2008 6:36 PM:

" This crisis has a slightly different dynamic, than the great depression. Globalization has made our oversight failures ripple throughout most every corner of the globe. Us home values have dropped more than a trillion dollars. Retirement plans have lost more than a trillion dollars. This crisis is still on life support, and the Fed is lowering rates to .5 percent, with little else it can realisticly do.

This crisis is far from over, job cuts, business closures, and various other aspects of decline are months from leveling off, if there is any possibility of pulling out of this begun uncontrolled dive. We were cruising at 30 thousand feet, and had catastophic engine failure. The nose of the plane has barely begun to point down, the last few months, were just the slight shudder of the change in force and direction occurring suddenly. It will be months, before we know if this craft is capable of gliding, or falling like a rock. Put your seat backs and tray tables in their upright positions, and fasten your seatbelts.

If blaming someone who inherited a mess of yet undetermined magnatude and still unfolding uncertainty, makes some feel better about the ride we now find ourselves at the mercy of, every one has their own coping mechanisms in times of crisis like this. If their memory of various former leaders administrations, is what they base their views of reality on, we can hardly blame them for being out of touch and pointing at the guy yet to take the controlls.

They were fostered to believe in invisible enemies, trickle down economics and probably had bomb shelter plans back in the fifties. There are generations of some folks, who believe what politicians say, no matter what is really going on in the world, and regardless of who disputes the word of thier heralded leaders and administrations, past present or future.

The big 3 have been out of their league in the business they created, for decades. Fuel economy, and safety requirements are more lax than they might be, simply to accomodate them. They made their beds, its high time they were forced to deal with their many decisions, that led them to teetering on the brink, long before the financial crisis began to unfold.

Domestic car production focused on changing it from the durable goods category, to increasingly becoming more and more of a disposable item. These disposables range in price from 12, to 50+ thousand dollars. With the introduction of 7 year loan programs, it became an endless cycle of constant car payments, and the big 3 all had their own finance branches to accomodate. Few Big 3 cars, subjected to normal every day driving, have a life span of the length they are financed. Trade in, carry balance over to new loan, thank you for the repeat business. They did this completely to themselves.

They moved out of the country to avoid labor laws of various requirements, and failed to yield a profit. Foreign carmakers moved here, cutting one of the biggest costs, transportation of their parts and finished products, and have thrived. They have led the way in development and durability, for decades. Many ways they could have positively impacted their own longevity are long since passed.

The 14 billion is to survive one month. It is estimated it will be hundreds of billions, and bulks of their assets are over seas now. They are beyond shoring up, in their domestic production only, so countless billions would be going towards maintaining their various foreign investments.

Back in the late eighties and early 90's chrysler was bringing cars from south america, to sell here, ford was as well, and chevy was importing from canada. As far as I am concerned, they ceased being US car manufacturers, when they fled our labor laws. Its past time these near century old companies were made to face the decisions they made, and if that means they get sold off, other companies will fill their voids, and know to do it right or fail like any business that can't be sustainably profitable should. "

medic57 wrote on Dec 16, 2008 7:09 PM:

" Also, the 14 B dollar bailout package isn't exactly kosher, that's 14 Billion for each automaker, included in the bill was a $5000 a year raise for federal judges. "

Locke wrote on Dec 16, 2008 7:14 PM:

" Mr. Miller,

Feel free to research FDR's many responses to the economy, and please, get back to us with the one that brought us out of the Great Depression. I'll even give you a hint: John Maynard Keynes. By 1940, Keynesian economics brought unemployment down from a high of 25% in 1932 to just 10%. Anyone can have an opinion, but an opinion based in fact means alot more than one that doesn't. "

Locke wrote on Dec 16, 2008 7:31 PM:

" Somebody wrote: "Econ 101, lowering taxes increases revenue because when people have more money they spend it... The rich provide jobs for the rest of us. By overtaxing them they reduce the number of jobs for the middle class and poor people."

First, go read about the Laffer Curve. Second, watch the news -- how come with supply-side economics in charge, we've had lower taxes on the wealthiest American, lower standards of living by the majority of Americans, and increasing national debt?

No, this isn't Econ 101, this is Recite the Political Mantra of Make-Believe 101. "

RJM wrote on Dec 16, 2008 9:11 PM:

" Locke, Keynesian economics brought us out of the Great Depression?
Two points:

1) Roosevelt never fully subscribed to Keynes' counterintuitive argument that government's should spend more during hard times. Roosevelt was a faint-hearted Keynesian, at best.

2) World War II ended both the temporary New Deal programs and the Depression they were attempting to cure.

3) The New Deal went a long way toward alleviating the worst suffering of the Depression while still being captive to the conventional thinking (political, fiscal, racial) of the day. We cannot answer the question of whether it could have ended the Depression based on historical facts because World War II interrupted the process.

Welcome to History 101 and Econ 201, Locke. "

RJM wrote on Dec 16, 2008 9:34 PM:

" One more point Locke, you stated that by 1940, Keynesian economics brought unemployment down from a high of 25% in 1932 to just 10%.

That is factually incorrect. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the unemployment rate was still nearly 15 percent in 1940, 14.6% to be precise.
That leaves an error of almost 50% in your statement.

I'm afraid your statements are hardly based on facts. And in the future you would do well to be more careful when dispensing the insults. "

Locke wrote on Dec 17, 2008 12:21 AM:

" You know full well the New Deal was based on Keynesian economics. It is more accurate to say FDR stumbled into Keynes after trying just about everything else (1930-1932.)

1929 3.2% Market crashes (Nov)
1930 8.9% Depression takes hold
1931 16.3% Unemployment up
1932 24.1% Unemployment up
1933 25.2% FDR enacts Keynes policies
1934 21.7% Unemployment down
1935 20.1% Unemployment down
1936 16.9% Unemployment down
1937 14.3% Unemployment down
1938 19.1% Unemployment up
1939 17.2% Unemployment down
1940 14.6% Unemployment down
1941 9.9% US enters war (Dec)
1942 4.7% War footing
1943 1.9% War footing

War had nothing to do with the New Deal, 1933-1936.

Yes we can see the New Deal having an impact, 1934-1937. 1941 comprised 11 months (and 7 days) of not being on a war footing. Some jobs were created with lend lease and other military programs, but there was no gradual build-up of American industry in anticipation of war -- that happened 1942-1943.

So I hit the wrong button, your point? Oh, everything I said was wrong because you see there is 50% less of an impact between 1940 and 1941. Good job, you have totally disproven my point -- not.

As usual, you have found a small flaw in my comment, attempted to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and completely dodge the point being made. Focus on the thesis, not the trivia.

The New Deal halted the failing economy and gradually began to improve employment prospects. And yes, by the time we went to war, it was down to 10%, or 9.9% to be exact. "

RJM wrote on Dec 17, 2008 6:28 AM:

" My schedule did not permit me to address this last night, and I'm limited this morning. I will single source my reply to a multifaceted misconception propagated by would-be socialists.

Inequality Myths from Investors Business Daily.

In fact, America's fast-growing economy has always bred differences in income. Some people are smarter, more talented, better educated and trained, or more entrepreneurial. In a free-market society or relatively free, anyway they'll do better. But they make the rest of us richer, too. We may envy them, but we're better off.

As for spreading the wealth, the definitive data come from the Gini ratio, calculated by the Census Bureau. Simply put, the Gini ratio measures income dispersion in a society that is, inequality.

Go back to 1947, as the U.S. emerged from World War II and the Great Depression. Since that year, the U.S. has had the most amazing run of wealth and income creation of any economy ever. We are today the richest country on earth, and No. 2 isn't close.

Yet, over that time, according to the Census Bureau, U.S. income inequality has risen by 15%. Why? Fast-growing economies are almost always accompanied by income inequality it was true of the U.S. in the past, and it's true of India and China today.

This isn't a bad thing. We benefit from this. The rich earn a lot of income, yes, but they pay even more in taxes. They also create thousands of businesses, millions of jobs and trillions in income.

That said, it's shocking to discover a little-known truth: The U.S. today has one of the most progressive tax codes in the industrialized world. And it's gotten more so over time.

As IRS data show, in 1980, the top 1% earned 8.5% of all adjusted gross income but paid 19% of all taxes. By 2006, that same group's share of AGI had risen to 22%, but its share of taxes had soared to 40%. That is, their tax bill rose faster than their income share.

A recent OECD study looked at federal tax rates paid by the rich vs. low-income workers in rich countries. The U.S. ratio is 1.3 vs. an average of less than 1.2 for other wealthy nations. As American Enterprise Institute economist Kevin Hassett noted, "the U.S. redistributes far more than the typical developed country."

Unfortunately, the focus on inequality obscures a key fact: Americans aren't taking home "less and less," as Obama says. Nor have wages "flatlined." Indeed, incomes are growing for everyone.

Again, census data tell the story.

Incomes for the poorest one-fifth of all earners have grown on average 3.9% a year since 1994. Meanwhile, those in the middle three-fifths of incomes broadly speaking, the middle class have grown by 3.4% to 3.6% a year. Incomes grew after inflation, too. So it's simply wrong to say there was no growth.

To correct these imaginary inequities, Obama talks about hitting the top 5% of incomes with new, higher taxes. But guess what? That'll only punish the millions of Americans who rely on the top earners for jobs and incomes. During a time of national recession, such policies aren't only unwise they could prove disastrous. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 17, 2008 8:12 AM:

" Incomes for the poorest one-fifth of all earners have grown on average 3.9% a year since 1994. Meanwhile, those in the middle three-fifths of incomes broadly speaking, the middle class have grown by 3.4% to 3.6% a year. Incomes grew after inflation, too. So it's simply wrong to say there was no growth.

*********************

I'm sure it was an oversight on the part of RJM in his omission of the growth rate for the very top earners.

I wonder why he left that out? lol.

After reading this post, I'm starting to feel sorry for those overburdened fat cats on the top. No wonder Bush wanted to give them some relief. Perhaps a bake sale is needed to help them with their heavy tax burden. "

HeinekenMan wrote on Dec 17, 2008 8:36 AM:

" I love it when some lay person from Hicktown, U.S.A. thinks he knows more than some of the top economists and political minds on the planet.

By all means, hop on the bus and head to Washington, Mr. Know-It-All. "

The Question wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:06 AM:

" The consensus used to be that the New Deal was effective, although not perfect, as Larry Beinhart as noted.
Unemployment was at about 25 percent at the start of the Great Depression. By1940, it was at 15 percent. But the New Deal also saved the United States from embracing the totalitarian extremes of fascism or communism as other nations did. FDR saved capitalism, a fact for which the ingrate capitalists have never thanked him.
But the American right has invested huge sums of money into selling the claim that FDR's policies were ineffective. It is one of the central tenets of their modern propaganda campaign. That's why we have to listen to this idiocy about how tax cuts will somehow fix everything they have already helped wreck. "

father bob wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:15 AM:

" medic57 wrote on Dec 16, 2008 5:13 PM:
" Father Bob

Sorry, we've been sold down the river so much in the last 20 years, there is no American Economy left, it is a Global economy now, and that will be the ruination for a lot of Americans. Funny, about a year ago, the leader of Iran said, the easiest way to destroy America is to destroy wall street. For the idiot that most people thought he was, he was exactly right. """"
_____________________
my reply yesterday did not pass the moderator for some reason....i'll try again.

bin laden thought that bringing down the world trade towers would do the same thing, but it seems our financial sector has done his dirtywork for him. "

Collatine wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:38 AM:

" A massive "New Deal" type spending plan has been tried as recently as the 1990s in Japan, after Japan's property prices and stock market plunged 60% in three years.

In 1991, Japan's debt-to-GDP ratio was about 65% (the US was at about 45%). Japan embarked on a decade of incredible spending on infrastructure, buying bad debt, and government "loans" in businesses to try and prop up the anemic economy (sound familiar?)

The ensuing 18 years, their economy didn't really grow, but they do have really nice roads. (The 90s are known in Japan as the "lost decade"...in America, with a balanced budget and Clinton's tax cuts, we had a boom, you'll recall).

By 2000, Japan's debt-to-GDP ratio was about 140% (the US's was about 35%). Today, Japan's is about 170%, and ours is still about 35%. Japan has never emerged from their economic downturn.

What does this teach us? Massive New Deal-like spending will give us nice roads, but won't substantively improve the economy. (Source: yesterday's Wall Street Journal's editorial, "Barack Obama-san").

That being said, I'm not opposed to the trillion dollar spending, because it will personally help Mattoon (i.e., FutureGen), maybe Oakland (that biofuels plant), and maybe Arcola (their Green resort) - and thus the entire region.

Also, Bernanke is a smart guy, so hopefully his efforts with the Fed will stimulate the private sector into investing for growth, and hopefully that will offset the depressing actions of ballooning debt to build new roads (and clean coal power plants). If that works, I'll be glad to give Obama all the credit. lol "

RJM wrote on Dec 17, 2008 12:43 PM:

" Locke, here's your original statements: "...the one that brought us out of the Great Depression. I'll even give you a hint: John Maynard Keynes."
And also: "By 1940, Keynesian economics brought unemployment down from a high of 25% in 1932 to just 10%."

The New Deal differed from Keynesian Economics on several key points:

Keynes did not advocate building infrastructure (the cornerstone to FDR's New Deal And Obama's). Instead, he suggested that governments should pay people to dig ditches and then fill them up again. Please note, contrary to FDR's plan, this would NOT create infrastructure. But it would put money into the pockets of people, and that was the aim of Keynes exercise.

During the New Deal, Roosevelt swore by balanced budgets, the ruling economic orthodoxy. But Keynes General Theory argued this was a mistake, and that governments should run large fiscal deficits during a recession to pump more demand into the economy. Roosevelts budget-balancing efforts typically failed, and he often ended up with budget deficits without meaning to. So at best FDR was a Keynesian by accident.

While unemployment was on the decline at the outset of WWII, there is no evidence that this scenario could have been sustained while budget deficits would have naturally continued to climb. In many countries during the 1970s, the model of Keynesian spending did not boost GDP and eventually led to inflation rather than growth. However, global experience showed that Keynesian demand management did not require infrastructure spending. The simplest, quickest way to increase purchasing power was to cut taxes.

Again I will restate my original conclusion: We cannot answer the question of whether The New Deal could have ended the Depression based on historical facts because World War II interrupted the process. "

RJM wrote on Dec 17, 2008 12:52 PM:

" Harry Potter wrote: "I'm sure it was an oversight on the part of RJM in his omission of the growth rate for the very top earners."

Those growth rates were provided by the article, not me. However the article DID provide these stats for the top earners, three paragraphs prior:

"As IRS data show, in 1980, the top 1% earned 8.5% of all adjusted gross income but paid 19% of all taxes. By 2006, that same group's share of AGI had risen to 22%, but its share of taxes had soared to 40%. That is, their tax bill rose faster than their income share." "

RJM wrote on Dec 17, 2008 1:02 PM:

" Somebody wrote:

"I love it when some lay person from Hicktown, U.S.A. thinks he knows more than some of the top economists and political minds on the planet."

That statement could be directed towards Locke, as easily as anyone.

To that point, here's what some top economists and political minds on the planet have to say:

George Will - "The assumption is that the New Deal vanquished the Depression. Intelligent, informed people differ about why the Depression lasted so long. But people whose recipe for recovery today is another New Deal should remember that America's biggest industrial collapse occurred in 1937, eight years after the 1929 stock market crash and nearly five years into the New Deal. In 1939, after a decade of frantic federal spending - President Herbert Hoover increased it more than 50 percent between 1929 and the inauguration of Franklin Roosevelt - unemployment was 17.2 percent."

In "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression," Amity Shlaes of the Council on Foreign Relations and Bloomberg News argues that government policies, beyond the Federal Reserve's tight money, deepened and prolonged the Depression. The policies included encouraging strong unions and higher wages than lagging productivity justified, on the theory that workers' spending would be stimulative. Instead, corporate profits - prerequisites for job-creating investments - were excessively drained into labor expenses that left many workers priced out of the market.

In a 2004 paper, Harold L. Cole of the University of California at Los Angeles and Lee E. Ohanian of UCLA and the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis argued that the Depression would have ended in 1936, rather than in 1943, were it not for policies that magnified the power of labor and encouraged the cartelization of industries. These policies expressed the New Deal premise that the Depression was caused by excessive competition that first reduced prices and wages and then reduced employment and consumer demand. In a forthcoming paper, Ohanian argues that "much of the depth of the Depression" is explained by Hoover's policy - a precursor of the New Deal mentality - of pressuring businesses to keep nominal wages fixed.

Furthermore, Hoover's 1932 increase in the top income tax rate, from 25 percent to 63 percent, was unhelpful. And FDR's hyperkinetic New Deal created uncertainties that paralyzed private-sector decision making. Which sounds familiar. "

Becky wrote on Dec 17, 2008 1:11 PM:

" "Unfortunately, the focus on inequality obscures a key fact: Americans aren't taking home "less and less," as Obama says. Nor have wages "flatlined." Indeed, incomes are growing for everyone."

You've GOT to be kidding me! Do you really believe this or do you just have your head buried in the sand? "

father bob wrote on Dec 17, 2008 2:18 PM:

" RJM wrote on Dec 17, 2008 12:52 PM:
"As IRS data show, in 1980, the top 1% earned 8.5% of all adjusted gross income but paid 19% of all taxes. By 2006, that same group's share of AGI had risen to 22%, but its share of taxes had soared to 40%. That is, their tax bill rose faster than their income share." """

so their taxes went up 11% in 26 years...not bad given the growth in economy, stocks and investments over the same period. "

RJM wrote on Dec 17, 2008 3:44 PM:

" Becky wrote: "You've GOT to be kidding me! Do you really believe this or do you just have your head buried in the sand?"

Read it for yourself, Becky.
Here it is straight from the U.S. Census Bureau: http://tinyurl.com/2ptlu3 "

RJM wrote on Dec 17, 2008 3:48 PM:

" father bob wrote: "so their taxes went up 11% in 26 years...not bad given the growth in economy, stocks and investments over the same period."

