Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by yodajazz
Every life has meaning? Try telling that to the pro-abortion liberals that pollute this rock. Or wait "Pro-Choice" <chuckle>
Every life has meaning, but that meaning is subject to intellectual choice.
Let's start over. Every life has meaning but less meaning than choice.
Done with your tangent, Beanie boy?
None of that diatribe backs your claim that the entire government is owned & controlled by "masters", or that the same policies are in place now that were in place then.
We already know what happens with systemic bankrupsy. It's called depression. Last time that happened, the depression lasted over a decade & we only got out of it by our involvement in WWII, AKA massive government spending & takover of all vital industries. We gave every able bodied man a job & shipped as many as possible overseas, then brought as many women as possible into the workforce. It was all done on a borrowed dime. But we got out of it & paid off the debt.
I've never been a fan of Greenspan & you should already know that. As far as I'm concerned, all that Ayn Rand egoist theology he & the rest of the supply siders ascribe to is a bunch of crackpot nonsense. That's why I'm disinterested in the opinions of the supply siders who signed that "open letter to the Fed". Those are the same people that Bill Black was bitching about on Moyers, show. The ideology driven policies of deregulating financials gave us the last 2 panics in '89 & '08. Greenspan was also involved in the decision of Richard Nixon to debase the dollar & put currencies on the open speculator market like commodities. Then he designed the half-baked wage & price control scheme when that backfired. I've been a critic of Greenspan since '73. So what? I still don't ascribe to the Bircher conspiracy theories.
Chris Whalen is wrong. The fingers don't grow back. Neither does your nose when you cut it off to spite your face. BofA, Wells Fargo, & Morgan Chase are solvent. They never needed TARP. Turns out that Paulsen's spreading TARP around to the other banks was originally a ruse to avoid a run on Citigroup. They needed a bailout. Something like 80% of credit cards in this country were running through them at the time. If they wen't down then, consumer spending would have come to a screeching halt, & that's over 70% of the economy. Since then, Citi's been wound down from #2 to #4 & card issuers are finding other underwriters or doing it themselves if they're big enough & solvent. Merril Lynch was a kingpin in retirement accounts & countrywide had mortgage trust deeds, & there were others, so the government paid the bigs to take them over even though they were worthless so their customers wouldn't be left in a lurch or at the mercy of foreign financiers who wouldn't be bound by contracts of a defunct company that they picked up in a liquidation sale. Change direction? I think not. We're in a restructuring. Restructuring away from bullshit "Austrian school" Friedmanomics that don't work. Whalen's just another republican.
QE2 just went into effect last week. The reactionary youtube video was made a week earlier & was just whining over what the speculators were doing trying to predict what was going to happen. Oops! The dollar strengthened & inflation did nothing. All they're doing is buying up treasuries with money that they forced the banks to fork over. If the Fed buys the treasuries, the money goes into circulation & the debt stays within the the government. The Treasury's just borrowing from itself. I'm not a big Bernanke fan, but I have differences with everybody. He's doing his job under the dual mandate. I'd rather not toss in a newbie right now.
I've been calling for fraud investigations since all this started. Before that actually. All the way back to the shock. Black can name names all he wants, but he's wrong that the President or the AG should shoot their mouths off in public. That's how you ruin & lose a case. Prosecutions aren't politics or academic economic arguments, & fraud is a crime. They're going to get Goldman. There's no way to know who else they're going after until the indictments come down. This ain't over. But you have to have sustainable proof before you can make a court case. You gotta have your ducks in a row, & you can't do that if you have to fight the politics too.
So far, you haven't shown me anything to make your case that the President is a crook. Nothing in that entire thread was any kind of evidence to that effect. I don't want to change course. We don't have another big event like WWII on the horizon to pull our fat out of the fire if everything collapses, & that's what you're advocating. A depression would just keep going until somebody like China or India becomes the dominant world market. I don't buy that it's inevitable. Economics is a man made abstract & we can change it. I'm all for going back to a tweaked form of Bretton Woods sans the gold peg. Money's not a commodity, & it seems that the only ones who understand that are the Chinese. Everything's global whether anybody likes it or not. If we don't stabilize currencies, this shit'll just keep happening. We need a rethink on everything when time allows.
Good post Hippifried! I only recently been made aware about Citigroup's importance in te bailout. And you further clarified the reason for me.
