Note To Chris Healy and Chris Shays

Healy is, still, clearly "Fat, drunk and stupid" if he thinks anyone is buying the Republican snake oil he sells. CT Bob has an "Obama endorsing Himes" ad at the top of his Blog, but if you scroll down you find this tear on the perpetually drunk with stupidity statements of Chis Healy that have come to represent the idiotic thought process of Republicans everywhere:

Yeah, it's just noise when Chris Shays tries to hitch his wagon to the Obama juggernaut in his mealy-mouthed ads. If the senator's endorsement means so little, why does Shays use the phrase "The hopefulness of Barack Obama" in his ads? Healy continues:

"Barack Obama talking about Jim Himes, whom I doubt he's ever met, it won't draw flies."

Uh, Chris, I hate to break it to you, but if you pull your head out of your butt long enough to look at Jim's website or catch his ads on TV, you might see this:

Oh well Chris, maybe you can photoshop your buddy Mr. Shays into the image where Jim Himes is standing right next to Barack Obama.

Unlike the spastic and erratic John McCain... Barack Obama actually takes the time to vet candidates BEFORE he endorses them. And, clearly, the Connecticut Republican party would do well to take away the keys from their 3 time DUI leader that has been integral in driving the local GOP into the ditch.

There is a huge difference between Jim Himes and Chris Shays, no matter how much the rubber stamp Republican, Shays, would like you to believe the opposite of reality:

There's no Republican in the House who has tried this exact same tactic more forcefully than Chris Shays of Connecticut. Shays is the last Republican member of the House from the 6-state New Hampshire region and his Connecticut congressional district has a PVI of D+5, the bluest district in America represented by a Republican.

Like his close ally, Joe Lieberman, Shays has managed to stay in office by persuading Democrats that he isn't really that Republican. His voting record, however, paints a very different picture. When Bush and the Republicans needed his vote-- no matter what the harebrained scheme they were pushing, he was always there for them. Take Iraq, for example. "Mr. Moderate" participated in 63 roll calls regarding Iraq since he voted 4 times on October 10, 2002 to authorize the use of force there. And "Mr. Moderate" voted against the Bush-Cheney agenda in Iraq exactly... 3 times, once to require competitive bidding on oil contracts when Cheney was caught trying to steal all of Iraq's oil, as did more than 4 dozen other Republicans, once to turn an Iraqi reconstruction grant into a loan (which was supported by 84 Republicans), and once on an inconsequential and unsubstantive budgetary matter. This week Shays, who is co-chairman of McCain's pointless Connecticut operation (he is polling just 36% against Obama) released an ad, very much like Gordon Smith's, trying to capitalize on Obama's immense popularity in Connecticut. Take a look-- and then consider donating to Blue America endorsee Jim Himes' campaign to replace him.

And Senator Obama's response?

"In this race, the good people of Connecticut should know that Barack Obama supports Jim Himes and believes Himes is the candidate who will bring the change American families need to Washington."

You want real change...

Not a desperate to hang onto his seat Republican like Chris Shays that is running from the McCain campaign that he has failingly chaired in the state of Connecticut. Both the national and the local Connecticut Republican party have proven, over and over again, that they are a top down driven failure. And none of them are willing to take responsibility for any of their own failures.

Republicans blame Obama for policies and ideas that are as American as apple pie. They blame those evil liberals and progressives for pointing out hypocritical Republican voting records. They blame their own ownership society that is ruining middle class Americans. They blame the economy that they ran into the ground with their free market run amok deregulation. They blame failed foreign policies that they created and chose to support. They even try to blame Bush for implementing their own ideas. And, now, some of these Republicans blame the incompetent and erratic McCain campaign and, even more so, the entirely absurd choice of Palin... The candidates they chose as their standard bearers and have failingly led the charge for themselves.

Not one of these Republicans are honest enough to look in the miror and see the failure that was and always will be theirs to own.

And that is what they try to call change?

That is Republican politics per usual... Connecticut and the rest of this nation cannot afford to remain on the same course that Republicans have, yet again, chosen. Their divisive political games and outright lies on the campaign trail to nowhere have caused nearly as much harm to America as their disastrous policies have. America needs real change.

Real change will come from electing Jim Himes.

New Milford Voting - Heads up!

In light of an email request from a reader for local New Milford, Connecticut, voting info:

Find out where to vote!
For your local poll...