Their share of taxes also soared to 40%. Their tax bill rose faster than their income share. You seem to brush over that point. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 17, 2008 4:14 PM:

" I hope some of you looked up the site RJM suggested if not consider this. The report opens with "median" household income. Median is not the same as mean. Check the definitions yourself. The poverty rate went down from 05 to 06 but not by a statistically different amount and even then "there were 36.5 million people in poverty in 2006".That's a whole lot of folks. "

father bob wrote on Dec 17, 2008 4:14 PM:

" RJM wrote on Dec 17, 2008 3:48 PM:
"Their share of taxes also soared to 40%. Their tax bill rose faster than their income share. You seem to brush over that point. """"

do the math using your own figures. i would more than gladly trade places with any of the top 1% of the wage earners. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 17, 2008 4:47 PM:

" Some other curious stats. The top 1% of Americans receive more income than the bottom 40 percent. On a world wide scale: The richest 1% of the worlds adults owned 40% of the world's total assets. The bottom half of the world adult population owned 1% of global wealth. We also know about the effects of poverty on health statistics, education, crime, etc. I mentioned 36.5 million Americans live in poverty in 2006. That's alot of angry, disenfranchised, bored young adults. AND we know how much trouble just a few angry, disenfranchised, bored young adults can cause--19 flew planes into a couple of buildings and led to........ "

Mike P wrote on Dec 17, 2008 6:56 PM:

" Lets look at this presented data a slightly different way. We are given that in 1980 the top 1 percent of the population, earned 8.5 percent of adjusted gross income, and paid 19 percent of taxes. 2006 figures show top 1 percent, earned 22 percent AGI, and paid 40 percent of taxes.

In 26 years, the population increased, so one percent of 2006 population means substancially more people, than 1 percent of 1980 population. In that same time, the number of million and billion dollar club members saw a bit of an increase as well.

Now lets crunch some numbers, 22 divided by 8.5, is 2.59. Fourty divided by 19, is 2.1. Now restate this data like this, in 2006 the top 1% of the population, earned 2.59 times more in AGI, and paid 2.1 times more in taxes than the top 1% did in 1980. Now we just need how many people were calculated in the top 1% in each data collection period, to further evaluate what this is actually saying. "

Locke wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:03 PM:

" There is plenty of data that proves the New Deal did reduce unemployment, prior to the war.

Arguing that there is not enough proof because WW2 happened, that would be like arguing Lincoln was not a great president because he was assassinated in 1865 -- there is plenty of proof between 1861 and 1865 to substantiate he was a good president. The fact the New Deal stopped unemployment from rising at a critical time, then produced a decline in unemployment is proof.

Furthermore, the war-footing economy was Keynesian economics on steroids. Spend the bank and worry about the nasty effects afterwards! Instead of building roads and taking pictures in the New Deal, the government at war provided jobs building guns, tanks, bombers, and ships.

One alternative, as suggested by some here, would be to cut taxes. The problem with this is we are on the far side of the Laffer Curve. Like another suggested, if we cut taxes to nothing, there will be no revenue to generate. We've seen tax cuts for the last 8 years and where it has gotten us? "

Mike P wrote on Dec 17, 2008 11:08 PM:

" Top one percent for 2000 data, would shed some light on how this demographic fared under the higher tax brackets being 3 to 4 percent higher. Tat being a census year, it should be out there. I had my fill of tax brackets, when I looked them up prior to the election. "

Becky wrote on Dec 18, 2008 7:32 AM:

" RJM: Even if American's actual income rose SLIGHTLY, the inflation of food, gas, heat, electric, health care, medicines, insurance has increased dramatically making that SLIGHT increase in incomes a moot point. The 3% increases doesn't even come close to the double digit inflation. You see, if you add 3 and take away 14, IT'S LESS than what you started with. You know, kinda like BASIC MATH type of thing going on here. "

RJM wrote on Dec 18, 2008 10:49 AM:

" Becky wrote: "Even if American's actual income rose SLIGHTLY, the inflation of food, gas, heat, electric, health care, medicines, insurance has increased dramatically making that SLIGHT increase in incomes a moot point. The 3% increases doesn't even come close to the double digit inflation. You see, if you add 3 and take away 14, IT'S LESS than what you started with. You know, kinda like BASIC MATH type of thing going on here."

I'm afraid it's slightly more than a "BASIC MATH type of thing going on here", Becky.
To that point; does this answer your question?

Cost of Living Adjustment

In order to accurately assess changes
in income and earnings over time, an
adjustment for changes in the cost of
living is required. The Census Bureau
uses the research series of the
Consumer Price Index (CPI-U-RS), provided
by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics for 1977 through 2006, to
adjust for changes in the cost of living. "

RJM wrote on Dec 18, 2008 10:58 AM:

" Becky, you seem to be personally offended that anyone would dare mention statistics that challenge your notion of poverty. I'm simply reporting factual data as per the government collection process.

You may find these facts equally distasteful:

Data on income collected in the ASEC
by the U.S. Census Bureau cover
money income received (exclusive of
certain money receipts such as capital
gains) before payments for personal
income taxes, social security, union
dues, Medicare deductions, etc.
Therefore, money income does not
reflect the fact that some families
receive noncash benefits, such as food
stamps, health benefits, subsidized
housing, and goods produced and
consumed on the farm. In addition,
money income does not reflect the
fact that noncash benefits are also
received by some nonfarm residents,
which often take the form of the use
of business transportation and facilities,
full or partial payments by business
for retirement programs, medical
and educational expenses, etc. Data
users should consider these elements
when comparing income levels.
Moreover, readers should be aware
that for many different reasons there
is a tendency in household surveys for
respondents to underreport their
income. Based on an analysis of
independently derived income estimates,
the Census Bureau determined
that respondents report income earned
from wages or salaries much better
than other sources of income, and that
the reported wage and salary income
is nearly equal to independent estimates of aggregate income. "

RJM wrote on Dec 18, 2008 11:11 AM:

" In response to Locke:

I will source two people who are far more qualified than you and I:

"Price Fishback Professor of Economics at University of Arizona,
and Robert Higgs,Senior Fellow in Political Economy for The Independent Institute and Editor of the Institutes quarterly journal "The Independent Review". Dr. Higgs received his Ph.D. in economics from Johns Hopkins University, and he has taught at the University of Washington, Lafayette College, Seattle University, and the University of Economics, Prague. He has been a visiting scholar at Oxford University and Stanford University, and a fellow for the Hoover Institution and the National Science Foundation. He is the author of many books, including Depression, War, and Cold War.

I'm sure you will find the credentials of these two gentlemen to be beyond reproach, and worthy of our serious consideration:

"It is widely held that World War II was a huge Keynesian stimulus that finally brought us out of the Great Depression. On the surface the facts seem to fit. The Federal government devoted 44 percent of GDP to fighting the war and ran very large deficits. Unemployment rates fell below 2 percent even as large numbers of women entered the work force.
In a series of academic papers, Robert Higgs of the Independent Institute has raised doubts about this rosy picture of Keynesian stimulus. The war economy was a very unusual setting. While running large deficits, the federal government took command over large segments of the economy, allocated a large part of the resources to the war effort, put 15 percent of the working age population in the military, and established wage and price controls.

The official statistics on private consumption during World War II suggest that real consumption expenditures rose, but they use official controlled prices that misrepresent the true price of consumer goods in the period. After relatively minor adjustments to reflect the real prices, real consumption in the middle of the war was lower than it was in 1941. Most in the military were risking life and limb in foreign lands. On the home front people could not buy new autos, tires, and many appliances at any price.

Rationing programs sharply limited access to meat, sugar, gasoline, and a wide array of other products. Life during World War II was a largely a continuation of the deprivation of the Great Depression with two exceptions. Fighting the war put many in the frame of mind that they were sacrificing for a much larger goal of winning the war, and people accumulated savings because there was not much they could buy at the time.

One sign that Keynesian budget deficits were not the key to bringing the U.S. out of the Great Depression is what happened after the War. Every Keynesian predicted that the private economy would go into a recession because the large government budget deficits would be eliminated and so many men would be returning from the War jobless. Instead, as government deficits receded, private consumption and investment boomed. Resources were no longer allocated to producing munitions and instead were devoted to production of typical consumer goods and services."

Thank you, Locke. "

RJM wrote on Dec 18, 2008 11:17 AM:

" I apologize for my condensed and lenghty responses. My schedule does not permit me to follow this discussion on a more methodical level. "

The Question wrote on Dec 18, 2008 12:10 PM:

" No need to consult economists to find how corporate capitalism works. The whole world now knows the answer -- it does not work, except for the corporate capitalists themselves.
Far from being accountable for anything, they are are able to order their governmental minions to steal taxpayer trillions for them after their greed has wrecked the world economy. "

Becky wrote on Dec 18, 2008 12:15 PM:

" RJM: You can quote all of the statistics you want of people covering up their own backsides. All I KNOW is that me and everybody (and I mean EVERYBODY) that I know, work with, my family, posters here....EVERYBODY is hurting. The dollar's purchasing power has dwindled what, 35-40%? and when our esteemed liars in govt want to make themselves look good, they remove any of the bad info from their "statistics" because they all want to still get paid. That's why they suddenly decided to take out the rise in food and energy from the national inflation figures because keeping them in would have told us the TRUTH! So, I really don't care what you think of me but I am really tired of the same ol schmeel coming from people who still have thier heads buried in the sand. If you want to live that way, by my guest. Just don't expect the rest of us to eat up your logic because we hear it every time some repub gets in office and once again asserts Reaganomics. They don't work, never have worked and never will work. It creates recessions and allows those at the top to feed off of the middle class and poor. Just because you repeat something over and over doesn't make it true. "

The Question wrote on Dec 18, 2008 12:24 PM:

" Republicans want Pottersville. Everybody else wants Bedford Falls. "

Becky wrote on Dec 18, 2008 12:32 PM:

" And here's some more information from none other than the US Census:

October 2003 figures from the US Census Bureau make stark reading:
Median household incomes are falling
The number of Americans without health insurance rose by 5.7 percent to 43.6 million individuals.
The number of people living below the poverty line ($18,392 for a family of four) climbed to 12.1 percent 34.6 million people.
Wages make up the majority of income for most American families. As "Downward Mobility," NOW's report on workers and wages illustrates, many American workers are facing corporate efforts to cut pay and benefits, which could lead to more American families struggling to stay out of poverty.

So you see, either of us can find pretty much a study somewhere backing our opinions. All I know and have lived through, is that when a repub gets in office, initiates trickle down economics, it starts the sharks at the top of the food chain on a feeding frenzy eating and feeding off of those underneath them. Which is us. It creates recessions, layoffs, busts the backs of the working people in this country. I'm tired of people tinkling on my leg and telling me it's the money trickling down. "

warrior wrote on Dec 18, 2008 12:32 PM:

" Cognitus wrote on Dec 16, 2008 10:32 AM:

" Miller:"Pro New Dealers should see the private sector as the real job creators"
Now Cognitus, when you refer to America in your response are you referring to North, South or Central.
As far as referring to people being ignorant, maybe you should look in a mirror.
Bush didn't have nothing to do with the housing industry giving bad loans, that would have been up to the oversight committee that was ran by democrats. The auto Industry is losing money because the UAW is still paying people 95% of their wages from when they were laid off 20 years ago due to automation technology that took their jobs. No company in the world could afford to pay someone 95% of their salary for not working.
Now does your mommy know your on the computer? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 18, 2008 2:14 PM:

" If you look around you will see we are all living in the Democrats pay-for-play version of Pottersville. Courtesy of The Democrat controlled Congress.

"The Most Ethical Congress Ever!" "

father bob wrote on Dec 18, 2008 2:22 PM:

" warrior wrote on Dec 18, 2008 12:32 PM:
" No company in the world could afford to pay someone 95% of their salary for not working."""

subpay has a time limit. i'd like you to give us the sources of your information. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 18, 2008 2:23 PM:

" Question- (Far from being accountable for anything, they are are able to order their governmental minions to steal taxpayer trillions for them after their greed has wrecked the world economy.)

Look at that. Question just described Democrats: Bawney Fwank, Chriss Dodd, and Maxine Waters.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you

FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC THE GREATEST DEMOCRAT SCAM IN HISTORY! "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Dec 18, 2008 2:58 PM:

" I know how to fix all the problems!

1) Let's give billions of dollars to companies that are poorly managed providing product overcapacity to the consumer, with union employees that are overpaid compared to similar workers else where in the country and the world.

2) Let's open up our borders and give the jobs from #1 above to foreigners that know how to work, and for less.

3)Let's provide loans to people that have no business borrowing the money. And then when they can't re-pay the loans let's blame it someone else.

4) Let's raise the minimum wage to $20 an hour (1/2 the world's population
lives on $2 a day).

5) Let's eliminate free enterprise and private businesses. Everybody will work for the government.

6) Let's raise the white flag of surrender in Iraq and Afghanistan. We can't win in either place anyway. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have told us so. Then let's get rid of our armed forces. With Obama in office we won't need them, the whole world loves us now.

7) Raise marginal income tax rates to ~90% like during the FDR years.

But be sure professional athletes and Hollywood movie stars pay the highest tax rates though. Why is it they get a "pass" while people that work hard and make things get blamed for how much they are rewarded? It's not like movie stars and professional athletes make anything to improve the nation's GDP like say... manufacturers do. Why do they need 4 houses anyway? And why do we have to be bothered with them through the media in how many of them are in rehab again?

8) Let's do away with free elections. Let's impose EVERYWHERE "pay-to-play" philosophy for governance. It's proven to work well for Illinois. And it's not like anybody's cared up until maybe recently.

9) Let's throw millions more dollars at our secondary educational system to maintain less than mediocrity. As public school HS graduation rates (2006) have declined to 68.6% nationally, and 72% in Illinois, our workers have a fine level of high tech skills to compete with other high tech workers from around the world.

10) Let's keep putting everything on our credit cards and create more imaginary wealth like we've over the past 15 years.

11) Let's tell our government to go further in debt with earmark spending. We need more high priced public buildings where roofs fall in right after they are built. Forget about fixing roads, and bridges. Who'll need them when you have a depressed economy with little commerce?

And once we've done all this...what recession?

But welcome yourselves to the United Socialist States of America (USSA). "

The Question wrote on Dec 18, 2008 3:21 PM:

" Bush is now saying he wants to avoid a "disorderly" collapse of the auto industry. Gee, thanks.
That's that extra-special Republican kind of "help" for you. An orderly worldwide Depression, to be followed an orderly crushing of all civil liberties and finally the orderly destruction of Earth's environment. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 18, 2008 3:47 PM:

" BREAKING NEWS:

The Clintons Saudi fundraisers; Lefty meltdown watch: Blackwater a donor

HAHAHAA!!!! "

father bob wrote on Dec 18, 2008 4:07 PM:

" The Question wrote on Dec 18, 2008 3:21 PM:
" Bush is now saying he wants to avoid a "disorderly" collapse of the auto industry. Gee, thanks.
That's that extra-special Republican kind of "help" for you. An orderly worldwide Depression, to be followed an orderly crushing of all civil liberties and finally the orderly destruction of Earth's environment. """"

i see he's blasting away even more at the Endangered Species Act.

them good ol' boyz will love that:
"let's go kill and drill!!!" "

father bob wrote on Dec 18, 2008 4:13 PM:

" BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 18, 2008 3:47 PM:
" BREAKING NEWS:

The Clintons Saudi fundraisers; Lefty meltdown watch: Blackwater a donor

HAHAHAA!!!! "

hey hotdiggitydog.....same folks who back the GOP...a real surprise for you? LOL!!! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 18, 2008 4:28 PM:

" (hey hotdiggitydog.....same folks who back the GOP...a real surprise for you? LOL!!!)

Uh.......yeah......fat-headbob.

As usual the point goes whizzing over your pointy well ventilated cranium.

I'll dumb this waaaaaaay down fer ya fat-head:

You see, you Left-losers have whined and complained about the eeeeeevil Saudi's and the eeeeeevil Blackwater company.

Are you with me so far bob???

I'll give you a moment to catch up..........................................................................................................................................................

*yawn*

Okay, fat-head:

These eeeeeeeevil Saudi shieks and those eeeeevil Blackwater folks were friends and donor to the Clintons.

I'll wait fer ya bob....................................................................................................................

now then, Hillary is Obama's Secretary of State.

You know what, I'll just let you sleep on that for a while fat-head..............................................

LOL!!! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 18, 2008 4:38 PM:

" This one's for my new Liberal Stooge Friend, Fat-HeadBob

ABOUT THAT 16 MONTH TROOP WITHDRAW.............

A new military plan for troop withdrawals from Iraq that was described in broad terms this week to President-elect Barack Obama falls short of the 16-month timetable Mr. Obama outlined during his election campaign, United States military officials said Wednesday.

UH-OH, Fat-Head!

LOL! "

father bob wrote on Dec 18, 2008 5:16 PM:

" yawn....back atcha....moron

anything new to rant about? your talking points and spin are several weeks old.

come up with some new comedy material, you're like watching old lucy shows. "

The Question wrote on Dec 18, 2008 7:28 PM:

" Republican Bernard Madoff, who ripped off rich investors with his $50 billion Ponzi fraud, is also ripping off the federal government, naturally. Investors who lost their fortunes in his scheme will end up paying far less in taxes and may even be eligible for refunds, according to accounting experts.
The IRS could be out as much as $17 billion in lost tax revenue.
Madoff sure don't want to be hindered by any of those awful, pesky financial regulations. His congressional pals saw to it that the government "got off his back" -- so he was free to commit one of this biggest frauds in history. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 18, 2008 8:35 PM:

" Republican Bernard Madoff, Question?

His congressional pals saw to it that the government "got off his back", Question?

Gee Question are you talking about THIS Bernard Madoff?

MADOFF WAS MAJOR DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTOR

CCN Dec 17 2008 - (CNN) Alleged Ponzi scheme mastermind Bernard Madoff has been a major political donor, directing hundreds of thousands of dollars to Democratic lawmakers over the past two decades.

Since 1991, Madoff and other individuals connected with Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities made campaign contributions totaling $372,100, with about 89 percent of those funds directed to Democrats, according to OpenSecrets.org, the Web site of the Center for Responsive Politics. The majority of the senators and representatives who benefited from these donations were New York-area legislators.

In 2008, Madoff contributed $50,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, pushing his total donations to the group since 1992 over the six-figure mark.

Madoff was arrested last week, charged with operating a fraudulent money-management business which has cost investors and charitable groups billions of dollars.

It is unclear whether Democratic lawmakers will return all contributions.

Madoff contributed to Hillary Clintons Senate campaign, but theres no record of donations to any of this years Democratic presidential candidates, including the secretary of state-designate.

Other major beneficiaries of Madoffs donations include the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association. Over the past decade, his company has also spent nearly $600,000 on lobbying.

LOL!

See what happens, Question, when you get your news from THE DAILY KOS.