Here's one where I would agree with you; if it were a true life scenario. That is, smaller regional banks, 'stripping' the bigger insolvent banks. But it seems to me in recent years, its mainly bigger corporations gobbling up the smaller ones, across the board. They are the only ones with enough spare cash/credit to make major aquisitions. But perhaps you have seen more things on the financial market than I.Quote:
Originally Posted by beandip
Obana needs to ..go
6 Dec 2010....
The Obama administration has warned Oakland over the licensing of four giant pot farms, saying the plan is in violation of state and federal law and could trigger multiple legal actions against the city.
Officials from the Justice Department’s civil division and the U.S. attorney’s office in San Francisco delivered the blunt message to Oakland City Attorney John Russo, according to two officials who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to talk about the meetings.
“The warning is clear: These are illegal, large-scale pot growing operations, with Oakland planning to get a cut of the illicit profits,” said one official.
City Attorney Russo confirmed that Justice Department officials raised objections to Oakland’s marijuana cultivation ordinance in separate meetings last month.
“They've expressed their concerns that the path Oakland is taking is in violation of the law,” Russo said in a statement.
He declined to discuss details of the meetings or disclose the identities of the other participants. A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in San Francisco did not respond to phone messages.
At issue is a controversial ordinance, approved by the Oakland City Council last July, to license four “industrial” facilities to cultivate and process marijuana and sell the product to medical marijuana dispensaries around the state. If Oakland issues permits and the facilities are built, they could be the largest of their kind in the world.
In November, Oakland voters approved a measure that imposes a 5-percent business tax on all medical marijuana operators, including future pot farms, opening a potentially lucrative revenue stream for the city.
Supporters say the plan is carefully crafted to comply with Proposition 215 and subsequent legislation, which allow for marijuana to be cultivated “collectively or cooperatively” by patients with a doctor’s recommendation.
More recent guidelines drawn up by Attorney General Jerry Brown call for a closed-circuit cycle of “marijuana cultivation and consumption with no purchases or sales to or from non-members.”
Even though pot remains illegal under federal law, the Obama Administration has taken a hands-off approach to California's medical marijuana operators so long as they are in unambiguous compliance with state law.
However, after closely studying the Oakland plan some federal officials have concluded the ordinance violates state law because it treats pot farms as distinct business entities for tax purposes, thus severing the direct connection between cultivator and patient that underpins the legal standing of a medical marijuana collective or cooperative.
“Oakland would be on the hook for violating state and federal law,” said one official who foresees possible civil and criminal litigation if the pot farms go into operation early next year as planned.
The Obama administration’s challenge to Oakland over large-scale marijuana cultivation appears to be part of a broader federal effort to bring order to California’s booming medical marijuana industry following last month’s defeat of Proposition 19, the initiative to legalize recreational pot.
Eight days after the vote California’s four U.S. attorneys met with DEA and Justice Department officials to develop a plan to deal with some of the loopholes and gray areas in the state’s medical marijuana program, according to two officials briefed on the discussions.
U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner said the Nov. 10 meeting focused on a "state-wide federal enforcement strategy" for marijuana but declined to provide details.
“My responsibility is not to enforce state law. But I do have a responsibility to enforce federal law, which means putting an end to people who use the cover of 215 to try to violate federal law. And there are efforts underway to try to tighten that up,” Wagner said.
Federal officials are particularly concerned about operators who are using medical marijuana as a cover for money laundering and illegal shipments to other states.
Wagner cited a recent case [PDF] in which several Fresno-based growers are accused of cultivating thousands of pounds of pot under the state’s medical marijuana program, then shipping the product illegally to drug dealers in Boston.
“We are working hard to send a clear message to law enforcement authorities, federal and state and local, that we are determined to go after this kind of activity and bring more cases,” he said.
Wagner declined to say whether targeting Oakland’s pot farms was part of the new federal strategy. But two sources said the city ordinance was discussed in detail at the Nov. 10 meeting.
Obama: No Whistleblowing on My Watch
The US Military Should Be Ashamed of Its Treatment of Pfc. Bradley Manning
by Ann Wright
Candidate Obama said "Government whistleblowers are part of a healthy democracy and must be protected from reprisal."