According to the information I found there are no local town issues to be voted on. Just the candidates and the two statewide questions. I phoned the town clerk's office to verify this information to be true:

Warning
November 4, 2008

State Election

The electors and taxpayers of the Town of New Milford are hereby warned to meet at the respective polling places in said town on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, for the following purposes:

I. To cast their votes for Presidential and Vice-Presidential electors, Representative in Congress, State Senator, and State Representative.

II To vote on the following questions for the approval or disapproval of a proposed Constitutional convention and proposed AMENDMENT to the Constitution of Connecticut, a vote of “YES” being a vote for approval, and a vote of “NO” being a vote for disapproval:

1. Shall there be a Constitutional Convention to amend or revise the Constitution of the State?

2. Shall the constitution of the state be amended to permit any person who will have attained the age of eighteen years on or before the day of regular election to vote in the primary for such regular election?

The full text of such proposed questions with explanatory text, printed in accordance with §2-30a of the General Statutes, is available at the Town Clerk’s Office for public distribution.

Notice is hereby given that the location of the polling places is as follows:

Voting District Location of Polling Place
District 1 Northville School, Hipp Road
District 2 Catherine E. Lillis Building, East Street
District 3 Pettibone School, Pickett District Road
District 4 Gaylordsville Fire House
District 5 Schaghticoke School, Hipp Road
District 6 Hill & Plain School, Old Town Park Road
District 7 Sarah Noble School, Sunny Valley Road

Voting machines will be used. The polls will be open at six o’clock in the morning (6:00 a.m. and will remain open until eight o’clock in the evening (8:00 p.m.)

Absentee Ballots for electors and Presidential Ballots will be centrally counted in the Loretta Brickley Room in the basement of the Town Hall at 10 Main Street.

The final tally of the election will be in the E. Paul Martin Room in the the Town Hall at 10 Main Street.

Dated at New Milford, Connecticut, this 17th day of October, 2008.
George C. Buckbee
Town Clerk
New Milford

Please note that if you typically voted at the Lanesville fire department in the past, they have switched that District 7 voting location to Sarah Noble School because of the fact that they dead ended that street.

Also, in as far as the two statewide Constitution questions...

On question 1, most of the Democratic leaning Blogs seem to be in agreement that question 1 (having a Constitutional Convention) would be a bad thing and are pushing for a no vote:

The Connecticut Citizen Action Group (CCAG) urges a no vote on the question. As one of the organizations that has lead the fights to open up our political process (Direct Primaries, Campaign Finance and Ethics reforms) we believe a convention would be a waste of taxpayers' money and could be corrupted by the same special interests that our new campaign finance reform laws are designed to protect us from.

Proponents of a convention either do not understand the process or are deliberately trying to mislead the public by saying that the vote on November 4th is about initiative and referendum. If the vote passes it is then up to the legislature to determine the process for selecting delegates to the convention. This will likely be done through a costly special election and primaries. The convention is then convened, which will result in additional costs to the state. The delegates may or may not propose amendments to the constitution, which would be subject to a future popular vote. There is no guarantee that what the proponents of the convention are arguing this vote is about will be included these proposals.

It is plausible that many of the proponents of a convention would mask their real motivation due to the unpopularity of some of their ultimate goals. Connecticut does not want to ban a woman's right to choose or to allow discrimination against same sex couples. Advocates of these and other radical positions realize that they cannot win enough legislative races to accomplish their goals so they are trying to push a convention to create a new avenue for their fight. Their gambit will have significant costs for the state at a time we are facing a huge deficit. I am confident their stealth agenda will ultimately be rejected.

There is a high likelihood that the delegate selection process will be driven by lobbying and other big money interest. It is not surprising that special interests are looking for new ways to exert influence as Connecticut embarks on the first election cycle under our public financing system. The new system has been a smashing success with over 75% of candidates voluntarily participating. It has been praised across the country and will result in a state government more accountable to voters not special interests.

Costly to the taxpayers and could potentially run counter to the spirit and idea of the many recent campaign financing rule changes in Connecticut, and never mind the tendency of radical right wing groups, like the Family Institute of Connecticut (FIC), to push costly campaigns on to the ballot that will never pass in the real world. It is no coincidence that the fringe Heritage front group, FIC, is one of the groups pushing this agenda. They have little in state support or participation from Nutmeggers and the FIC is the quintessential example of an Astroturf group. Their sole purpose is to try and create a false perception of "grassroots support" for generally repulsive legislation that the majority does not support. They use money and vocal twits to agitate the process and create those perceptions.