ROFL!! "

Cognitus wrote on Dec 18, 2008 9:33 PM:

" Doesn't anyone, who selects WW II as
a special case that "interrupted" the
New Deal realize that WW II was simply
a political force that brought REAL
Keynesian economics,and indirect congtinuation of Keynes. There was politicalapproval of the spending of monies to no useful purpose whatsoever that restored our economy.
Had Roosevelt and the Congress had the courage to spend LOTS of money on the manufacture of objects to be dumped in the ocean, the Depression would have
ended much earlier. "

Cognitus wrote on Dec 18, 2008 9:50 PM:

" The Quesion:"" Republican Bernard Madoff, who ripped off rich investors with his $50 billion Ponzi fraud, is also ripping off the federal government, naturally. Investors who lost their fortunes in his scheme will end up paying far less in taxes and may even be eligible for refunds, according to accounting experts.
The IRS could be out as much as $17 billion in lost tax revenue."
I make no claim to expertise in
taxes, but I do know from personal experience that there is a $3,000 limit per year in the deduction of capital losses. They can be carried over of course, but the magnitude of some losses suggest people may not live long enough to deduct all losses. "

The Question wrote on Dec 19, 2008 5:38 AM:

" I stand corrected. Madoff is a crooked Democrat who gamed the deregulation of the financial industry. "

RJM wrote on Dec 19, 2008 8:10 AM:

" You can not be serious, Cognitus.

Again let us consider the analysis by Dr Higgs:

Consider first the labor market. Although unemployment virtually disappeared, the disappearance owed nothing to Keynesian fiscal policy. In truth, it owed everything to massive conscription. Between 1940 and 1944, the number of unemployed persons fell by 4.62 million, while the armed forces increased by 10.87 million. For the whole war period, more than 10 million men were drafted. The enormous forced withdrawalthe number of draftees was equivalent to nearly 20 percent of the prewar labor forcedrastically reduced the number of potential workers and depleted the ranks of the unemployed, and would have done so with or without the governments budget deficit. The Keynesian correlation is spurious.

But what about the enormous increase of the economys total output? This, it turns out, is nothing more than an artifact of the accounting system used by the government to keep the national product accounts. In the official system, spending for military goods and services gets counted as part of the dollar value of national output, as does spending for consumer goods and new capital goods. So every dollar the government paid for the services of military personnel or for the purchase of battleships, tanks, bombers, and other munitions during the war was included in the GNP. Hardly surprising, then, that GNP skyrocketed as the government created a command economy geared for total war.

Many aspects of economic well-being deteriorated during the war. Military preemption of public transportation interfered with intercity travel by civilians, and rationing of tires and gasoline made commuting to work very difficult for many workers. More workers had to work at night. The rate of industrial accidents increased substantially as novices replaced experienced workers and labor turnover increased. The government forbade nearly all nonmilitary construction, and housing became extremely scarce and badly maintained in many places, especially where war production had been expanded the most. Price controls and rationing meant that consumers had to spend much time standing in lines or searching for sellers willing to sell goods at the controlled prices. The quality of many goods deteriorated, as sellers forbidden to raise prices adjusted to increased demands by selling lower quality goods at the controlled prices. "

RJM wrote on Dec 19, 2008 8:18 AM:

" In addition Cognitus, the post-war reconversion destroyed the Keynesian Theory and ran counter it's basic principles.

Again Dr. Higgs provides the analytical summation:

After the war ended in the late summer of 1945, a genuine economic miracle took place during the next two years. More than 10 million men were released from the armed forces. Industry, which had occupied itself largely in producing war goods from 1942 to 1945, switched back to the production of civilian goods. The huge government budget deficit disappeared, and during the fiscal years 1947-1949, the federal budget actually had a small surplus. Yet, despite the fears and warnings of the Keynesian economists that such events would plunge the economy back into depression, civilian production boomed, increasing by nearly 27 percent from 1945 to 1946, and the rate of unemployment never exceeded 4 percent until the recession of 1949. Why the economy performed so successfully during the reconversion is an economic mystery that a few economists, including the present writer, have recently begun trying to understand better.

The mainstream economics profession, however, never faced the contradictions between its Keynesian theory and the events of the reconversion. According to this theory, the huge turnaround of the federal budgetfrom a deficit equal to 25 percent of GNP during 1943-1945 to a surplus during 1947-1949should have sent the economy into a tailspin. It did not, which refutes the theory. Ignoring this embarrassing fact, the Keynesians continued to cite the war boom as a definitive demonstration of the correctness of their theory. Reflecting the conventional wisdom, a leading textbook in U.S. economic history gave its chapter on World War II the title War Prosperity: The Keynesian Message Illustrated.

The lesson was false but, for politicians and certain others, immensely useful. For decades, secretaries of defense helped to justify their gargantuan budget requests by claiming that high levels of defense spending would be good for the economy and that reduced defense spending would cause recession. So common did this argument become that Marxist critics gave it the apt name military Keynesianism. On both the left and the right, people believed that huge military spending propped up an economy that, lacking this support, would collapse into depression. Such thinking played an important part in the political process that directed into defense spending some $10 trillion dollars (in todays purchasing power) between 1948 and 1990.

Military Keynesianism was always an intellectually bankrupt theory. As I have shown above, it was not proven by the events of the war years; all that those events proved was that a command economy can, at least for a while, keep everyone busy building munitions and using them to demolish the nations enemies. But the munitions production was far from free. It entailed huge opportunity costs, even though part of it could be accomplished simply by employing workers and capital that had been idle before the war. During the Cold War, however, the nation had very few unemployed resources to call into defense production, and using lots of resources for this purpose meant that the civilian goods that those resources might otherwise have produced had to be sacrificed.

Keynesian economics rests on the presumption that government spending, whether for munitions or other goods, creates an addition to the economys aggregate demand, which brings into employment labor and other resources that otherwise would remain idle. The economy gets not only the additional production occasioned by the use of those resources but still more output via a multiplier effect. Hence the Keynesian claim that even government spending to hire people to dig holes in the ground and fill them up again has beneficial effects; even though the diggers create nothing of value, the multiplier effect is set in motion as they spend their newly acquired income for consumption goods newly produced by others.

Such theorizing never faced squarely the underlying reason for the initial idleness of labor and other resources. If workers want to work but cannot find an employer willing to hire them, it is because they are not willing to work at a wage rate that makes their employment worthwhile for the employer. Unemployment results when the wage rate is too high to clear the market. The Keynesians concocted bizarre reasons why the labor market was not clearing during the Great Depression and then continued to accept such reasoning long after the depression had faded into history. But when labor markets have not cleared, either during the 1930s or at other times, the causes can usually be found in government policiessuch as the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933, the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, and the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, among many othersthat obstruct the normal operation of the labor market.

So, government policies created sustained high unemployment, and Keynesians blamed the market. The Keynesians then credited the governments wartime deficits for pulling the economy out of the Great Depression and continued to credit defense spending for preventing another economic collapse. In this way, sound economics was replaced by economic ideas congenial to spendthrift politicians, defense contractors, labor unions, and left-liberal economists. "

RJM wrote on Dec 19, 2008 8:27 AM:

" By your very own rationale, Cognitus; our current economic recovery can be found in the current war-footing.

All President Obama would have to do is simply expand the war on both fronts, reinstate the draft, return the nation to rationing, halt all attention to infrastructure, and spend boundlessly on the defense budget, regardless of the effectiveness of it's production effort.

Is this what you are advocating, Cognitus? "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:25 AM:

" You are right on target RJM. And most don't, I venture to say very few here, understand the pretext to Keynesian economics. His thoughts were based upon the influence of human labor in an economic structure much different from our times, and regardless all things aside. There was no global supply chain (aggregation) so pronounced upon aggregate demand, consumption, and distribution. Also, the influence of technology is much more pronounced on marginal unit of labor now than in the 70's let alone the 30's.

But what do you and I know? This is Hicktown USA.

As for Madoff, Blagojevich, Rezko, Obama, et al. (either side) with everything else going on in contemporary society, ever notice that the true underlying theme here comes down to character, ethics, and morality?

With all the talks of more intervention, regulation, and oversight even though we have plenty of laws and regulations on the books, it all comes down to people standing up and saying "that's right" or "that's not right"? But I guess now we need the government to do this for us, eh? "

The Question wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:28 AM:

" We can argue about whether government policy can help the economy. But we all know that government policy can DESTROY the economy, as the legalized fraud known as deregulation has just done. When you let Wall Street write the financial regulations, you guarantee an eventual economic crash. That makes no more sense than letting crooks write the criminal code because they are so knowledgeable about the field.
Government policy can also keep people from starving, which is helping the economy in the most fundamental way possible. "

The Question wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:53 AM:

" Until about 10 minutes ago, the Republican mantra was that the U.S. economy's "fundamentals are sound." Hard not to laugh in contempt at that kind of "credibility."
Yeah, don't worry, everything is fine. That's what the crooks always say as they're picking your pocket. "

father bob wrote on Dec 19, 2008 11:11 AM:

" I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.
~Thomas Jefferson~ "

RJM wrote on Dec 19, 2008 11:19 AM:

" NeoCon Academician, you have just pointed out a key weakness to the modern concept of "The New Deal".
Namely, infrastructure.

The fact that modern construction technologies (i.e. equipment, techniques, and overall automation) will not result in the significant employment boost that popular belief assumes. This is, in effect, a significant "fly in the ointment" to the overall theory.

Very astute observation, NeoCon Academician. Another accidental truth, stumbled upon, here in Hicktown USA.

Thank you. "

The Question wrote on Dec 19, 2008 11:55 AM:

" Paulson is demanding another $250 billion even as we speak. They've just GOT to have those taxpayer billions. They got to pay it out in secret to their corporate crook pals so they can stash it in their overseas bank accounts before Obama takes office.
Fascism on parade, folks. Have a good look. These are the people who are stealing your silver after setting fire to your house. "

The Question wrote on Dec 19, 2008 1:29 PM:

" Iraq was Bush's blank check to the military-industrial complex. This bailout is his blank check to Wall Street. Unbridled fear and greed sealed the deal in both cases. "

Collatine wrote on Dec 19, 2008 4:40 PM:

" father bob - are you really quoting a slaveholder who wanted the US to remain a backwater agrarian state and called for a strict adherence to a the Constitution, right before doubling the size of the country in a shady land deal?? Yeah, let's follow HIS advice.

The Question - fascism? That's not fascism. Look it up. Heck the Fed isn't even part of the government, so how can it be fascist? LOL

Paulson is not a evil guy, so that begs the question why is he doing this? Try thinking about it... My first reaction was similar to you, but not as emotional. LOL. I was suspicious.

But after thinking about it, I suspect they won't share the list of banks they're helping because so much of our economy - including faith in the banking system - is based on just that: Faith. If he starts telling everyone which banks are so weak they have to take the Fed's money, that will undermine people's faith in them as institutions.

My meager accounts are in First Mid. If I felt I wouldn't be able to pay my bills from those accounts, I'd likely pull my money (and bill payment) out and put it somewhere else. But I have FAITH that the bills I write to those accounts will get paid.

That might not be the reason he's keeping it secret, but it's a good one, I think. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 19, 2008 4:49 PM:

" Question (I stand corrected. Madoff is a crooked Democrat who gamed the deregulation of the financial industry.)

Crooked Democrat?

Uhm Question.....isn't that redundant?

LOL! "

father bob wrote on Dec 19, 2008 5:21 PM:

" Collatine wrote on Dec 19, 2008 4:40 PM:
" father bob - are you really quoting a slaveholder who wanted the US to remain a backwater agrarian state and called for a strict adherence to a the Constitution, right before doubling the size of the country in a shady land deal?? Yeah, let's follow HIS advice.""""

another Einstein heard from "

The Question wrote on Dec 19, 2008 6:53 PM:

" Fascism is an authoritarian alliance of the government and corporations. Having corporations make war with no-bid contracts and help themselves to taxpayer trillions certainly qualifies. "

The Question wrote on Dec 19, 2008 6:58 PM:

" "Paulson is not a evil guy, so that begs the question why is he doing this?"
---
What makes you assume that? He's stealing several hundred billion in borrowed taxpayer money for the creeps who put him in power even as you watch.
I guarantee you that money will vanish into overseas bank accounts without a trace and the American economic situation will continue to deteriorate. And I will remind you of that. "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Dec 19, 2008 7:43 PM:

" Collatine and BDD...

Remember The Question is a liberal/democratic party sophist.

If you notice, her posts are written as sound bits. They're not meant to be pointed, let alone written to engage contrary points of view for constructive or critical discourse. So Collatine you may not want to waste your time asking her to look things up or even to consider the hypocrisy of the view she's espousing.

Just an observation... "

Collatine wrote on Dec 19, 2008 8:46 PM:

" fb - there you go, resorting to calling names again... LOL

The question - I disagree with your definition of fascism, but if I WERE to agree with it, then sure, the Federal Government (but not the central bank) could be labeled that - since the inception of the "Cold War" in fact.

As for assuming Paulson isn't evil, I assume that because of what I've read about him, and I have a somewhat less cynical view of people in power than you. But if I'm wrong, I know I can count on you reminding us all... (although the economic situation will probably continue receding for a few more quarters regardless if you're right or not). Only time will tell if Paulson is really steering money to overseas banks... which I believe is laughable, since all the European and Asian central banks are in as bad of shape as the Federal Reserve. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:24 PM:

" I wonder what Jefferson would have thought about the corrupt Democrat members of Congress inserting themselves into the private mortgage market? Can you say Fannie and Freddie? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:26 PM:

" Let's take a closer look at one of the original causes of the world market collapse.

FANNIE MAE

-Fannie Mae is not just any private institution.

-It is the biggest single source of money for mortgages in the United States.

-It is congressionally chartered, meaning its existence is established in law, it does not have to pay state and local income taxes, and it is not subject to bankruptcy laws.

-It can borrow money at a lower rate than anyone else except the federal government itself.

-Given all that, there was a public perception that Fannie Mae is a rock-solid government institution.

-There was an implied guarantee to global investors

-Investors thought they were the next best thing to Treasuries.

-In the 1980s, Fannie Mae began creating a new product when it bought up mortgages and bundled them for sale to investors as mortgage-backed securities.

-It was an extraordinarily profitable move for Fannie Mae.

-By the 1990s, the company moved in a much riskier direction. Fannie Mae used its borrowing power to buy up mortgages and hold them, making a profit from the difference between the low price it paid to borrow the money and the higher interest rate it received on the mortgage. It was potentially profitable, but it had nothing to do with helping low- and middle-income people buy houses.

-From 1998 to 2004, Fannie Mae was headed by former Clinton budget director (and current advisor to Barrak Obama) Franklin Raines.

-Raines's top management team included former Clinton Justice Department official Jamie Gorelick.

-During that period, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight discovered that Raines and his team grossly overstated Fannie Maes earnings to the tune of $10.6 billion for the purpose of paying themselves big bonuses. By deliberately and intentionally manipulating accounting to hit earnings targets, the report says, senior management maximized the bonuses and other executive compensation they received, at the expense of shareholders.

-OFHEO found that Raines became obsessed with propping up Fannie Maes earnings per share, or EPS, even if he had to use creative accounting to make it happen. Raines set a series of increasingly higher EPS goals that, if met, would trigger bonuses for the executive team that far surpassed what they received in salary.

-In 1999, Raines announced a new goal to double Fannie Maes EPS in five years, from $3.23 per share to $6.46. It was an audacious goal, and reaching it, according to OFHEO, became Fannie Maes reason for existence: $6.46, the EPS goal, became the corporate mantra - everything else was secondary to hitting that target.

-It worked. Fannie Mae met its EPS goals, and Raines rewarded his top executives and most of all himself - with unheard-of amounts of money.

HOW MUCH MONEY YOU ASK?

-Even though his salary never topped $1 million, Rainess total compensation shot from $6.48 million in 1998 to $8.52 million in 1999, to $13.89 million in 2000, to $18.86 million in 2001, to $18.20 million in 2002, to $24.15 million in 2003, all on the strength of EPS bonuses.

-Investigators found that of the $90.12 million Raines was paid in that six-year period, more than $52 million came from EPS bonuses.

-Gorelicks situation was similar. OFHEO found that she took home $26.46 million in the period from 1998 to 2002 (she left in that year, so she wasnt there for the entire period under investigation). Of that figure, nearly $15 million came from EPS bonuses.

-Of course, IT WASN'T LEGIT.

-Fannie Mae reported extremely smooth profit growth and hit announced targets for earnings per share precisely each quarter, the OFHEO report says. Those achievements were illusions deliberately and systematically created by [Fannie Maes] senior management with the aid of inappropriate accounting and improper earnings management.

THAT'S FRAUD FOLKS

IN OTHER WORDS, THEY COOKED THE BOOKS.

-And to make matters worse, according to OFHEO

-when regulators began to catch on to what was happening, RAINES AND HIS TEAM THEN "SOUGHT TO INTERFERE" WITH THE OFHEO INVESTIGATION BY TRYING TO GET HIS DEMOCRAT CRONIES IN CONGRESS TO START UP A SEPERATE PROBE OF OFHEO.

DID YOU GET THAT FOLKS?

THAT'S OBSTRUCTION ON A CONGRESSIONAL LEVEL.

-FANNIE MAE ALSO LOBBIED CONGRESS TO CUT OFHEOS FUNDS UNLESS IT GOT RID OF THE TOP OFFICIAL IN CHARGE OF INVESTIGATING FANNIE MAE.

MORE OBSTRUCTION ON A CONGRESSIONAL LEVEL FOLKS.

-That didnt work, and, as a result of the investigation, Fannie Mae has agreed to pay $400 million in penalties. The company is now under criminal investigation by the Justice Department, and will likely be in trouble with the Securities and Exchange Commission, too.

-But there still is the matter of cleaning up Fannie Mae.

-Republican Senator John Sununu and his colleagues on the Senate banking committee have been trying for two years to win approval of a bill that would create a new regulatory body for Fannie Mae and give that body the authority to crack down on the companys riskier practices.

-BUT THE BILL HAS FACED STRONG OPPOSITION FROM DEMOCRATS.

-When Raines was still at Fannie Mae (he was forced out in 2004), he tried, in Sununus words, to slow-walk the process. Frank Raines decided they were stronger and better and smarter than everyone else, so they would push back. Democrats allied themselves with Raines and said they worried that reform might harm Fannie Maes ability to provide mortgages to low- and middle-income homebuyers. Sununus bill was approved in the banking committee last year, but only on a straight party-line vote. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:47 PM:

" Biden: Pass Obamas massive stimulus plan or an economic meteor will hit Earth

Either there really are doomsday indicators circulating in Democratic circles or theyre coordinating exceptionally well to panic the public into giving The One whatever he wants, because were hearing more of this every day. First there were the anonymous murmurs from inside the transition team about the economy looking vastly worse than theyd anticipated. Then came David Obey this morning ranting how close we are to falling into a "massive, massive hole" unless Bush passes a giant spending package right this instant. And now heres Greasy Joe, ducking and covering unless we hand Obama upwards of a trillion dollars to save the world. "

Locke wrote on Dec 20, 2008 12:22 AM:

" "You are right on target RJM."