As a U.S. presidential candidate in 2008, in referring to the Bush Administration's use of phone companies to illegally spy on Americans, Barack Obama said, "We only know these crimes took place because insiders blew the whistle at great personal risk ... Government whistleblowers are part of a healthy democracy and must be protected from reprisal." Candidate Obama was referring to the Bush Administration's use of phone companies to illegally spy on Americans.
President Obama says No whistleblowing on my watch!
Yet, Obama, as he has on so many issues as President, is taking a 180 degree turn from his comments as a candidate, comments on which the American people relied and elected him.
Now, the Obama administration's warning to Bradley Manning and to other whistle blowers is this: blow the whistle on government criminal actions and we will put you in solitary confinement before you are charged, much less go to trial. You will be treated as an "enemy combatant," in America's ongoing wars on about everything, including the truth.
Evidence of Murder of Civilians in Iraq by US military helicopter pilots
Bradley Manning, a U.S. Army Private First Class (PFC) intelligence analyst who turned 23 years old in late December, allegedly leaked a video of a US helicopter attack that killed at least eleven Iraqi civilians, including two Reuters reporters, to the website Wikileaks. Two Iraqi children were also severely wounded in the attack.
PFC Manning's alleged actions are just as important as those of the whistleblowers who informed us of the Bush administration's use of phone companies to illegally spy on Americans. The video taken from the U.S. military helicopter that fired the killing rounds of ammunition, graphically showed US military pilots firing on and killing innocent civilians in Iraq. In addition to this "Collateral Murder" video, PFC Manning is suspected by the government of leaking the "Afghan War Diaries" - tens of thousands of battlefield reports that explicitly describe civilian deaths and cover-ups, corrupt officials, collusion with warlords, and a failing US/NATO war effort.
Manning had the legal responsibility to disclose evidence, even classified evidence, of criminal actions conducted by government officials
If indeed, Manning did give the video to Wikileaks, his actions show clearly that he reasonably believed that war crimes were being covered up, and that he took action based on that belief. Exposing criminal actions done under the cover of government orders is a responsibility and duty of military personnel as codified in the Uniform Code of Military Justice as well as the Geneva conventions and the Nuremberg Principles.
Nuremberg Principle I
Principle I states, "Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment."
Principle II
Principle II states, "The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law."
Principle III
Principle III states, "The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law."
Principle IV
Principle IV states: "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".
This principle could be paraphrased as follows: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say 'I was just following my superior's orders'".
Classifying the evidence of criminal actions does not make the actions untouchable
Reporting criminal actions done by others and providing evidence of those criminal actions, especially when the evidence of criminal actions have been covered up by "classifying" the evidence, is not illegal, but in fact, is a very brave response.
Punishment before the Trial-Solitary Confinement
Manning has now been in prison in solitary confinement for 7 months and still neither the U.S. military nor the U.S. government has indicted him for any offense. Manning essentially is being treated by the U.S. government as an American citizen "enemy combatant."
Manning's treatment in detention, pre-trial confinement in prison is cruel and unusual. He is being kept in solitary confinement, alone in a cell for 23 hours a day. He is forbidden to exercise in his cell. He is deprived of sleep. He is not given a pillow or sheets for his steel bed, although recently after publicity about he conditions in the prison, he was given a mattress for the bed. Prison medical personnel now "administer regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the effects of this isolation."
US Soldier Treated as Those Detained in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo
The U.S. military's treatment of Manning is tragically consistent with its treatment of persons detained in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo. America's military uses harsh conditions and torture, physical or mental, for those who have not been convicted of any crimes used to break the person to provide whatever information the military wants to receive. This type of treatment is inhumane, immoral and wrong for those in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo and is wrong for Bradley Manning.
Nothing to be Proud of
Nothing in this to be proud of, President Obama. Nothing in this to be proud of, US Military.
If you, the reader, are offended by this, please -- Raise Hell for Bradley, the undeclared American "enemy combatant."
Contribute to Manning's defense fund at www.couragetoresist.org
Ann Wright is a 29 year US Army/Army Reserves veteran who retired as a Colonel and a former US diplomat who resigned in March, 2003 in opposition to the war on Iraq. She served in Nicaragua, Grenada, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Sierra Leone, Micronesia and Mongolia. In December, 2001 she was on the small team that reopened the US Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan. She is the co-author of the book "Dissent: Voices of Conscience."