To put it bluntly, FIC has more money... Yet, I have more readers (both in and out of state...) But the FIC uses out of state soft money and out of state sister group members to finance and create a fake movement and to get media access. And they want to amend the Connecticut Constitution?

I suggest using your middle finger on that "Hell NO!" vote for question 1.

When it comes to question 2, on allowing people that will be old enough to vote in the election to vote in the primaries if they are only 17, it seems like a reasonable way to help ensure our younger generation learns the civic responsibility of voting as soon as possible. If they will be able to vote in the elections, they should be able to help pick the candidate they want to vote for.

Those were my long answers... The short of it is to vote:

• NO on question 1
  
• YES on question 2

Just my suggestions and reasoning. :)

Don't Let This Be YOU!

Do you really want to be that person?

CT Marriage Equality Officially Begins Nov 10th

Or sometime within that week:

The State Supreme court decision on same-sex marriage becomes official Tuesday with its publication in the Connecticut Law Journal, and that means same-sex couples could be tying the knot in about two weeks.

[snip]

"It could be the 13th, but it will happen the week of November 10th," Ben Klein, of Gay/Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, said.

Not much time for them to get their wedding plans together... Good luck to any of you that take advantage of actually having EQUAL RIGHTS when it comes to your own personal pursuit of happiness.

Love Makes a Family is looking for donations to help defend this newly minted equality. You know there are wingnuts out there that are already plotting to force their misguided opinions into other peoples' marriages and happiness. Instead of fighting this decision they might do better to invest their political war chest in marriage counseling to figure out just what, exactly, is so wrong that makes their marriages success so dependent on somebody else's personal lives?

I don't know about any of you but my marriage hasn't changed one little bit, nor has it been diminished in any way, since the Supreme Court decision. Figure the odds?

Palin On Stevens Guilt

Via Think Progress:

Hotline reports that Sarah Palin issued a statement about the guilty decision in the Ted Stevens corruption case:

Thanks for your patience there. It’s a sad day for Alaska, and a sad day for Senator Stevens and his family. The verdict shines a light though on the corrupting influence of the big oil service company up there in Alaska that was allowed to control too much of our state. And that control was part of the culture of corruption that I was elected to fight.

Just exactly how did Palin fight this corruption in Alaska?


Yep... She has an image as some kind of political reformer but she is just another booster of the Corrupt Bastards Club. Obviously the feelings are mutual:

I bet Governor Palin wishes she could take this commercial back.

Ted Stevens Endorses Sarah Palin

Oh yeah... And Palin was groomed by the criminal as the director of a Stevens organized 527:

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin began building clout in her state's political circles in part by serving as a director of an independent political group organized by the now embattled Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens.

Palin's name is listed on 2003 incorporation papers of the "Ted Stevens Excellence in Public Service, Inc.," a 527 group that could raise unlimited funds from corporate donors. The group was designed to serve as a political boot camp for Republican women in the state. She served as one of three directors until June 2005, when her name was replaced on state filings.

snip

At the time Stevens revealed the existence of the 527 group -- a type of independent political corporation named for its the section of the tax code -- ethics experts questioned whether it was appropriate.

The Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reported that several experts called the group an example of the fine legal line between a legal effort to conduct political activity and then-new prohibitions against raising unlimited soft-money.

The same kind of "maverICKY" 527 groups that are skating on the edge of election laws and attacking Barack Obama with outrageous lies for the McCain campaign. Both John McCain and Sarah Palin are prime examples of everything that is wrong and needs to be reformed in politics... Hypocritical sell outs to the big corporations that are corrupting the system.

Banking Scam: Hate To Say I Told Ya So...

But I told ya so... Long before anyone else was telling you the truth:

60 Minutes' Steve Kroft examines the complicated financial instruments known as credit default swaps, and reveals how these little-known derivatives played a central role in precipitating the current market meltdown. In essence, speculators bet that homeowners wouldn't be unable to pay back their mortgages, and when those people started defaulting and the speculators tried to cash in their wagers, there was no money to cover the literally trillions of dollars in payouts. What it really boils down to is an unregulated gambling racket that Congress voted unanimously to create and legalize.