Higgs. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 20, 2008 8:41 AM:

" Hey Bluey, you left something out in that last long winded rant. You forgot to tie Obama into it. Isn't this Obama's fault?

I'm really surprised that you didn't make a case that it was his fault.

You're slacking.

If Caroline gets the job, I'm sure you'll be able to "prove" that she's somehow to blame for the current economic mess, which as we know is not due to anything Bush or the Republicans did.

If Al Franken gets the nod in Minnesota, I'm sure you'll be able to "prove" he was involved in the world crash too.

Darn those pesky people from the Democratic party, huh?

First you "proved" they brought us the Iraq war, and now we find they caused the world wide economic crash.

With all of your brilliance, you need to contact the RNC. They have been having a lot of setbacks lately, and I'm sure they could use some of your insightful advice. Looks like you're wasting your time here ranting and raving on this Podunk site.

It looks like you have your work cut out for you, Doh. "

The Question wrote on Dec 20, 2008 9:00 AM:

" As for assuming Paulson isn't evil, I assume that because of what I've read about him, and I have a somewhat less cynical view of people in power than you.
---
As Alfred Alder said, don't listen to what the words say. Watch where the feet go. It's not a coincidence that the richest people in America are getting a gift of hundreds of billions in taxpayer money from the working class and what's left of the the middle class.
And as Lily Tomlin said, no matter how cynical you are, you just can't keep up. "

The Question wrote on Dec 20, 2008 9:04 AM:

" Britt's 14 characteristic elements of a fascist state:

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
5. Rampant sexism.
6. A controlled or manipulated mass media.
7. Obsession with national security.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
9. Power of corporations protected.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
14. Fraudulent elections.
---
You will note that Bush and Cheney have managed to hit every one of them. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 20, 2008 9:24 AM:

" If the Democrats lack the guts to impeach Bush and Cheney for war crimes, then they should consider waterboarding them at the very least.

Cheney has admitted that our government has done this, even though our government tried and executed people form other countries for doing the exact same thing in the past.

Torture is another thing to put on Bush's pathetic legasy list. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 20, 2008 9:32 AM:

" Using Bluey's guilt by association idea, Sarah Palin must be a druggie. Her daughter's future mother in law got busted for drugs, so according to Bluey's logic Sarah must be guilty of illegal drug use too. (thanks for the idea Coonsey)

Maybe the mother turned to drugs after becoming distraught over her White house wedding dreams for her criminal son fell through after Sarah blew it for the Republicans. lol! "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 20, 2008 11:00 AM:

" We get the following from the ever vigilant Coonsey:

WASHINGTON Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that he was directly involved in approving severe interrogation methods used by the CIA, and that the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, should remain open indefinitely.

Cheneys remarks on Guantanamo appear to put him at odds with President George W. Bush, who has expressed a desire to close the prison, although the decision is expected to be left to the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama.

Cheneys comments also mark the first time that he has acknowledged playing a central role in clearing the CIAs use of an array of controversial interrogation tactics, including a simulated drowning method known as water-boarding.

I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the process cleared, Cheney said in an interview on ABC News.

Asked whether he still believes it was appropriate to use the water-boarding method on terrorism suspects, Cheney said: I do.

After World War II, America tried and sentenced Japanese officers who used waterboarding on American soldiers for war crimes. According to John McCain, some Japanese were tried and hanged for using this technique on Americans. The American case law is clear: waterboarding is torture, and it is a war crime. International Law condemns it as well.

So When will our legislature or someone with the intelligence and expertise indict Vice President Cheney for war crimes?

******************

Darn good question, Coonsey. It's not enough to let him ride off into the sunset with his millions in war profits, the man should go to jail for his crimes against humanity. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 20, 2008 11:31 AM:

" Joe the Plumber Pens Memoir
Joe the Plumber became famous during the final weeks of the campaign after asking Barack Obama about his tax plan at a campaign stop outside his home near Toledo.

*************

Holy cow! Bluey's intellectual peer wrote a book. I'll bet it's about as intellectually shallow as most of Bluey's predictions are for the Obama administration.

Along with the Palin calendars, I'll bet old Bluey stocks up on copies of the plumbers helpers book to give as presents. The little ones in his family will really be excited to get these two items from old uncle "Bluedoggy".

One can only imagine the Christmas day conversation in that house after old Bluey has a few belts and starts his blathering non-stop hate-filled rants on Obama and politics in general.

Hey Bluey, are you gonna invite old Vanutty over for a little Christmas cheer? "

The Question wrote on Dec 20, 2008 11:52 AM:

" Before the election, the right wingers assured us that Obama was "the most liberal senator." He's a far, far, far left socialist, they shrieked.
Now, since he won the election, all of a sudden they say he's a moderate with some right-leaning views. He's even named a bigoted right-wing fanatic preacher to appear at his inauguration.
Obama hasn't changed, of course. But the right-wing lies have changed. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 20, 2008 12:02 PM:

" BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 19, 2008 10:26 PM:

" Let's take a closer look at one of the original causes of the world market collapse.

Why Bluey, just a few days age you were claiming that was The reason for the collapse. Now which is it. One of the causes or THE cause?

Pretty soon your reasons for the collapse will be resembling Bush's ever changing list of reasons for invading Iraq.

Darn that pesky Barney Franks, who would have thought that one little congressman could bring the word economy to a screeching halt, huh Doh, er.. I mean BlueDogDemocrat? hee hee "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 20, 2008 1:07 PM:

" And here comes The New York Times, rewriting history and clearing the way for Democrats.

Just in time for The Obama Administration.

From Drudge:

NYT SUNDAY: BUSH TO BLAME FOR HOUSING NIGHTMARE... DEVELOPING... "

Locke wrote on Dec 20, 2008 3:27 PM:

" So basically some choose to ignore the quantifiable results of the New Deal from 1933 to 1936 in offsetting the unemployment figures. Then they claim that Keynesian economics (spend like crazy when the economy is bad) will lead to a recession due to government spending, but this was all offset due to World War Two.

I hate to mention these small details, but we have excessive government spending now and a recession now and rising unemployment now.

Their solution? Tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans, hoping we have not crossed the Laffer Curve (which even some in the Bush administration believe we have), and trusting that businesses will someday hire more employees. Another detail that might have been lost on some -- this is what we have been doing since 2003 and it is not working.

Instead of giving more tax breaks to the business owners and hoping they will trickle down the money to their employees who will then buy consumables and move the economy forward, a new New Deal will put money into the pockets of the people, bypassing the employer sense of goodwill and greed, and kickstart the economy back on the right track.

But then again, we could just cease all debate, cite two or three "experts" and call it done. Problem is, experts are a dime a dozen. If I wanted, I could probably Google up or research some experts to counter Higgs. I'll use experts to reinforce my summarization of the issue; I won't use experts to speak for me. Higgs, by the way, is libertarian who is more against government expansion than Keynesian economics (which by extension, is government expansion.) "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 20, 2008 4:51 PM:

" The good folks at Fox news are conducting a poll of their viewers that asks if Caroline Kennedy is qualified to be in the Senate. Anyone ever recall them conducting such a poll of any Repugs? lol!

Not surprisingly, most Fox fans say she's not. Now if they were to ask about any of the Bush tribe..... "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 21, 2008 7:12 AM:

" From an interesting article in todays New York Times.....

Eight years after arriving in Washington vowing to spread the dream of home ownership, Bush is leaving office, as he himself said recently, "faced with the prospect of a global meltdown" with roots in the housing sector he so ardently championed.

There are plenty of culprits, like lenders who peddled easy credit, consumers who took on mortgages they could not afford and Wall Street chieftains who loaded up on mortgage-backed securities without regard to the risk.

But the story of how we got here is partly one of Bush's own making, according to a review of his tenure that included interviews with dozens of current and former administration officials.

From his earliest days in office, Bush paired his belief that Americans do best when they own their own home with his conviction that markets do best when let alone.

He pushed hard to expand home ownership, especially among minorities, an initiative that dovetailed with his ambition to expand the Republican tent and with the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards.

Bush did foresee the danger posed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored mortgage finance giants. The president spent years pushing a recalcitrant Congress to toughen regulation of the companies, but was unwilling to compromise when his former Treasury secretary wanted to cut a deal. And the regulator Bush chose to oversee them an old prep school buddy pronounced the companies sound even as they headed toward insolvency.

As early as 2006, top advisers to Bush dismissed warnings from people inside and outside the White House that housing prices were inflated and that a foreclosure crisis was looming. And when the economy deteriorated, Bush and his team misdiagnosed the reasons and scope of the downturn; as recently as February, for example, Bush was still calling it a "rough patch."

________________________

This view doesn't quite match the ideas of our local gasbag, BlueDogDemocrat does it?

There is a link to the complete article on the Drudge report this AM.

Bluey should read it too.

Now watch for his pathetic attempt to discredit it because of its source.

Bluey only accepts radical right wing/ nutball sources for his non-stop blathering reports.

Funny that there was no mention of Bluey's favorite culprit, Barney Franks in the article. (and not a single word about the earth being only 6000 years old either). lol... "

The Question wrote on Dec 21, 2008 8:35 AM:

" A New York Times report today details how Bush's failure to regulate financial markets triggered the global economic meltdown. A friend of mine observed that Bush, with his blind, Republican faith in "free markets," is just a stupid, lazy man who mutters simplistic homilies about people and the world. New Orleans was the nadir where generators were flown in to light up his vapid bromides about how everything would be rebuilt better than before. Then the lights went out and he flew away -- documenting that he is just a lit-up, speech-written bag of words. It's like having a lazy, uneducated doctor who just spreads a lotion on whatever ailment you have and tells you that you'll be fine ... and you keep getting sicker under their "care."
It's not hard to understand why Bush would just not care about abuse and unsustainable loans if it allowed him to stand in front of a slogan and talk simplistic homilies about every American having a home ... just a bag of scripted words. Bush is bad, deadly catastropic theatre of the absurd. "

The Question wrote on Dec 21, 2008 10:35 AM:

" Buddy, can you spare $1.6 billion?
Banks that are getting taxpayer bailouts awarded their top executives nearly $1.6 billion in salaries, bonuses, and other benefits last year, the AP has shown.
The rewards came even at banks where poor results last year foretold the economic crisis that sent them to Washington for a government rescue. Some trimmed their executive compensation due to lagging bank performance, but still forked over multimillion-dollar executive pay packages. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 21, 2008 4:39 PM:

" And here comes The New York Times, rewriting history and clearing the way for Democrats.

------------------

Now let's see, on one hand we have the New York Times and on the other hand we have the perpetual whining machine, Bluey the Dohdog. Who are we to believe?

That's sort of a no brainer. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 21, 2008 5:12 PM:

" Anchorage Daily News

WASILLA, Alaska Sherry Johnston, mother of Bristol Palin's fianc, faces a Jan. 6 court date for an OxyContin-related arrest at her home by Alaska state troopers

troopers' spokeswoman said Friday afternoon that the charges "are in relation to the drug OxyContin."

Johnston, 42, is the mother of Levi Johnston, the Wasilla 18-year-old suddenly placed in an international spotlight in September, when Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin then running for vice president on the Republican ticket with John McCain and her husband, Todd, said their daughter Bristol was pregnant, and Levi was the father.

----------------

OxyCotin? That must be a Republican drug of choice. First Cindy McCain, then Rush Limbaugh and now the Palin in law.

OxyCotin= the new Republican family value. lol! "

The Question wrote on Dec 21, 2008 6:14 PM:

" Six Wall Street firms that received billions in bailout dollars still own and operate fleets of jets to carry executives to company events and on personal trips, according to the AP.
Gee, thanks for those hundreds of billions, middle class and working class taxpaying saps. If you miss some car payments or can't afford to go to college or have to choose between food and medicine, just take comfort in the fact that your money is keeping Bush and Cheney and Paulson's parasite pals in cushy jet-set comfort. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 6:19 PM:

" Oh I've got an even MORE interesting article from the New York Times, Harry ole boy.

This one's from Sept 11 2003.

And uhm......it tells a little different story:

NEW AGENCY PROPOSED OT OVERSEE FREDDIE MAC AND FANNIE MAE

NYT- The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

-Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

-The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

-The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt - is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

-Reflecting the changing political climate, both Fannie Mae and its leading rivals applauded the administration's package. The support from Fannie Mae came after a round of discussions between it and the administration and assurances from the Treasury that it would not seek to change the company's mission.

-After those assurances, Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chief executive, endorsed the shift of regulatory oversight to the Treasury Department, as well as other elements of the plan.

-Freddie Mac, whose accounting is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a United States attorney in Virginia, issued a statement calling the administration plan a "responsible proposal."

-Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders AND CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

-"These two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing" "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 6:31 PM:

" What the New York Times and you Left-loons in here don't want to talk about, is the relaxed leanding standards that the banks WERE FORCED TO FOLLOW with all of these defunct mortgages.

It was deregulation all right- but who created it and advanced it?

The Birth of Flexible Underwriting Standards

All politicians at all times seem to be in favor of home ownership.
But home ownership shouldn't seem to require much help from the federal government.

-The government became heavily involved in the mortgage market in a new way after concerns about mortgage discrimination arose in the 1970s.

-The government passed the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) in 1977, requiring banks to conduct business across the entirety of the geographic areas in which they operated, thus preventing them from doing business in a suburb, say, while neglecting a downtown area.

-Congress also passed the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) in 1975, which required that mortgage lenders provide detailed information about mortgage applications. Every year banks receive a score on their CRA compliance just as they receive a score on their financial viability, and banks strive to do well on both parts of their examination.

-In 1991 the HMDA data was expanded, allowing for comparison of rejection rates by race. Various news organizations started publicizing simple examinations of HMDA data, showing that minorities were denied home mortgages at a rate far higher than that for whites. It was and still is common for newspapers in large cities, shortly after the yearly HMDA data are made public, to do exposs examining the differences by race in rejection rates on mortgage applications. There are even turnkey kits for newspaper reporters aspiring to demonstrate such results.

-The last defense of banks trying to defend themselves against charges of engaging in biased mortgage lending appeared to fall when the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (Boston Fed) conducted an apparently careful statistical analysis in 1992, which purported to demonstrate that even after controlling for important variables associated with creditworthiness, minorities were found to be denied mortgages at higher rates than whites. In fact, the study was based on such horribly mangled data that the studys authors apparently never bothered to examine them.

-government regulators got busy putting the results of this Boston Fed study to use in creating policy.

-THAT POLICY, SIMPLY PUT, WAS TO WEAKEN UNDERWRITING STANDARDS.

-What happened next is nicely summed up in an enthusiastic Fannie Mae report authored by some leading Liberal egg-head academics:

"Attempts to eliminate discrimination involve strengthened enforcement of existing laws . . .
There have also been efforts to expand the availability of more affordable and flexible mortgages. The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) provides a major incentive . . . Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac . . . have also been called
upon to broaden access to mortgage credit and home ownership. The 1992 Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act (FHEFSSA) mandated that the GSEs increase
their acquisition of primary-market loans made to lower income borrowers . . . Spurred in part by the FHEFSSA mandate, Fannie Mae announced
a trillion-dollar commitment.
The result has been a wider variety of innovative mortgage products. The GSEs have introduced a new generation of affordable, flexible, and targeted mortgages, thereby fundamentally
altering the terms upon which mortgage credit was offered in the United States from the 1960s through the 1980s. Moreover, these secondarymarket
innovations have proceeded in tandem
with shifts in the primary markets: depository institutions, spurred by the threat of CRA challenges and the lure of significant profit potential
in underserved markets, have pioneered flexible mortgage products. For years, depositories held these products in portfolios when their underwriting
guidelines exceeded benchmarks set by
the GSEs. Current shifts in government policy, GSE acquisition criteria, and the primary market have fostered greater integration of capital and lending markets. These changes in lending herald what we refer to as mortgage innovation."

-Did you get that? "Mortgage innovation".

This "mortgage innovation" infected the entire mortgage industry.

But wait! What if banks DIDN'T want to abide by this DEREGULATION KNOWN AS "MORTGAGE INNOVATION"? "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 21, 2008 6:53 PM:

" Looks like the demented Doh is having a little difficulty accepting the fact that Bush is as much to blame as anyone for this fiasco. Sorry that you having such a hard time with this, Bluey. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 7:00 PM:

" So what could happen to banks and lending institutions that DIDN'T want to go along with Fannie Mae's politically-correct DEREGULATION known as Mortgage Innovation?

Let's find out:

-Within a few months of the appearance of the Boston Fed study, a new manual appeared from the Boston Fed. It was in the nature of a Nondiscriminatory Mortgage Lending for Dummies booklet. The president of the Boston Fed wrote in the foreword:

"The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston wants to be helpful to lenders as they work to close the
mortgage gap [higher rejection rate for minorities]. For this publication, we have gathered recommendations on best practice from lending institutions and consumer groups. With their help, we have developed a comprehensive program for lenders who seek to ensure that all loan applicants are treated fairly and to expand their markets to reach a more diverse customer base."

-EARLY IN THE DOCUMENT, THE BOSTON FED GRACEFULLY REMINDS ITS READERS OF A FEW POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES OF NOT GOING ALONG WITH THIS DEREGULATION:

"Did You Know? Failure to comply with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act or Regulation B can subject a financial institution to civil liability for actual and punitive damages in individual or class actions. Liability for punitive damages can be as much as $10,000 in individual actions and the lesser of $500,000 or 1 percent of the creditors net worth in class actions."

-But oh, it gets better!

The part of this document that is of greatest interest to us is the section on "underwriting standards".
This is where we find the nasty little seeds of todays mortgage meltdown. It starts out:

"Even the most determined lending institution will have difficulty cultivating business from minority customers if its underwriting standards contain arbitrary or unreasonable measures
of creditworthiness."

-You might think that it would be difficult for a bank to cultivate business with any mortgage applicants, or merely to stay in business, if it had arbitrary and unreasonable measures of creditworthiness. But then you would be failing to understand the doublespeak that is actually the point of this quote. What the quote is really saying is that IF A BANK'S UNDERWRITING STANDARDS DO NOT ALLOW A SUFFICIENTLY HIGH PERCENTAGE OF MINORITY MORTGAGE APPROVALS, THEY MUST BE ARBITRARY OR UNREASONABLE. Arbitrary and unreasonable include the standards that prevailed in the several decades prior to the 1990s.

-The document continues:

"Management should be directed to review existing underwriting standards and practices to
ensure that they are valid predictors of risk. Special care should be taken to ensure that
standards are appropriate to the economic culture of urban, lowerincome, and nontraditional
consumers."