Manning isnt even in solitary confinement he gets tv and three square meals a day. When you break your oath and every person weighs whether they want to follow an order or not were not going to have a very good military. He knew the laws he was breaking. Dont do the crime if you dont want the time.
Published on Wednesday, January 19, 2011 by TruthDig.com
Obama Pulls a Clinton
by Robert Scheer
Here we go again. When Bill Clinton suffered an electoral reversal after his first two years in office, he abruptly embraced the corporate money guys who had financed his congressional opposition in an effort to purchase a second term.
On Tuesday in his Wall Street Journal Op-Ed piece, Barack Obama veered sharply down that same course, trumpeting his executive order " ... to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive. ..."
He employed the same "creating a 21st-century regulatory system" rationalization used by Clinton when he signed off on the sweeping deregulation legislation that unleashed the Wall Street greed that ended up being the biggest job-killer since the Great Depression. "Over the (past) seven years, we have tried to modernize the economy," Clinton enthused as he signed the Financial Services Modernization Act that repealed key New Deal legislation, adding, "And today what we are doing is modernizing the financial services industry, tearing down those antiquated laws and granting banks significant new authority." Modernizing was the propaganda constant, as in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act that Clinton signed, thus shielding financial derivatives from any government regulation.
That deregulation, as Obama concedes in his WSJ column, led to "a lack of proper oversight and transparency (that) nearly led to the collapse of the financial markets and a full-scale depression." But Obama now promises that his deregulation efforts will be more sensibly targeted and will "bring order to regulations that have become a patchwork of overlapping rules, the result of tinkering by administrations and legislatures of both parties and influence of special interests in Washington over decades."
When he wrote that he intends to accomplish this revamp "with more input from experts, businesses and ordinary citizens," did he have in mind his two new key White House advisers who were the most effective advocates for those special interests? Tom Donilon, Obama's national security adviser, was the Washington lobbyist for the housing behemoth Fannie Mae, which will cost taxpayers $700 billion because of its marketing of toxic derivatives. Obama's new Chief of Staff William Daley was the lead Washington representative for a similarly afflicted JPMorgan Chase. These are the folks, along with many other Wall Street alums in this administration, who will oversee the latest update of already weakened regulations.
The first target will be the administration's puny efforts to protect consumers: "The move is the latest effort by the White House to repair relations with corporate America," the Wall Street Journal's report on Obama's column stated, "Business leaders say an explosion in new regulations stemming from the president's health-care and financial regulatory overhauls has, along with the sluggish economy, made them reluctant to spend on expansion and hiring. Companies are sitting on nearly $2 trillion in cash and liquid assets, the most since World War II."
This is a case of corporate blackmail pure and simple. The economy is sluggish because of a housing crisis that shows no sign of improvement. It stands history on its head to blame government financial regulations that had worked splendidly for six decades for the meltdown or the failure to fix a housing market that is the key to improved consumer spending.
Fixing housing would require efforts to keep the 50 million Americans whose mortgages are underwater in their homes. But the government bailouts under both George W. Bush and Obama have not required any significant cramp-down or reappraisal of mortgages by banks to enable people to stay in their homes. Instead the Fed and Treasury have flooded the banks and top corporations with cheap money and bailouts but, in the classic problem of pushing on a string, the corporate ingrates are hoarding that money.
Obama, and the party he heads, failed to provide a progressive narrative during November's election holding the financial elite that created this mess responsible. The key issue is not big government or onerous regulation but rather transparency and fraud prevention. When you are evicted, it is a government agent, a marshal or sheriff, who will force you out, so shouldn't the government also be involved in assuring that the consumer is protected by a properly vetted contract? Instead the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spearheaded the marketing of an alternative narrative, as successful as it was devious, by Republican candidates that held regulation-rather than deregulation-responsible for the mess. Now Obama seems poised to join their ranks. As the WSJ reported:
"On Feb. 7, Mr. Obama will visit the U.S. Chamber of Commerce-a chief opponent to his administration's regulatory approach-for a discussion on how the White House can work with the group to create jobs. The efforts are designed to give companies more confidence in the president's stewardship of the economy, and bolster his re-election prospects among a wealthy constituency not traditionally allied with Democrats."
A constituency that Daley, Obama's new chief of staff, can faithfully represent, having received $5 million a year from JPMorgan Chase. And so ends the season of hope for the less wealthy constituency traditionally allied with Democrats.
© 2011 TruthDig.com