The world's financial system teetered on the edge again last week, and anyone with more than a passing interest in their shrinking 401(k) knows it's because of a global credit crisis. It began with the collapse of the U.S. housing market and has been magnified worldwide by what Warren Buffet once called "financial weapons of mass destruction."

They are called credit derivatives or credit default swaps, and 60 Minutes did a story on the multi-trillion dollar market three weeks ago. But there's a lot more to tell.

As Steve Kroft reports, essentially they are side bets on the performance of the U.S. mortgage markets and the solvency on some of the biggest financial institutions in the world. It's a form of legalized gambling that allows you to wager on financial outcomes without ever having to actually buy the stocks and bonds and mortgages.

It would have been illegal during most of the 20th century, but eight years ago Congress gave Wall Street an exemption and it has turned out to be a very bad idea.

Crooks and Liars has the video. And yep!

I told ya so.

Information and facts are the only things that will protect you from any attempts by the government to take your money and hand it over to the support the lavish lifestyles of these corrupt, reckless and foolish investors.

Bank Crisis 101 - The Simplest Explanation You Will Find

'Warren Buffett once called derivatives,
"financial weapons of mass destruction"'

They try to hide what it is using fancy words like credit derivatives. Over and over again they tell you it is too complicated for the average person to understand. They are lying to you. You can easily understand this if you read these pieces together. They keep talking about mortgages but they are the smallest part of this entire "shitpile." It is a scam and the bushies have been waiting for months to unleash this "crisis" as an election issue.

rdf at The EuroTrib sums it up in the simplest of terms for those of you that don't understand what the supposed bank crisis is all about:

The Crisis Explained - Really
by rdf
Thu Sep 25th, 2008 at 10:24:14 AM EST

Analogies are never perfect, but here's one using horse racing. Don't expect a perfect correspondence to the banking situation, but I think it is close enough for government work.

Joe goes to the track and bets $2 on a horse.

Two guys standing nearby get into a discussion and Fred says to Sam, "I'll bet you $5 that Joe wins his bet."

Next to them are Bill and Bob. Bill says: "I'll bet you $10 that Fred welshes on his bet if he loses."

Next to them is Sally. Sally says: "For $3 I'll guarantee to Bill that if Bob fails to pay off, I'll make good on the bet."

Sally then goes to Mary and borrows the $7 needed in case she has to ever pay off and promises to pay back $8. She doesn't expect to every have to pay since she believes Bob will always make good. So she expects to net $2 no matter what happens to Joe.

A quick calculation indicates that there is now 2+5+10+3+7 = $27 riding on the outcome of the horse race.

Question how much has been "invested" in the horse race?

Answer:

$50,000 by the owner of the horse who is expecting to recoup his investment from the winnings of the horse and other future deals. Everyone else is gambling, not investing.

The issue with the home market is that the only "investor" was the person who bought the home. All those engaged in the meaningless derivatives spun off from this are gambling. You can see how quickly the face value of all these side bets can exceed the underlying investment. Who is holding these side bets - not the homeowner? It is the people at the failing investment banks, hedge funds and similar enterprises. Notice that the bailout is being directed at them not the homeowners.

The real world is, of course, even more complicated. Over the last 30 years people have been allowed to place bets on everything starting with the value of stock averages. They might as well bet on the temperature in Newark at 8:00 AM.

So when you hear everybody saying this is a crisis caused by the housing collapse, be skeptical. We are in the midst of a classic pyramid or Ponzi scheme and there is no way out except for people to lose a lot of money. All that is different this time is that it is the taxpayers who are being asked for the cash.

I keep trying to explain to people how this is a scam and how the American people are going to be victims of it if they don't pay attention to it. They don't want you to know how simple this ripoff is.

Does that explanation above sound so complicated? That is an explanation that needs to go viral!

And all you really need to know about this now is that the bushies have been holding on to this to use it as an election issue for quite a while.

The thing that really pisses me off - and that most of the people, journalists and politicians don't seem to get or, at least, some of them intentionally ignore - is that the mortgage aspect is just a tiny little part of the entire shitpile.

The mortgage part of it is what really started to show the cracks in this scam, and it is one of the very few parts of this ponzi scheme with real and tangible assets to show at stake - the bulk of the shitpile are scraps of paper with absolutely zero value.