-You might have thought that financial standards that indicate a high probability of success in making mortgage payments, such as steady employment, a record of savings, and keeping the loan payment small relative to income, might have been prudent standards for borrowers of all incomes and all races. In fact, you would be correct. But in the world of mortgage discrimination the goal is to increase mortgages for certain nontraditional customers, and in this case financial standards are to be twisted or discarded if necessary.

-So if banks decided NOT to go along with this "LAXED" DEREGULATION in lending standards, then they would be opening themselves up to charges of discriminization and risk
being labeled a racist institution.

Can you say class action law suits? Can you say ACORN? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 7:11 PM:

" Looks like Hairball Harry is having a hard time accepting the fact that the New York Times is lying and distorting.

Or were they lying in their article back on Sept 11 2003, Harry?

Which NYT's article is correct, Harry? "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 21, 2008 7:14 PM:

" Bluey, you've got to quit believing all that propaganda put out on those right wing web sites.

So when are you going to put the blame on Obama? lol!

After reading your last two posts, I'm afraid you might be going into one of your meltdowns. Take it easy and take a couple of deep breaths, my fiend. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 7:26 PM:

" You never answer the question Harry, which New York Times is lying the one you cited or the one from Sept 11 2003? "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 21, 2008 7:28 PM:

" Really Doh, you should credit those sources you cut and paste. I seem to recall you berating someone else for not giving credit and actually accused them of plagiarizing. Is that what your doing, Bluey? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 7:28 PM:

" Harry - (you've got to quit believing all that propaganda)

Oh don't worry Harry, I don't believe most of the propaganda at The New York Times.

LOL! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 7:31 PM:

" The Subprime Lending Bias

Investors Business Daily Dec 19 2008

Media: If, as they say, it's journalists who write history's first draft, then future texts will be riddled with errors about the origins of the subprime disaster, teaching future leaders the wrong lessons.

Just how did Americans come to lose $10 trillion in real estate and stock wealth? And why are our children and grandchildren on the hook for as much as $8 trillion in federal bailout money? These are some of the most important questions of our time. Yet the mainstream media, plagued by monopartisan bias, are not providing the public honest answers.

Take, for instance, a recent front-page article in the Washington Post, under the headline, "How HUD Mortgage Policy Fed the Crisis." The piece correctly fingers HUD for helping fuel risky lending at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But the newspaper starts its analysis in 2004 (in fact, the first sentence begins, "In 2004 . . . "), making it seem as if the Bush administration crafted "affordable housing" policy and created the subprime market.

The Post knows better. The Bush HUD merely continued a politically correct policy launched by the Clinton administration. For the first time, President Clinton ordered HUD to set quotas for Fannie and Freddie to buy huge portions of Community Reinvestment Act loans and other low-income mortgages made to borrowers with poor credit. The Post failed to mention this key fact.

By 2000, fully half of the mortgage giants' portfolios consisted of these risky loans, most of them subprime mortgages. In effect, the Clinton HUD set a time bomb that would explode years later with the collapse of home prices, which happened to occur on Bush's watch.

At the same time, HUD pressured the federally subsidized giants to lower their loan-to-value ratios and other underwriting requirements to accommodate minority borrowers. HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo even admitted that the administration was mandating a policy of "affirmative action" lending (his words, not ours).

And it was Clinton who initially spread the subprime rot to Wall Street. To help Fannie and Freddie reach their "affirmative action" lending quotas, HUD in 1995 let them get affordable-housing credit for buying subprime securities that included loans to low-income borrowers.

Less than two years later, Freddie partnered with Wall Street investment banker Bear Stearns to issue the first securitizations of low-income CRA loans.

There's even a press release still available on the Web that memorializes the historic deal, which dumped hundreds of millions of dollars in the risky loans on the market a down payment on the hundreds of billions that were to follow.

The Post left all of that out of its story, even though the deal marked the beginning of the boom in subprime securities.

Of course, providing such background to readers would ruin the impression that Bush and Republicans were responsible for the crisis, an impression the Post and other liberal media elites hope will stick in the public's mind and become conventional wisdom. And conventional wisdom, once galvanized, is a powerful thing in Washington. Whole agendas and coalitions are built around it.

The Post also provided just one side of the data in its story. The paper said that Bush "ratcheted up" the affordable-housing goal for Fannie and Freddie, from 50% to 56%. But it left out the fact that the previous president, the liberal Democrat, institutionalized the quota and ballooned it up to 50%. Which move do you think had a greater impact on the subprime market?

A recent story in the Associated Press was equally tendentious. It blamed Bush for not cracking down on loose lending standards that had become the norm in the mortgage industry, while completely ignoring the systematic dismantling of those standards during the previous decade under Clinton.

"The administration's blind eye to the impending crisis is emblematic of its governing philosophy, which trusted market forces and discounted the value of government intervention in the economy," wrote AP Washington correspondent Matt Apuzzo.

Reality check: "Government intervention" is what planted the seed to this whole crisis. As we've noted, Clinton in 1995 revised CRA regulations to pressure banks into adopting "flexible" lending standards to increase minority homeownership. In a 1,389-word story, AP cited that easily verifiable fact not a single time.

Make no mistake: It was Clinton who forced banks most importantly, Fannie and Freddie to go into the subprime market to serve the targeted populations that HUD and other Clinton banking regulators wanted them to serve.

In effect, the media are blaming Bush for Clinton policies. Whoever controls the debate in Washington controls the truth. Right now, it's Democrats and their press courtiers. And so far, they've managed to shade the truth about the root causes of this epochal financial crisis. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 7:36 PM:

" (After reading your last two posts, I'm afraid you might be going into one of your meltdowns. Take it easy and take a couple of deep breaths, my fiend.)

Oh really, Harry? If those two posts are factually incorrect, Harry- show me. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 21, 2008 7:42 PM:

" If only the paper could somehow incorporate a lie detector on this site. Poor Bluey wouldn't get very much posted. Besides lying, he even plagiarizes the propaganda he reads on his favorite right wing wacko sites. lol...

And by the way, Doh, I think this might be a record duration for you to stick with the same name, BlueDogDemocrat. I'm proud of you, buddy. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 8:09 PM:

" (If only the paper could somehow incorporate a lie detector on this site.)

Are you kidding Harry Larry?

You would be banned from this site.

Everytime you logged on it would blow up!

LOL!

Now which NYT's article was lying, HairBall Larry? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 8:13 PM:

" Once again, Harry is running away from a question he's not honest enough to answer.

Oh and, the article I've been citing is from:

The Independent Policy Report

Anatomy of a Train Wreck
Causes of the Mortgage Meltdown

by Stan J. Liebowitz October 3, 2008

Now what will you whine about HairBall?

LOL!

Now which NYT's article was lying, Harry? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 21, 2008 8:27 PM:

" Oh and HairBall Larry,

Bush DOES share some of the blame for the housing meltdown.

For a while he pushed the Democrats Liberal and reckless idea that everyone should have a house even if it meant insanely laxed lending standards.

But at least, later on, he tried to fix the on coming disaster. But alas! Bawney Fwank and his Democrat friends in Congress would have none of it! "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 7:43 AM:

" So now you're FINALLY willing to admit that Bush gets some of the blame, huh Bluey?

Good boy, now if we could just get you to admit the earth is more than 6000 years old.

You have my permission to go back to your Obama rants anytime now. "

Interested Observer wrote on Dec 22, 2008 8:05 AM:

" Not sure I agree, Lon. We're not in a depression (yet), so you *could be* right. On the other hand, spending such as FDR did in his first 100 days might actually PREVENT a depression. This is brand new territory, economically, because starting with the stock market crash of 1987, each government 'intervention' has been layered on top of the others until no one actually *knows* if the standard economic rules still apply or not. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 8:05 AM:

" You seem to be confused again Bluey, was that supposed to be HairBall Larry or HairBall Harry?

I just assumed you were so distraught over the NYT's article that you got confused, and it was meant for me. If not, I apologise for interfering with your message to the HairBall Larry person.

You seem to be getting confused a lot, Bluey. First you get hung up on the idea that the earth is only 6000 years old, then you claim Bush's invasion of Iraq is the fault of the Democratic party and now you've convinced yourself that Barney Franks is the cause of the world wide economic collapse.

The next thing you know Obama will be the one sitting on millions of dollars worth of Halliburton stock options. lol...

I sincerely hope you have a better day today, Doh. "

The Question wrote on Dec 22, 2008 8:41 AM:

" After ransacking it for eight years, the Bush administration has set the nation's house on fire, and now they're stealing the last of the silver on their way out the door.
And the really irritating thing is that they want us to thank them for it. "

The Question wrote on Dec 22, 2008 8:58 AM:

" Here's how the GOP deregulated housing finance scam worked, Doggy Doh.
1. Some struggling couple wants to buy a house.
2. They see a real estate agent who surprises them by telling them they can buy much more house than they ever dreamed. The real estate agent gets his commission. Making the payments is their problem.
3. A broker provides the loan. The broker agrees with the real estate agent that they can borrow more money for their dream house than they ever imagined. He gets a commission and his firm passes the stinky loan off to a bank. The loan getting paid off is their problem.
4. A bank bundles the mortgage up with a bunch of others that stink just as bad and passes them off to a Wall Street firm. The bank pockets a tidy profit. The loan getting paid off is their problem.
5. The Wall Street firm chops up the bundle of loans into "digestible bites" called securities. They get AIG to launder the securities by insuring them so they get a AAA rating. It's like spraying Lysol where the dog just did his business. Now it's AIG's problem to get the loans paid off.
6. The Wall Street firm's brokers call every sucker in their Rolodex to buy the securities.
7. One day this game of musical chairs comes to a halt when the economy stops playing "You're In The Money." Ponzi schemes always collapse, you know. And now it's all the American taxpayers' problem.
The real estate agents, the banks and Wall Street all got the big bags of money. The American working class and middle class is left holding the bag. "

The Question wrote on Dec 22, 2008 11:56 AM:

" America is in a war, a class war. But only one side is fighting.
That would be the side that wrecked the global economy and then took a trillion or two of your tax money in payment for their services. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 12:28 PM:

" Bush: Its All Mah Daddys Fault
By: Jane Hamsher

Here's to old times!
The Wall Street meltdown isn't his fault, he tells Charles Gibson:

"I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so, before I arrived," he said.

Decade ago. . . lemme sharpen my pencil. . . 1990. . . that would be Bush Sr. at the helm.

He's pretty stupid, but I think even he can count to ten.

In his final days, his legacy is going to be whining, refusing to take responsibility and blaming his mess on his dad.

On the list of great shames of the USA, re-electing Bush in 2004 is going to be among them.

Wonder why he's not blaming Barney Franks like our resident whiner is? "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 12:41 PM:

" I see that Fox on line is doing its part to try to prop up Bush and Cheney's pathetic legacy's, all the while continuing it's daily assault on Obama.

Fox is trying to portray both Bush and Cheney as supportive of the troops. I would imagine both of them have a troubled conscience over the thousand of young Americans they are directly responsible for getting killed. Perhaps Cheney should cash in those millions in Halliburton options which are the result of this war, and establish a educational fund for some of the kids who lost a parent for these two reprobates. Yeah, like that's gonna happen. "

The Question wrote on Dec 22, 2008 12:52 PM:

" By the way, Obama is about to run into a four-year solid storm of corporate media attack and innuendo.
The corporate media sun shone indulgently on the vicious Monkey King as he wrecked the nation, but it will burn Obama. "

The Question wrote on Dec 22, 2008 2:41 PM:

" When you hear the auto workers being blamed, remember that what's happening here is that corporate America is lowering American wages, benefits and standards of living drastically to the Chinese level. Everything else is just window dressing to keep you distracted. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 2:45 PM:

" FactCheck.org lays out pretty solid case that the current economic situation cannot be layed solely at the feet of the Republicans.

So who is to blame? There's plenty of blame to go around, and it doesn't fasten only on one party or even mainly on what Washington did or didn't do. As The Economist magazine noted recently, the problem is one of "layered irresponsibility ... with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role." Here's a partial list of those alleged to be at fault:

* The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.

* Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.

* Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.

* Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.

* The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.

* Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.

* Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.

* Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.

* The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.

* An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.

* Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.

The U.S. economy is enormously complicated. Screwing it up takes a great deal of cooperation. Claiming that a single piece of legislation was responsible for (or could have averted) the crisis is just political grandstanding. We have no advice to offer on how best to solve the financial crisis. But these sorts of partisan caricatures can only make the task more difficult.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008

------------

What, not a single mention of Barney Frank?

Better give them a call, Bluey.

And hey Herr Goebbels, you're slipping, Hannity and Limbaugh are calling this the Obama recession. Can Fox news be far behind with that claim? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 3:26 PM:

" (Harry Potter -You seem to be confused again Bluey, was that supposed to be HairBall Larry or HairBall Harry?)

No confusion at all HairBall Larry.

Remember, you're the first of the three Liberal Stooges:

Harry, Question, and fat-headbob.

Larry, Moe, and Curly!

woop woop woop! nyuk nyuk nyuk!

LOL

Thanks for stepping in that one Harry!

ROFLMAO! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 3:31 PM:

" Oh and uhm.....Hairball Larry,

here's that latest question that's got you scared to death:

Which NYT's article was lying?

It looks like I'm going to have to add this question to the ever growing list of questions that the three Liberal Stooges are too scared to answer.

woop woop woop! nyuk nyuk nyuk!

LOL "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 3:34 PM:

" No confusion at all HairBall Larry.

Nice try Herr Goebbels, but I ain't buying. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 4:08 PM:

" Perhaps when you start answering one of the dozens of questions that have been put to you, over these many months to your many different posting names, I might consider answering yours, Bluey. Answering a question with a question is not really answering it, DohDoh.

And hey, are you trying to steal Vanutty's Stooge bit?

I know you two have a lot in common, such as your belief that the earth is only 6000 years old and that man walked along side the dinosaurs, but come on, is nothing sacred?

Just fess up about the evolution stuff, under your BDD label, and I'll answer your question. How's that?

Until you do that, you can ask questions till the cows come home and like you I will continue to ignore you.

I'm safe, because you can't do it, can you Doh? lol! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 4:11 PM:

" Here's how all that "bad paper" first got into Wall Street and onto the world market. Please note it was the Clinton era, and these securities were BACKED BY THE COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT (The CRA was that little jewel of Liberal legislation that weaked the lending standards and forced banks to make loans to applicants who were high risk).

AND THESE SECURITIES WERE GUARANTEED BY FREDDIE MAC AND HAD AN IMPLIED "AAA" RATING. THAT'S WHAT ATTRACTED GLOBAL INVESTORS.

Press Releases

October 20, 1997
First Union Capital Markets Corp., Bear, Stearns & Co. Price Securities Offering Backed By Affordable Mortgages

Unique Transaction To Benefit Underserved Housing Market

CHARLOTTE - First Union Capital Markets Corp. and Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. have priced a $384.6 million offering of securities backed by Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) loans - marking the industry's first public securitization of CRA loans.

The affordable mortgages were originated or acquired by First Union Corporation and subsidiaries. Customers will experience no impact - they will continue to make payments to and be serviced by First Union Mortgage Corp. CRA loans are loans targeted to low and moderate income borrowers and neighborhoods under the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977.

CHARLOTTE - First Union Capital Markets Corp. and Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. have priced a $384.6 million offering of securities backed by Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) loans - marking the industry's first public securitization of CRA loans.

The affordable mortgages were originated or acquired by First Union Corporation and subsidiaries. Customers will experience no impact - they will continue to make payments to and be serviced by First Union Mortgage Corp. CRA loans are loans targeted to low and moderate income borrowers and neighborhoods under the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977.

"The securitization of these affordable mortgages allows us to redeploy capital back into our communities and to expand our ability to provide credit to low and moderate income individuals," said Jane Henderson, managing director of First Union's Community Reinvestment and Fair Lending Programs. "First Union is committed to promoting home ownership in traditionally underserved markets through a comprehensive line of competitive and flexible affordable mortgage products. This transaction enables us to continue to aggressively serve those markets."

THE $384.6 MILLION IN SENIOR CERTIFICATES ARE GUARANTEED BY FREDDIE MAC AND HAVE AN IMPLIED "AAA" RATING. First Union Capital Markets Corp. is the investment banking subsidiary of First Union Corporation. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 4:13 PM:

" (and I'll answer your question. How's that?)

You'll answer the question of my choosing, Harry? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 4:16 PM:

" (Harry Potter- Nice try Herr Goebbels, but I ain't buying)

temper temper Hairball Larry.

It's Christmas, and besides, you're outmatched!

woop woop woop! nyuk nyuk nyuk!

LOL! "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 4:20 PM:

" After you Bluey... But as I said I'm safe, cause you won't do it... "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 4:37 PM:

" It's Christmas, and besides, you're outmatched!

Thanks Doh, I needed a good laugh. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 4:40 PM:

" Again, here's what was in store for banks and lending institutions who DID NOT WEAKEN THEIR UNDERWRITING STANDARDS per the instructions of the Democrats Community Reinvestment Act and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act.

From the cute little federal publication entitled-

Nondiscriminatory Mortgage Lending for Dummies booklet:

-"Did You Know? Failure to comply with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act or Regulation B can subject a financial institution to civil liability for actual and punitive damages in individual or class actions. Liability for punitive damages can be as much as $10,000 in individual actions and the lesser of $500,000 or 1 percent of the creditors net worth in class actions."

-"Even the most determined lending institution will have difficulty cultivating business from minority customers if its underwriting standards contain arbitrary or unreasonable measures of creditworthiness."

-"Management should be directed to review existing underwriting standards and practices to ensure that they are valid predictors of risk. Special care should be taken to ensure that standards are apropriate to the economic culture of urban, lowerincome, and nontraditional
consumers."

Isn't that sweet folks? "You had better be politically correct and make high-risk loans or.....uhm....can you say 'class action lawsuit'....?"

LOL! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 4:48 PM:

" (Harry- After you Bluey... But as I said I'm safe, cause you won't do it... )

It's a Deal Harry Larry.

Here's the question.

Why did Obama lie when he said that no one in his team had communicated with Blago about his vacant Senate Seat? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 5:03 PM:

" Helloooooooo?

Harry Laaaaaarrrrrryyyyyyy? "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 5:26 PM:

" Sorry Doh, but I have to go pick up your Christmas present. In the mean time get a hold of yourself. "

The Question wrote on Dec 22, 2008 6:38 PM:

" Funny. If you didn't know this was good, Republican, Bush-endorsed, Paulson-stamped, true-blue free-market capitalism, you'd swear it looked just exactly like trillion-dollar corporate welfare giveaway socialism. LOL. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 7:01 PM:

" Hey Harry Larry- were did you run off to?

LOL "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 7:05 PM:

" Hey Question, did you know?

Failure to comply with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act or Regulation B can subject a financial institution to civil liability for actual and punitive damages in individual or class actions. Liability for punitive damages can be as much as $10,000 in individual actions and the lesser of $500,000 or 1 percent of the creditors net worth in class actions.

hmmmmmmmm? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 7:43 PM:

" Poor ole Harry Larry.

He challenged me to ask him a question.

I did.

He folded like a cheap suit.

Then he ran away and hid. woop woop woop! nyuk nyuk nyuk!

How embarrassing for him.

*snicker* "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 22, 2008 8:52 PM:

" Never mind the hyper active Bluey folks, he thinks the earth is only 6000 years old, and can't get anyone to go along with him rather than Jon Vanutty.

I suspect he might be in meltdown mode. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 22, 2008 9:10 PM:

" (Never mind the hyper active Bluey folks, he thinks the earth is only 6000 years old, and can't get anyone to go along with him rather than Jon Vanutty)

Ah, Harry Larry.

Coming back for more?

Okay.

Show me where I said the world was 6000 years old Harry Larry.

Cite it.

I challenge you.

LOL! "

The Question wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:12 AM:

" Some of the biggest U.S. property developers are asking for government money in the face of $160 billion in maturing commercial mortgages next year, the Wall Street Journal says.
Every "free market" Republican crook in America has his hand out. "

The Question wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:43 AM:

" Here's what fascism looks like: The source of gifts to U.S. intelligence officials is classified, but CIA chief Michael Hayden took in $8,000 in gifts, including a sword, fountain pen and silk rug, in 2007.
Yes, you read that right. THE SOURCE OF GIFTS TO U.S. INTELLIGENCE OFFICIALS IS CLASSIFIED. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:59 AM:

" Show me where I said the world was 6000 years old Harry Larry.

Show me where you denied it, Bozo.

Yup folks, old Bluey still thinks the earth is only 6000 years old. That's the problem with ignorant uneducated folks like our little friend Bluey.

I'll be on the road for a couple of days, Bluey, but I'll be waiting to hear from you and read some of your brilliant messages. lol! "

father bob wrote on Dec 23, 2008 12:59 PM:

" here's a website so you can read all 4213 names of the soldiers who've died in iraq and afganistan.....you know the same ones bush and cheney are tossing under the bus during their "farewell" interviews.

http://icasualties.org/oif/USDeaths.aspx "

father bob wrote on Dec 23, 2008 3:34 PM:

" over 4000 of our brave young citizens died because bush and cheney lied...

how does someone feel when their son or daughter dies because someone wanted a shootout at the OK coral just for grins? "

father bob wrote on Dec 23, 2008 3:42 PM:

" Vice President Dick Cheney, according to a still-highly confidential FBI report, admitted to federal investigators that he rewrote talking points for the press in July 2003 that made it much more likely that the role of then-covert CIA-officer Valerie Plame in sending her husband on a CIA-sponsored mission to Africa would come to light.

Cheney conceded during his interview with federal investigators that in drawing attention to Plame's role in arranging her husband's Africa trip reporters might also unmask her role as CIA officer. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 4:05 PM:

" (Harry Larry Potter - Show me where you denied it,)

Okay Harry Larry.

I'll deny saying it.

I deny I ever said the earth is only 6000 years old.

There. I denied it.

In other news: Harry Potter said that Barack Obama was a liar who will adopt Bush's foreign policy.

LOL! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 4:06 PM:

" Tell me fat-headbob;

when's Obama going to get those troops out of Iraq? "

The Question wrote on Dec 23, 2008 4:26 PM:

" Now that their financial derivative and credit default swap con games have wrecked the world economy, Republicans are now suddenly proclaiming their lifelong support of government regulation, and scolding Democrats for their lax regulatory policies. LOL. "

The Question wrote on Dec 23, 2008 4:29 PM:

" "Selfish men have always tried to skim the cream of our national wealth in order to satify their own greed, and their instrument in this effort has always been the Republican Party."
-- President Harry Truman, Aug. 1948. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 4:56 PM:

" The Democrats in Congress have wrecked the housing market with their politically-correct underwriting regulations and relaxed lending standards. And they have infested the global market with their corrupt Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac derivatives.

So what's next? Well, now these Congressional Democrats get to act as impartial investigative legislators, completely removed from any responsibility or consequences for their criminal actions.

And the mainstream media is more than willing to advance this charade while turning a blind eye to the real causes of this Democrat Crime of The Century. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 5:38 PM:

" A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.

-Thomas Jefferson "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 5:45 PM:

" I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

-Thomas Jefferson "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 5:55 PM:

" Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae:
Where the Domain of the Housing Bubble and the Domain of the Derivatives Bubble Intersect

June 9, 2003 (EIRNS) Freddie and Fannie have become gigantic. In terms of asset size, the four largest financial institutuions in America are: 1) Citigroup, $1.1 trillion in assets; 2) Fannie Mae, $822 billion in assets; 3) JP Morgan Chase, $720 billion in assets; and 4) Freddie Mac, $708 billion in assets. Thus Fannie and Freddie are two of the top 4 financial institutions in America.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.

-Thomas Jefferson "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 6:04 PM:

" The Congressional Democrat controlled institutions, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, have been allowed to carry out their fraudulent operations by issuing three types of highly risky obligations:

1. corporate bonds that Freddie and Fannie issue;

2. Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), in which Freddie and Fannie pool a group of mortgages together, put a guaranty on it (for which they earn a fee), and then they package these MBS to insurance companies, pension funds, international investors; etc; and

3. outright derivatives, which Fannie and Freddie have used to infest, and subsequently, collapse the entire world market.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.

-Thomas Jefferson "

The Question wrote on Dec 23, 2008 6:38 PM:

" History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.
--Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813. "

The Question wrote on Dec 23, 2008 6:39 PM:

" Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.
--Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom "

The Question wrote on Dec 23, 2008 6:39 PM:

" Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
--Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 8:26 PM:

" I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.

-Thomas Jefferson "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 8:28 PM:

" The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time.

-Thomas Jefferson "

The Question wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:06 PM:

" Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.
--Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787 "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:36 PM:

" "It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.

-Patrick Henry: [May 1765 Speech to the House of Burgesses] "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:37 PM:

" Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

-John Adams "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:39 PM:

" The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity... I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.

-John Adams "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:47 PM:

" A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen. It is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus

-Thomas Jefferson "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:50 PM:

" Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.

-Thomas Jefferson "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:53 PM:

" Weve staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all of our heart.

We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. Weve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity....to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.

-James Madison [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia] "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 23, 2008 9:59 PM:

" In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed...No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.

-Noah Webster [One of the Founding Fathers and Author of America's First Dictionary] "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 24, 2008 8:38 AM:

" "Nobel Prize-winning American physicist Steven Weinberg said, 'Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things. it takes religion.' " from The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins "

father bob wrote on Dec 24, 2008 9:10 AM:

" Hail to the Chimp

The Farewell Tour

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."

- George WTF Bush "

father bob wrote on Dec 24, 2008 9:16 AM:

" as the bush-cheney farewell tour interviews continue. i am beginning to think cheney has this omnipotent arrogance to the point he believes he's almost immortal. he seems to have this i-admit-my-guilt-and-don't-care mindset to the point he is almost daring someone to try and do something about it.

i think he needs a swift death by hanging. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 24, 2008 12:11 PM:

" (But for good people to do evil things. it takes religion.' " from The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins )

That's ridiculous, shumphreys.

Just because evil people hide behind religion doesn't mean that those people are somehow "good", nor does it mean that all religion is inherently bad.

But if you are going to attribute evil actions performed under the guise of religion as the fault of the religion itself, and NOT the fault of the "good" individuals; then it would be more than fair to attribute the historically unparalleled acts of murder, torture, and brutality of Atheistic nations, solely to Atheism itself and NOT to the basically "good" tyrants who wrought such evil.

If religion allowed the Christian to do it; then what motivated the Atheist to do it? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 24, 2008 1:00 PM:

" The Obama Facade

Obama had become the Liberals political Rorschach test.

He was a self professed: "blank canvas upon which anyone can project their fantasies and desires.

The beautiful irony here is that the Left has already become disillusioned with this ambiguous self-opportunistic sophist, whom they believed would herald in an unprecedented era of "Hope and Change".

Instead, they are already sensing the familiar smell of: "More Of The Same".

It won't be long before the long-held seething hatred and juvenile emotions, that fueled the Left through the last eight years, begins to fester like a cancer within the Democrat Party as the disenchanted Left-wing radicals begin to turn on one another.

Immature irrational hatred such as this has to be directed somewhere. It doesn't just evaporate.

I'm definitely going to need more popcorn..... "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 24, 2008 1:16 PM:

" (shumphreys wrote- "But for good people to do evil things. it takes religion.")

The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.

-G.K.Chesterton "

Rotty wrote on Dec 24, 2008 1:31 PM:

" Just thought I'd throw this in, as a kicker to ole Soapbox Shemphreys....
LOL!

"But you see, you do understand, you do understand that this issue right here, of intellectual arrogance, is the reason why people like you have a difficult problem with people of faith. I don't communicate an air of superiority over the people because I know so much more, and if you only read the books I know, and if you only knew the scientists I knew, then you would be great like me. Well, sir, there could be many things that you know well. There are other things that you don't know well. As you age, you'll find yourself wrong on some things, right on some other things. But please, in the process of it, don't be arrogant."

-Ted Haggard "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 24, 2008 2:43 PM:

" Great quote, Rotty!

There was a great (yet humble) literary giant who would have loved to have shared a drink with Mr. Haggard:

"Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly."

-G.K.Chesterton "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 24, 2008 3:42 PM:

" BDD, you had better try reading the posts first before commenting on them,it will help you avoid foolish errors. The quote was for good people to do evil it takes religion.Now read that carefully. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 24, 2008 3:44 PM:

" Gosh Rotty if you weren't in such great need of enlightenment, I'd shut up! Like BDD you have a long way to go, but there is always hope, you might just get there eventually. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 24, 2008 3:45 PM:

" Blaise Pascal, "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." "

The Question wrote on Dec 24, 2008 4:50 PM:

" That's right. The coming Depression had its roots in the single-term Carter administration, grew in strength during the Clinton years and finally exploded on us all on Jan. 21, 2009.
Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. tried valiantly to stem the tide with their massive tax cuts for corporate billionaires, horrendous deficit spending, shredding of civil liberties, unjustified wars and GOP congressional majorities, but were helpless before the omnipotent influence of the largely out-of-power Democrats. "

The Question wrote on Dec 24, 2008 4:52 PM:

" "The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.
-G.K.Chesterton "
---
Nice cop out. Same one the Soviet communists used to excuse their constant failures. "

The Question wrote on Dec 24, 2008 5:07 PM:

" One good thing about the coming Depression. It will greatly ease the servant problem of the remaining rich. Fox News should do a big special on that. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 24, 2008 6:57 PM:

" (BDD, you had better try reading the posts first before commenting on them,it will help you avoid foolish errors. The quote was for good people to do evil it takes religion.Now read that carefully.)

As usual Susan MY point goes flying over YOUR head.

How do you explain evil acts committed by Atheists?

Are Atheists naturally evil people? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 24, 2008 7:00 PM:

" (Nice cop out. Same one the Soviet communists used to excuse their constant failures.)

Where's the cop out? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 24, 2008 7:13 PM:

" (shumphreys wrote - BDD, you had better try reading the posts first before commenting on them,it will help you avoid foolish errors. The quote was for good people to do evil it takes religion.Now read that carefully.)

But Susan ole girl, you would be well advised to read your OWN posts.

Over on the (Stolen Atheist Sign) thread you told us that religious beliefs are irrelevant- did you not?

shumphreys wrote- "I have said that what any individual believes is totally irrelevant, all that matters are everyday actions, how one treats ones fellows."

So religion is irrelevant ONLY until shumphreys decides it makes supposedly "good" people do "evil" things?

Looks like you made a very foolish error, shumphreys.

LOL! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 24, 2008 7:20 PM:

" Religious liberty might be supposed to mean that everybody is free to discuss religion. In practice it means that hardly anybody is allowed to mention it.

-G.K.Chesterton "

Rotty wrote on Dec 24, 2008 9:33 PM:

" You've done well, Shemphreys.
You've enlightened me.
When I worked for the county, many years ago, I thought I'd delt with most every loon there was, at one time or another.
But alas, you've proved me wrong.
Thank You!

Now will you please shut up?
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!! "

Rotty wrote on Dec 24, 2008 11:15 PM:

" Thanks, BlueDog!

You folks all have a Merry Christmas/Happy Holiday.

And yes, even you too, Ms. Humphreys.
LOL!

Take Care & Be Safe All!
:-)

Until next time.... "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 25, 2008 3:39 PM:

" Oh I should probably also explain that for an atheist to do great good it is also not connected to, sanctioned by religion it comes because that person is a good person. No wonder you have such difficulty making your points and understanding the Bible. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 25, 2008 3:41 PM:

" Sorry Rotty I am on a roll and there is no stopping me now, not even your inane comments!Grow up. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 25, 2008 5:41 PM:

" (Oh I should probably also explain that for an atheist to do great good it is also not connected to, sanctioned by religion it comes because that person is a good person.)

That was a pathetic dodge, shumphreys. Even for you.

I didn't ask you about "good". I asked you about your assertions of "evil".

THESE were the questions I asked you:

If religion allowed the Christian to do evil; then what motivated the Atheist to do evil?

How do you explain evil acts committed by Atheists?

Are Atheists naturally evil people? "

Rotty wrote on Dec 25, 2008 6:47 PM:

" Just for you Shemphreys....
Because I care....

How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?

Two. One to actually change the bulb, and the other to videotape the job so fundamentalists won’t claim that god did it.

.......

Atheist: What’s this fly doing in my soup?
Waiter: Praying.
Atheist: Very funny. I can’t eat this. Take it back.
Waiter: You see? The fly’s prayers were answered.

.......

ROTFLMAO!

Merry Christmas, Shemp!
Btw, mine is still bigger than yours!
ROTFLMAO! "

The Question wrote on Dec 25, 2008 8:06 PM:

" Q: How many Christians does it take to change a light bulb?

A: Three, but they're really one. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 25, 2008 9:49 PM:

" Merry Christmas, Shemp!
Btw, mine is still bigger than yours!

HAH! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 25, 2008 11:46 PM:

" (A: Three, but they're really one.)

Well Question Moe, since Christians don't believe that they themselves are three into one....that joke really doesn't work now does it......uhm no, no it doesn't. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 25, 2008 11:54 PM:

" I don't believe in the after life, although I am bringing a change of underwear.

-Woody Allen "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 26, 2008 10:21 AM:

" BDD I suggest you print out all these comments then maybe your simple brain can follow the discussion. When people realize they are loosing an argument they do predictable things. Some will resort to name calling, and attempts at denigrating their opponent (Rottys favorite tactic). You turn to obfuscation, that is a big word I realize but another way to put it is when you can't "wow people with your brilliance you try to baffle them with your bs." That tactic only works on people that aren't more intelligent than yourself. Go to the other thread about the "stolen atheist sign" for a more direct response to your comments. "

The Question wrote on Dec 26, 2008 10:50 AM:

" All we've heard from the Republicans for the last year are their warnings about some possible scandal involving Obama. Will they ever tire of sounding like whiny, backbiting old ladies, I wonder? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 26, 2008 11:44 AM:

" Here's Shemphrey's aurgument:

("for good people to do evil it takes (a set of beliefs) AND what you believe is totally and completely irrelevant, all that matters are your everyday actions.")

BUT if any old set of beliefs will do, Shemphreys-
then why aren't you blaming Atheistic beliefs as well? Have horrendously evil acts not been performed by Atheistic regimes? Since there is no religion for Atheists to hide behind; are Atheists just naturally evil people? On what shall we blame the evil acts of Atheism?

And MORE importantly, how can "good people" be truly "good" if they are using any old set of beliefs to do evil actions?

Again Susan, if the set of beliefs are truly irrelevant; then the "good people" who do evil are basically evil people, are they not?

And that includes people of all religious beliefs as well as people of no religious beliefs i.e. Atheists.

So, Susan, why do you turn a blind eye on the evil of secular regimes, and only single out evil performed in the name of religion?

See that Susie; I cut it up into bite size bits that even YOU can follow.

Have you considered getting a reimbursement on your tuition?

I'm sure your debates on this site will provide a strong case in favor of compensation.

Obviously Susan, academia has failed you miserably. "

Rotty wrote on Dec 26, 2008 11:45 AM:

" Ms. Humphreys fails once again to grasp the simple concept of her own hypocrisies.

Yes, there are extremes in all religions, & nonreligions.
I think most everyone has already figured this out.

The only difference is, some are willing to admit it, at one time or another, & some are not.

In my own humble opion, Ms. Humphrey's very arrogant attempts to speak down upon other's beliefs, while under the guise of goodness, fair-play & togetherness, is just as bad, if not worse, as a pushy christian, or any other religion for that matter, who comes to my door, trying to get me to attend their church, or believe in what they do.

Thanks, but No Thanks!

Ms. Humphreys, take a good long hard look in a mirror.
You want to "enlighten" someone?
Enlighten yourself!

I'll await your next piece of BS & claptrap, hypocrite. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 26, 2008 1:37 PM:

" (Will they ever tire of sounding like whiny, backbiting old ladies, I wonder?)

Uhm..... Question Moe?

You're wondering if Republicans will stop sounding like....you? "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 26, 2008 2:23 PM:

" The evil acts you are talking about are not connected to atheistic beliefs BDD. Atheism is nothing more than a disbelief in Theism. Theism by the way is a belief in a creator God who intervenes (when he feels like it) in the affairs of men (sometimes in the way of dictating scriptural verse, or speaking directly to people/telling them what to do). Deists, polytheists, panentheists, as well as those who don't believe in any God are all Atheists. As the original quote pointed out Good people will do good and evil people will do evil but it takes religion to get good people to do evil. Since atheism isn't a religion, it would appear that when an atheist commits an evil act he would be an evil person doing something evil. If the atheist does something good it would be because she is a good person doing good things because it is the good thing to do. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 26, 2008 2:28 PM:

" Now when you start throwing "truly" into your arguments you are changing the parameters of the original argument which is a form of obfuscating. Try sticking to the original parameters it will help you make sensical points rather than foolish ones. OH and I have never turned a blind eye to the evil in this world whether committed in the name of religious beliefs or committed in the name of greed, power, or pleasure. Once again when you are loosing an argument you attempt to denigrate the other persons character. It doesn't work. You shoot yourself in the foot. "

father bob wrote on Dec 26, 2008 3:37 PM:

" goodness.....easy to see just who doesn't have a life.

hey hotdog....have a lonely 36 hours or so there chump? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 26, 2008 7:44 PM:

" (The evil acts you are talking about are not connected to atheistic beliefs BDD.)

Oh really? How do you know?

(Since atheism isn't a religion, it would appear that when an atheist commits an evil act he would be an evil person doing something evil.)

And there is your double standard, Shephreys.

Religion is a belief system.

Atheism is a belief system.

You attribute the beliefs of the religious people to the cause of their evil actions.

You DO NOT attribute the beliefs of the Atheistic people to the cause of their evil actions.

Again the belief system only matters in your argument when that system is based on religion.

But more importantly, Susan; since far greater evil has been committed in this world by regimes that were Atheistic, we can logically conclude by your premise that, not only does Atheism attract naturally evil people, it does so on a scale far greater than religion.

Thank you for TRULY making my point. "

The Question wrote on Dec 26, 2008 9:45 PM:

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 26, 2008 10:39 PM:

" (shumphreys wrote - "Try sticking to the original parameters it will help you make sensical points rather than foolish ones.")

Uhm....Susan, "sensical" is not a real word.

Try sticking to the parameters of the English language and it will TRULY help you make a further mockery out of your foolish hypocrisies, Susie ole girl.

See how patiently I'm teaching you, shemphreys? "

harry potter wrote on Dec 27, 2008 6:49 AM:

" i think he needs a swift death by hanging. "

Sorry fb, but I can't agree with you on this one. I thnk he should be locked in an 8 by 10 cell for the rest of his miserable life. The only reading material allowed should be his Halliburton stock options plastered on the walls of his cell, along with the pictures of all the people killed by this piece of human scum. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 27, 2008 7:27 AM:

" The Question wrote on Dec 26, 2008 9:45 PM:

" RNC candidate Chip Saltsman's Christmas greeting to committee members includes a music CD with lyrics from a song called "Barack the Magic Negro," first played on Rush Limbaugh's radio show.

*****************

Having an and out and out racist as head of the RNC should please our local "experts" such as Bluey and Vanutty.

Now watch for Bluey to get all indignant about getting called out for his bigotry. lol! "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 27, 2008 8:59 AM:

" Sorry once again BDD. Atheism is a lack of beliefs. The key word is belief. Beliefs are what you hope are true but have no proof of TRUHTH. Atheists in general, though since the term covers such a wide swath of those that believe in a deistic God and multiple Gods and God as embodied in all life and all things and those that have no belief in any sort of God it is hard to generalize, but generally Atheists pursue and embrace KNOWLEDGE. Knowledge by the way has proof of TRUTH. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 27, 2008 9:08 AM:

" BDD why don't you try getting a little exercise, something different from "jumping to conclusions". The conclusions you draw are from your own twisted and perverted reasoning. They can't be drawn from anything I have said. I have never "attributed the beliefs of the religious people to the cause of their evil actions." I suggest you go back and reread ALL that I have written, print out the pages (maybe you are one that needs to see the hard copy in order to understand what has been said). Falsely accusing someone of saying what they didn't say doesn't work in this forum when one can so easily checks the FACTS. "

The Question wrote on Dec 27, 2008 9:29 AM:

" The difference, Doggy Doh, is that religion is a belief system that demands that you have faith in invisible, inaudible, intangible beings who never appear in public or take any discernible action. Atheism, as a philosophical position, makes no such demands. "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Dec 27, 2008 1:58 PM:

" RNC candidate Chip Saltsman's Christmas greeting to committee members includes a music CD with lyrics from a song called "Barack the Magic Negro," first played on Rush Limbaugh's radio show.

Having an and out and out racist as head of the RNC should please our local "experts" such as Bluey and Vanutty.
------------------------------------
Ah, Harry you left me out! Ah, that's okay. I've already gotten a compliment and an agreement this week from your side! LOL.

Hmmmm....think...think...think.

So I wonder if that's as bad as hanging Sarah Palin in effigy or calling GWB a chimpanzee or a simian?

I guess one's side shouldn't point fingers when one's side is full of H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E-S. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 27, 2008 3:38 PM:

" Ah, Harry you left me out! Ah, that's okay. I've already gotten a compliment and an agreement this week from your side! LOL.

Sorry, Neo.

And who the hell qave you a compliment? We may have to consider giving him a three day suspension. lol! "

The Question wrote on Dec 27, 2008 9:45 PM:

" So I wonder if that's as bad as hanging Sarah Palin in effigy or calling GWB a chimpanzee or a simian?
---
Take a good look at Bush, Neo. He IS a chimpanzee. "

The Question wrote on Dec 27, 2008 9:50 PM:

" The current chairman of the RNC, Mike Duncan, has issued a statement saying he is "shocked and appalled" that Saltsman could have thought this "Magic Negro" song was was funny or appropriate in any way.
But then Duncan is just another of your RINOs, eh, Neo? Anyone who doesn't endorse the true Republican spirit of racism is a RINO, right? "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 27, 2008 10:11 PM:

" Ahem.

Atheism:

1.) the DOCTRINE or BELIEF that there is no God.

2.) disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Atheism asserts a belief that there is no God.

Simply put: An Atheist's DISBELIEF in God is based on his BELIEF that there is no God.

Question Moe himself, has asserted many times that God absolutely positively does not exist.

Atheism is not only a position of faith, it is a position based on a universal negative. Not only is this position NOT based on knowledge, Susan; it prevents one from the true precious pursuit of this life- WISDOM.

But, by claiming to affirm only a passive lack of a god-postulate, and by denying that they actively assert the nonexistence of deity, Atheists conveniently absolve themselves from having to defend their position. "

Cognitus wrote on Dec 28, 2008 12:42 AM:

" Miller:We can hope that with President Bush giving more details about the job, Obama has certain newly formed attitudes.

How could he? The ignoramus never
understood it himself. "

Cognitus wrote on Dec 28, 2008 12:56 AM:

" Blue Dog:"But more importantly, Susan; since far greater evil has been committed in this world by regimes that were Atheistic, we can logically conclude by your premise that, not only does Atheism attract naturally evil people, it does so on a scale far greater than religion."
I'm sure this is false. Almost every human society -- Muslims, American Indians, etc. -- has a belief in god(s).
Even the people in Zimbabwe have beliefs in various objects of the supernatural. So whomever you think is evil, I'm sure you'll find a society that believes in some sort of religion.
So I think your theory has no basis.
Even in "Communist" Russia, I do not
believe that the people, the common
people, ever gave up their religious belief, even tho concealed. "

Cognitus wrote on Dec 28, 2008 12:58 AM:

" Blue Dog:"I'm definitely going to need more popcorn..... "

A remark consitent with the intellectual
level of most of Blue Dog's comments. "

Cognitus wrote on Dec 28, 2008 1:08 AM:

" Blue Dog:"" A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen. It is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus

-Thomas Jefferson "

Blue Dog seems ignorant of the Jefferson Bible in which he cut out all references to miracles. I'm sure TJ believed in casting the money-changers out of the temple (i.e. government), but he did NOT accept the New Testament as written by King James & friends. "

The Question wrote on Dec 28, 2008 5:20 AM:

" If atheism is a religion, Doggy Doh, then NOT collecting stamps is a hobby. "

The Question wrote on Dec 28, 2008 7:58 AM:

" I have come to the reluctant conclusion, over these last few years, that many Americans long to embrace fascism.
Ugly and small-minded, with a violent distaste for anyone they perceive as different, they like the idea of people being kidnapped by the government and locked in secret prisons where they can be tortured and murdered in complete legal darkness. They like the idea of private mercenary companies mowing down the
unarmed citizenry in countries their nation has
invaded and occupied.
They want the government to spy on all Americans at all times, without any legal oversight. They loudly condemn any poor person who steals something, but fashion strange, tortured defenses for corporate CEOs
who rob billions from the public.
Anti-individualist to the bone, they demand that
everyone else grovel to their deities and their flags.
Much of their conversation consists of nothing more than a tedious recitation of their imagined grievances against women, against gay people, against people who have other religious convictions, against black or brown or yellow people.
They enjoy listening to ranting idiots on the radio
and television, and think those loudmouth dropouts are intellectuals. They have a long list of people they want to execute, and they delight in telling you how much they would enjoy seeing that done.
For all the lip service they may pay the Constitution from time to time, in fact they despise it.
In short, they are nasty pieces of work. They dont like to call themselves "fascists," of course, but thats just a PR ploy. What they like, very much, is BEING fascists. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 9:47 AM:

" BDD I think you have been using a High School dictionary. A-theism is about non belief in a theist. Now a theist doesn't just believe in any old God. And translating theist as "God" is inaccurate and misleading. A theist believes in a particular type of God, a Creator God that is all knowing, all powerful and that intervenes when he feels like it in the affairs of men. That is totally different from a Deist, Polytheist etc. I suggest you look up the words theist, deist, polytheist, pantheist, panentheist, in your dictionary or google them. Expanding your vocabulary and learning to use correctly is an important part of carrying on civil discourse. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 9:57 AM:

" Question, I agree that there is definitely something "rotten" in our society or perhaps a better analogy is that there is a "runaway virus" infecting our society and those that have it are "typhoid mary's" carriers that don't know they are carriers because they refuse to see that they are infected. I said on another line that humans have an amazing ability to self-deceive, if that is what they choose to do. I think the only way to irradicate a virus is to expose it to bright light and fresh air, bring it out into the open. Did any of you see 48hrs on CBS last night? It was a program about "Boot camp for God". Pretty freaky. "Forgive them Lord they know not what they do." "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 28, 2008 10:00 AM:

" It appears that the list of people who think Bluey is a total idiot is growing by the day. lol... "

The Question wrote on Dec 28, 2008 12:25 PM:

" The truth is, of course, that many of the American Christian fanatics do not believe out of philosophical conviction, but out of blind tribal allegiance. They are Christians for the same reason and with virtually the same fervor that they are Cubs fans.
The search for truth doesn't particularly interest them, and may frighten them, because it may well contradict the comforting myths of their huddled tribe.
Had they been born in the Middle East, they would have been equally fanatic Muslims. "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 28, 2008 1:34 PM:

" In an interview aired Sunday on Fox News Sunday, Mrs. Bush says she knows her husband's eight years in office was not a failure, and says she doesn't feel as if she needs to respond to people who view it that way.

She says history will judge the two-term presidency of George W. Bush.

Mrs. Bush notes that under her husband's watch, the nation has been kept safe from attack since Sept. 11 and that his administration toppled Saddam Hussein and liberated millions of people in Afghanistan and Iraq from oppressive governments. She also talked of her husband's work to provide treatment for disease to millions of people in sub-Saharan Africa.

*****************

I guess they didn't ask her about the economy.

What's next from Fox? How about an interview from Lynn Cheney justifying the Dickster's Halliburton stock options that went from a mere 200 thousand to tens of millions since he spearheaded the invasion of Iraq and all those no-bid contracts he put together behind the scenes.

Oops... I forgot, he's going to donate them to charity, right. Well that's what he said almost 8 years ago anyway.

Rumor has it that he is trying to get one of his kids to name a child Charity, so he can claim he lived up to his promise. "

The Question wrote on Dec 28, 2008 1:56 PM:

" John Snow, Bush's former secretary of the treasury, claimed that one of the causes of the mortgage meltdown was that, in its gee-whiz eagerness to increase homeownership, the Bush administration "forgot" that people had to be "able to afford their houses."
So the Bush White House is arguing that hey, they are not really corrupt greedbags. They are just monumentally, profoundly, stupendously stupid.
And though many of them are in fact stupid, they are lying. The explanation for this crisis -- as for the $12 billion on wooden pallets in cash that vanished in Iraq, no questions asked -- is kleptocracy. That's rule by thieves. "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Dec 28, 2008 3:31 PM:

" The Question wrote....

Take a good look at Bush, Neo. He IS a chimpanzee. "
-------------
Well then, with that logic Obama looks like Curious George. So I guess it's okay to refer to him as Curious George. I wonder how do you refer to people with disabilities that look a certain way?
--------------------
".....that Saltsman could have thought this "Magic Negro" song was was funny or appropriate in any way.
But then Duncan is just another of your RINOs, eh, Neo?"
----------------

As for the "magic negro" song, I was honestly unaware of it until I read your post. Contrary to HP's assertion that I listen to Rush Limbaugh religiously, and therefore I would know about the song, I've listened to Limbaugh maybe a hand full of times over the past several years, and generally when traveling. And as I have said before I judge folks by character and actions.

After reading your post, I found the "magic negro" song on Youtube. At best the song is parody, at worst the song is tasteless. But iI would say it is similar in nature to the many (tasteless) parodies I have seen (reluctantly) from 'SNL'. Does it increase human quality of life? No but then again doing something like Sarah Palin was pretty "low brow" too.

As for Duncan, I'm not "up" on his political views yet, but I think you know my view on RINO's. The republicans need a good "housecleaning" of the RINO's from the party. It's hard for republicans to take any kind of high ground when their standing in the sewer. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 3:39 PM:

" (Cognitus- "Even in "Communist" Russia, I do not believe that the people, the common
people, ever gave up their religious belief, even tho concealed.)

You're confused as always, Cogni. The common people were the victims. The Atheistic Communist Regimes were the evil perpetrators.

Thanks for making my point.

(Cognitus- "Blue Dog seems ignorant of the Jefferson Bible...")

I'm quite familiar with Jefferson's "bible" as well as his animosity towards orthodoxy.

You on the other hand, Cogni, seem to be quite ignorant of the original source that The Founding Fathers used for the basic principles and moral guidelines to established this great country:

"It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here."
-Patrick Henry

"The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God."
-John Adams

"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."
-Charles Carroll [signer of the Declaration of Independence]

"God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel"
-Benjamin Franklin [Constitutional Convention of 1787]

"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. Weve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacityto sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."
-James Madison [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]

"It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible."
-George Washington

"What students would learn in American schools above all is the religion of Jesus Christ."
-George Washington

"To the distinguished character of patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian"
-George Washington "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 4:32 PM:

" BDD George Washington is long gone and the same with Adams and the rest. What they believed and what actually was done however are not the same. Take Adams statement, "The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity" and of Buddhism, and of the Greek Philosophers, and of....."those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God." He does not in anyway apply that those principles are ONLY Christian principles, the principles are the
UNIVERSAL ones of equal rights for ALL humans. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 4:40 PM:

" (shumphreys- "BDD I think you have been using a High School dictionary. A-theism is about non belief in a theist.)

I used two sources Susan:

Dictionary.com
Merriam-Webster.com

I'll also throw in a third:

Cambridge Dictionary Online:

Atheist - "someone who BELIEVES that God or gods do not exist.

Now Susan, if you would like to correct the fine people at these established institutions, have at it.

I'm sure they would love to hear your brilliant insights; like your invention of the word "sensical".

LOL "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 4:48 PM:

" (shumphreys- "He does not in anyway apply that those principles are ONLY Christian principles,)

I'm sorry Susan, did Adams specify Buddhism, and Greek Philosophers?

No.

Here's a little more insight to Adams:

"The Law given from Sinai [The Ten Commandments] was a civil and municipal as well as a moral and religious code."
-John Adams

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
-John Adams "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 5:03 PM:

" (Shumphreys- BDD George Washington is long gone and the same with Adams and the rest. What they believed and what actually was done however are not the same.)

Are you kidding, Susan? What was actually "done" was the creation of this great Republic. And it was founded on Christian principles. Principles that allow YOU to believe the way you choose.

You would do well to read the words of Patrick Henry very carefully, Susie ole gal:

"It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. FOR THIS VERY REASON, PEOPLES OF OTHER FAITHS HAVE BEEN AFFORDED ASYLUM, PROSPERITY, AND FREEDOM OF WORSHIP HERE."

-Patrick Henry [May 1765 Speech to the House of Burgesses] "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 5:08 PM:

" And BDD I shouldn't have to remind you but I will anyway: the basic concepts of Republican and Democratic forms of government come from the Greek and Romans (pagans at the time), the Ten Commandments are Judaic not Christian, and the Golden Rule of do unto others, well that appeared with Confuscius and later with Rabbi Hillell long before Jesus ever walked this earth. So in actuality, none of the principles are Christian. They were here long before Christians appeared. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 5:41 PM:

" (Shumphreys- the basic concepts of Republican and Democratic forms of government come from the Greek and Romans (pagans at the time), the Ten Commandments are Judaic not Christian, and the Golden Rule of do unto others, well that appeared with Confuscius and later with Rabbi Hillell long before Jesus ever walked this earth. So in actuality, none of the principles are Christian. They were here long before Christians appeared.")

Tell it to the Founding Fathers, Susan.

Never before had all of these concepts, philosophies, and principles come together, as they did, under the collective wisdom of these predominantly Christian minds.

And they believed, that that circumstance in itself, was providence.

Thanks for beautifully highlighting their brilliant point, Susan.

See how Christ is working through you as we speak?

"It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. FOR THIS VERY REASON, PEOPLES OF OTHER FAITHS HAVE BEEN AFFORDED ASYLUM, PROSPERITY, AND FREEDOM OF WORSHIP HERE."

-Patrick Henry [May 1765 Speech to the House of Burgesses] "

Harry Potter wrote on Dec 28, 2008 6:51 PM:

" Hey Susan, ask the lttle guy how old the earth is. lol! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 7:04 PM:

" Hey, Harry Larry Potter, tell us what "sensical" means.

LMAO "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 8:05 PM:

" They actually were well aware of it BDD. Unlike you some of them, though not all, were well read for their time, curious and thoughtful men, serious and deep thinkers. It was their willingness to challenge old worn out ideas and break with long established traditions, to THINK for themselves, that enabled them to have the courage to "go where no men had gone before." "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 8:08 PM:

" Actually BDD I can't think of a single value, moral, principle, that Christians can claim as their own, that they haven't usurped from some other religion or culture. All of the values are UNIVERSAL BDD not Christian. "

Rotty wrote on Dec 28, 2008 8:10 PM:

" If the best "typhoid mary" can come up with is "sensical", she definitely has "the amazing ability to self-deceive".

Talk about a "runaway virus infecting our society".

"I think the only way to irradicate a virus is to expose it to bright light and fresh air, bring it out into the open."

Precisely what we're accomplishing!
LOL!

Perhaps since Shemp is "pretty freaky", she could attend a "Boot camp for God".
By her own premise, she'd blend right in.
LOL! "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 8:12 PM:

" Try googling "sensical" BDD. It is amazing what you can find online these days. AND some people think I am not hip! "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 9:11 PM:

" (shumphreys- "They actually were well aware of it BDD....blah blah blah)

Uhm yeah....I think I said that Susan.

Right here: "Never before had all of these concepts, philosophies, and principles come together, as they did, under the collective wisdom of these predominantly Christian minds."

And I'm sorry you don't think I'm well read Susan. You on the other hand, can't even read my replies correctly.

BTW have you found an official reference for your made-up word "sensical"?

LOL "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 9:30 PM:

" (Actually BDD I can't think of a single value, moral, principle, that Christians can claim as their own, that they haven't usurped from some other religion or culture. All of the values are UNIVERSAL BDD not Christian.")

First of all Christianity doesn't claim an isolated origin without pedigree. It is an extension of Judaism.

What does Christianity claim?

Jesus Christ.

And Christianity doesn't "claim" Him for itself. Christianity claims Christ in spite of itself. He is for all of us. Even though none of us are worthy.

Of all the values, morals, principles, and philosophies; no one stated them, lived them, and died for them, more completely than Jesus Christ.

What other religion has given humanity the suffering God?

The God born into the flesh of man,(a worm and no man) for the sole purpose of suffering at the hands of mankind?

The God who feels our pain.

The God who weeps our tears.

The God who bears our insults, yet extends his forgiveness. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 9:58 PM:

" AS AN ATHEIST, I TRULY BELIEVE AFRICA NEEDS GOD

Missionaries, not aid money, are the solution to Africa's biggest problem - the crushing passivity of the people's mindset

TimesOnline(December 27, 2008)

-It confounds my ideological beliefs, stubbornly refuses to fit my world view, and has embarrassed my growing belief that there is no God.

-Now a confirmed atheist, I've become convinced of the enormous contribution that Christian evangelism makes in Africa: sharply distinct from the work of secular NGOs, government projects and international aid efforts. These alone will not do. Education and training alone will not do. In Africa Christianity changes people's hearts. It brings a spiritual transformation. The rebirth is real. The change is good.

-Faith does more than support the missionary; it is also transferred to his flock. This is the effect that matters so immensely, and which I cannot help observing.

-In the city we had working for us Africans who had converted and were strong believers. The Christians were always different. Far from having cowed or confined its converts, their faith appeared to have liberated and relaxed them. There was a liveliness, a curiosity, an engagement with the world - a directness in their dealings with others - that seemed to be missing in traditional African life. They stood tall.

-Whenever we entered a territory worked by missionaries, we had to acknowledge that something changed in the faces of the people we passed and spoke to: something in their eyes, the way they approached you direct, man-to-man, without looking down or away. They had not become more deferential towards strangers - in some ways less so - but more open.

-It would suit me to believe that their honesty, diligence and optimism in their work was unconnected with personal faith. Their work was secular, but surely affected by what they were. What they were was, in turn, influenced by a conception of man's place in the Universe that Christianity had taught.

-Christianity....with its teaching of a direct, personal, two-way link between the individual and God, unmediated by the collective, and unsubordinate to any other human being, smashes straight through the philosphical/spiritual framework (of the tribal mindset). It offers something to hold on to to those anxious to cast off a crushing tribal groupthink. That is why and how it liberates.

Read the full article here:
http://tinyurl.com/a5o5um "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 10:05 PM:

" Just about every religion BDD has had the concept of the suffering God, the concept of the emaculate conception, the concept of death and resurection,they just didn't call their saviors Jesus. I suggest you get a good book about the Worlds Great Religions and about Mythology. Joseph Campbell has a wonderful series of books on religious mythology and history. Very ENLIGHTENING. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 10:08 PM:

" Oh and BDD even the concept of forgiveness, is not unique to Christianity. Some religions just stress that one must first forgive ones self before one will be able to forgive others or find forgiveness from their God. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 10:10 PM:

" And that BDD, forgiving our selves, is very difficult for us to do because as some other wise saint or sage once said, "we have met the enemy and he is us." That sage was Pogo by the way. We are our own worst enemy. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 28, 2008 10:38 PM:

" BDD I have said from the beginning that religion can help people become better people AND it can help people become worsen people! BUT people should never be forced to listen to ANY religious message in order to get help. People should convert to a religion, any religion,freely from personal choice, not out of fear of hellfire and damnation or because they are in need of food or shoes or shelter or medicine or..... "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 11:07 PM:

" Name the religions Susan that have a suffering god who suffers for his people.

Who willingly laid down his life for his people.

Who suffers the indignation's and insults of his people and still forgives them.

Who lowered himself down to his people because they could not raise themselves up to him.

Who taught forgiveness by suffering the unforgivable.

Who's death brought about life for those who took his life.

Name that religion, Susan. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 28, 2008 11:11 PM:

" (shumphreys- People should convert to a religion, any religion,freely from personal choice, not out of fear of hellfire and damnation or because they are in need of food or shoes or shelter or medicine or....)

Is THAT what you got out of the Times article, Susan?

Is THAT what your fellow Atheist was saying in that article?

I think you need to read it again, Susan. Slowly. Very slowly. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 29, 2008 8:45 AM:

" "And though many who bow with closed eyes in the sanctuaries of their own tradition rationally scrutinize and disqualify the sacraments of others, an honest comparison immediately reveals that all have been built from one fund of mythological motifs--variously selected, organized, interpreted, and ritualized, according to local need, but revered by every people on earth." Joseph Campbell p. 4 Primitive Mythology from The Masks of God series. I suggest you read for yourself because you won't believe what I tell you. "

The Question wrote on Dec 29, 2008 9:25 AM:

" I see Bush has his women out pumping sunshine up our backsides, trying to distract the American public from the realization that he is the worst president in modern history. Hiding behind their skirts will certainly improve his reputation. "

The Question wrote on Dec 29, 2008 4:14 PM:

" By the way, you right wingers have been supporting Bush's unlimited, unsupervised domestic spying powers. I take it you will also support those same unlimited spy-on-Americans powers for President Obama?
Or have all those terrorists hiding under your bed suddenly become less threatening somehow? "

The Question wrote on Dec 29, 2008 5:32 PM:

" And as the Mideast crisis burns away, the Chimpanzee in Chief takes yet another vacation. Yes, relax and have another banana, George, Don't let the smell of all that blood bother you. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 29, 2008 6:00 PM:

" (I take it you will also support those same unlimited spy-on-Americans powers for President Obama?)

But, Question Moe!

I thought Obama WASN'T originally for FISA?

Golly! Did Obama change his mind?

LMAO! "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Dec 29, 2008 11:18 PM:

" The Question wrote on Dec 29, 2008 5:32 PM:
" And as the Mideast crisis burns away, the Chimpanzee in Chief takes yet another vacation. Yes, relax and have another banana, George, Don't let the smell of all that blood bother you.
----------------------------

What should GWB do? Fly over there and say, "Okay you guys, knock it off or else..." Maybe send some troops over too, hmmm? And where's your beloved UN? Why aren't they doing something about it?

In case you did know, Hamas and Israel have been trying to knock each other off for quite sometime now.

Maybe President-elect Curious George could fly over there and talk to Hamas. He is kindred with the terrorist Hamas, isn't he now?

Or maybe for once you could post something non-rhetorical and maybe thoughtful? Nah, that'll never happen. That's past your grasp isn't it, The Question? "

The Question wrote on Dec 30, 2008 7:33 AM:

" "What should GWB do? Fly over there and say, "Okay you guys, knock it off or else..."
----
No, by all means, Bush should take a vacation just like the rich, arrogant, indifferent goon he is. Bush has spent some 900 days -- nearly 30 percent of his time in office -- on vacation, including the happy little holiday he took while New Orleans drowned.
He can't be expected to start acting like a president at this late date, after all. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 30, 2008 8:01 AM:

" Obviously Hamas has no fear of a President Obama intervening on behalf of Israel.

Likewise, I'm sure the imams in Iran are elated at the thought of a vacillating junior Senator neophyte as Commander in Chief of the free world's only protection.

Barry Hussein Obama (the teleprompter-created, cult of personality) who has vowed that he will respond to a nuclear attack on Israel with an American nuclear retaliation on Iran, will soon "clarify" his brave stance, in ....3....2.....1.... "

The Question wrote on Dec 30, 2008 8:22 AM:

" Remember when all your neocon pals said that "the road to peace in in Jerusalem runs through Baghdad?" What happened to that laughable, sickening lie? Is there any murderous foreign policy mistake you neocons HAVEN'T made? "

The Question wrote on Dec 30, 2008 10:16 AM:

" Remember, if you right wingers have nothing to hide from President Obama, you have nothing to worry about. Isn't that what you always say when you support the American police state? "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Dec 30, 2008 12:08 PM:

" Hey Raptor....

I never got to fully address the auto industry economic situation....so here's the rest of my thoughts on it...

I see that GM and Chrysler CEO's Wagoner and Nardelli think that congress's stipulation of restructure with massive cuts in labor costs, and a two-thirds reduction in debt that involves convincing creditors to swap debt for equity is achievable.

Since 2007 Chrysler's cut 32,000 jobs, taking 1.2 million units out of capacity, eliminated 12 production shifts and closed two plants.

GM's gonna cut about ~25,000 jobs, seek additional changes to labor contracts, and restructure $30 billion in unsecured debt.

That's all great, and far be it for me to ever agree with UAW president Ron Gettelfinger, but both congress and GM/Chrysler are wrong on the solution.

They are trying to cut operating expenses, which is the lowest priority. Their goal should be to first increase throughput (vehicle sales), lower inventory (increase inventory turns), and then cut operating expenses.

Both CAT and John Deere took this approach, a few years ago, and they are sitting pretty relative to the economic downturn. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 30, 2008 12:45 PM:

" Gee Question.

Where's all your belly-aching, and whining and moaning about Obama's jack-booted fascist thugs kicking your door in?

All of a sudden your big Liberal mouth is unusually shut about that little double standard. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 30, 2008 12:47 PM:

" Oh and, I'm all for Obama's fascist jack-booted security tactics.

Are you, Question? "

The Question wrote on Dec 30, 2008 12:55 PM:

" Fox News is now blaming the Mideast crisis on Obama, the man who isn't president, while giving a complete pass, of course, to the vacationing, sociopathic Oval Office Orangutan who couldn't care less how many people are slaughtered in the Mideast.
And remember, less than a month until Fox News discovers the economy has suddenly turned horrendous and it's all Obama's fault. "

The Question wrote on Dec 30, 2008 2:11 PM:

" Bush has never been president. He has play-acted at being president, dressing up in daddy's clothes, preening in front of the lights, reading speeches he doesn't understand or care about, and then waltzing off on vacation at least a third of the time.
Now he's broken the shiny toy of the American presidency, just as he's broken every other expensive toy he's had in his wretched, spoiled life. Somebody else can have it now. Bush doesn't care, he wants to stay on vacation.
As a friend of mine observed, we can be grateful for one thing: the white male leadership of the Republican Party finally showed the entire world that ugly GOP power lust, greed, cronyism, tribalism, corruption and discrimination completely outweigh any glimmer of competence. "

The Question wrote on Dec 30, 2008 5:49 PM:

" " Oh and, I'm all for Obama's fascist jack-booted security tactics.
Are you, Question? "
---
No. If he doesn't rescind them and restore constitutional liberty, I will oppose him as I opposed the fascist ape. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Dec 30, 2008 8:13 PM:

" Uhm....Question Moe....Obama ALREADY voted for the FISA bill last summer.

When will your Obama protests begin?

LMAO! "

father bob wrote on Dec 31, 2008 9:09 AM:

" Editors note: In light of the recent fighting in Gaza, Truthdig asked Chris Hedges, who covered the Mideast for The New York Times for seven years, to update a previous column on Gaza.~

Can anyone who is following the Israeli air attacks on Gazathe buildings blown to rubble, the children killed on their way to school, the long rows of mutilated corpses, the wailing mothers and wives, the crowds of terrified Palestinians not knowing where to flee, the hospitals so overburdened and out of supplies they cannot treat the wounded, and our studied, callous indifference to this widespread human sufferingwonder why we are hated?

Our self-righteous celebration of ourselves and our supposed virtue is as false as that of Israel. We have become monsters, militarized bullies, heartless and savage. We are a party to human slaughter, a flagrant war crime, and do nothing. "

The Question wrote on Dec 31, 2008 1:56 PM:

" You're absolutely right, Father Bob. If you find you can blithely endorse blowing children to pieces, you have become evil, whether you realize it or not.
The same is true if you endorse torture, by the way. Doesn't matter what your excuse is. You're just peddling evil. "

The Question wrote on Dec 31, 2008 2:31 PM:

" Condi Rice says, "I don't know anyone who wasn't caught off guard by Hamas's strong showing."
This from the same woman who asked, "Who could've foreseen planes hitting the towers?"
Poor Condi Rice -- a "leader" who is as perpetually surprised by the world as a blithering idiot.
But she isn't an idiot. She's just lying. "

shumphreys wrote on Dec 31, 2008 2:46 PM:

" You atarted it no you hit me first. You are starving my people, they have no jobs, no medicines. We let humanitarian aid in (now and then). "How many roads must a man walk down before he is called a man? How many times must the cannon balls fly before they are forever banned. The answer my friend is blowing in the wind. The answer is blowing in the wind. " When will it ever end, when will it ever end. "

The Question wrote on Dec 31, 2008 2:54 PM:

" Government officials overseeing a $700 billion bailout have acknowledged difficulties tracking the money and assessing the program's effectiveness.
The information was contained in a document, released Wednesday, of a Dec. 10 meeting of the Financial Stability Oversight Board.
The officials noted the "difficulties associated with monitoring the use of specific funds" provided to individual financial institutions, according to the document.
In other words, the Bush administration is turning over nearly a trillion taxpayer bucks to its corporate sponsors with ABSOLUTELY NO accountability or oversight. That's naked fascism, folks. "

The Question wrote on Dec 31, 2008 3:13 PM:

" Here's that "moral clarity" the GOP is so famous for.
Just remember, the man who ISN'T the president is responsible for everything that's wrong, but the man who IS the president can go lah-de-dahing off on vacation because he is responsible for nothing whatsoever he has done.
That's the "Party of Personal Responsibility" in action -- meaning, I guess, that you are somehow personally responsible for all their crimes and mistakes. "

The Question wrote on Jan 1, 2009 4:12 AM:

" Whatever happened to the Republican plan to "privatize" Social Security into the stock market, because stocks always only go up? Too bad the "deregulated" Wall Street crooks couldn't get their claws into the subsistence safety net for America's seniors and rip it apart, isn't it?
Don't just think of the many disasters Bush actually managed to create. like the destruction and occupation of Iraq and the drowning of New Orleans. Think of the disasters he TRIED to create, until he was blocked by wiser, saner, more honest people. "

Harry Potter wrote on Jan 1, 2009 4:20 PM:

" Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about.
Mark Twain

+++++++++++++++

For some reason I immediately thought of our friend Blueboy when I saw this one. lol! "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Jan 2, 2009 9:04 AM:

" " Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about.
Mark Twain
------------------------------
No, no, no, the name for a person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about is a known as a DEMOCRAT. "

NeoCon Academician wrote on Jan 2, 2009 10:11 AM:

" Hey Harry Potter....

Go see my post underneath,
"Haulers to offer curbside recycling in Charleston"

You can work this from the liberal side....Neo "

Harry Potter wrote on Jan 2, 2009 7:01 PM:

" Whatever happened to the Republican plan to "privatize" Social Security into the stock market, because stocks always only go up?

*********************

Good question TQ, wonder what happened to that brilliant idea? "

The Question wrote on Jan 3, 2009 12:06 PM:

" The Fed has selected four "investment giants" to "manage" $500 billion in mortgage-backed securities purchases -- but the firms and the Fed won't say how much they're getting paid.
Fascism on parade, folks. The corporate totalitarians steal hundreds of billions right out of your family's pocket, into the distant future, while you watch. And if you ask a question about it, they tell you to shut up and go away.
No wonder this nation is collapsing. Its citizens are stupid, distracted, Fox-fed, American-Idolized sheep. I'd call them lambs to the slaughter, but they're not that innocent. "

BlueDogDemocrat wrote on Jan 4, 2009 11:36 AM:

" Question Moe just demonstrated his mind-numbingly oblique ability to spew Liberal troglodyte propaganda.

Here's what he's NOT TELLING YOU:

+++++++

From USAToday (April 28 2008)

-Fannie, Freddie bet big, with little federal oversight

-Rein them in before their risky business loses the pot for taxpayers.

-As other institutions pull back, however, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two publicly traded corporations created by the federal government to promote homeownership, are capturing a rapidly growing share of the housing finance market.

-In the final three months of last year, Fannie and Freddie were involved in $450 billion in new home loans, or about 76% of the mortgage business, up from just 37% as recently as two years ago. This year, that figure might top 80%.

-While it is beneficial that someone is still pouring money into the troubled housing market, this concentration poses great risks to taxpayers that need to be addressed.

-Fannie and Freddie have guaranteed $3.6 trillion in loans and mortgage-backed securities that they have sold to other institutions.

-They hold an additional $1.6 trillion themselves, bringing their total exposure to the housing market to $5.2 trillion.

-That, incredibly, is larger than the $4.5 trillion portion of the national debt that's held by private investors.

-Should Fannie or Freddie run into trouble, the federal government would have little choice but to bail them out. With the government already sodden in debt, that is a risk to which every American is exposed.

-IF THAT IS NOT CAUSE ENOUGH FOR CONCERN, CONSIDER THIS:

-These two companies are subject to almost no government oversight to ensure they don't engage in reckless behavior.

-Their one overseer is an obscure, understaffed and hamstrung agency within the Department of Housing and Urban Development that has less control over these financial behemoths than U.S. Treasury has over conventional banks.

-The agency, known as the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, has minimal powers to impose and adjust capital reserve requirements the cash cushions Fannie and Freddie must set aside to absorb potential loan losses.

AND HERE'S THE DEMOCRATS CORRUPT EFFORTS TO BLOCK AND REGULATION:

-Efforts to bring tighter controls over these companies have gone nowhere. For years, Fannie and Freddie deployed armies of politically connected lobbyists to deflect them.

-Accounting scandals at both companies, uncovered in 2004, convinced many of their staunchest defenders that they need tighter oversight.

-Sensible legislation is supported by President Bush and has passed the House of Representatives.

-Yet it has been stuck in the Senate, caught between Fannie's and Freddie's efforts to water it down and objections from some of their harshest critics, who want more dramatic reforms.

-It is time to end this senseless maneuvering. Congress needs to realize that Fannie's and Freddie's upside of supporting the mortgage market comes with a potential downside that needs to be taken seriously.

-If they were to falter, the federal rescue of Bear Stearns would look like peanuts.

++++++++

Back to you Question Moe.

Spin some more Liberal Moonbat propaganda out of that. "