While it may look superficially similar to the recent implosions of such investment giants as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Lehman, the takeover and bailout of AIG is quite different, and means that the market is entering the next and even more dangerous phase. What is driving the fall of AIG – and potential government losses that may far, far exceed the $85 billion bailout announced late on September 16th - is not mortgages or real estate (directly), but fears that AIG’s huge, global credit-default swap positions will unravel. The $62 trillion dollar credit derivatives market is 50 times the size of the subprime mortgage derivatives market, and is indeed larger than the entire global economy.

Unfortunately, few people understand credit derivatives, or the full risks to the United States and global markets and economies. In this article, I will take a Credit Derivatives Primer that I published in the spring of 2008 - which anticipated this exact type of event - and update it for the current situation. Through reading this article, you should be able to greatly increase your knowledge of what credit derivatives are, and why they are a far greater danger than subprime mortgages. We will end with introducing some concepts about how individuals can protect themselves and even profit from these unprecedented market conditions – something you won’t find in recent financial history or conventional investments.

...snip...

On September 1st, few knew that AIG, the largest insurance company in the world with over $1 trillion in assets, was in deep trouble. By September 12th, the rumors about major trouble were everywhere. By September 15th AIG’s corporate life expectancy was being measured in days, and the question was: bankruptcy, buyer or bailout? By the evening of September 16th, the federal government had massively intervened, making an $85 billion loan to AIG in exchange for a controlling 79.9% equity share of the company.

Welcome to the brave new world of credit derivatives driven collapses. A world that is far more dangerous than the world of subprime mortgage derivatives. A complex world that because of its sheer size can potentially cause more damage in a matter of days than the subprime mortgage derivatives caused in their first year in the headlines.

Go to the following link and apply what you learned from the horse race to it remembering that a credit derivative is just a bet or a side bet. Bets where the oddsmakers start messing with the odds in unreal ways: The people that were selling and buying these scraps of paper, their managers, partners and firms profiting from and behind it all are negligent in their dealings - criminally negligent, IMHO - AND the Feds that backed all of this are equally criminal.

But whom exactly will all of the taxpayer money benefit?

A little clue to Joe and Suzy Sixpack: Unless you own a bank or one of these other failing businesses, it ain't you!

They gambled, they lost... And now they want you to pay off their gambling debts.


Previously Brewed in New Milford:

Buy Your Shitpile? HELL NO!

Given what we know about the closed door meetings on Capitol Hill, I want to know what the meeting insiders - from the corrupt Bush administration on down to the supposedly surprised Senators and Representatives and including all of the other government officials that have known or just found out about this - have done with their own investment portfolios in the last little while.

I say "supposedly surprised" since the Bush administration had fought tooth and nail to keep investigations into a big part of this financial fraud under wraps until their recent pre-election extortion demands to rape the American taxpayers:

Sure, Spitzer should have de-socked before his career-ending indiscretion. But we should revisit the prophetic message that was lost to the tsunami of Spitzer's scandalization two weeks later.

Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime: How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help Consumers,
Feb. 14, 2008. Washington Post.

Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders...These and other practices, we noticed, were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.

Spitzer's omen went further to note that not only did the White House do nothing, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye after 50 state Attorneys General and many legislative attempts failed to halt the worst of the predatory lending excesses.

The AGs and their banking superintendents fought the Bush Administration's use of a Civil War era banking provision which established federal preemption of all state predatory lending laws and the new rules which emasculated state consumer protections from national banks.

Shortly before Stone's November tip finally mobilized national law enforcement to rescue Americans from the perverse activities of Spitzer and his calf-length socks, he left a final warning:

When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers.

We're now to let Industry's insider dictate the terms under which we'll spend the heritage of our grandchildren to repurchase the bloody bag of instruments of our rape?(em. mine -CM1)

The Spitzer investigations were dogging just the mortgage aspects of the entire shitpile that bushies are trying to sell to us... Which would have eventually exposed the entire underbelly of this well before the Bush administration wanted to.

They try and tell you, over and over again that it is too complicated to understand. BULLSHIT!

All you really need to know is that the bushies have been holding on to this to use it as an election issue.

The thing that really pisses me off - and that most of the people, journalists and politicians don't seem to get or, at least, some of them intentionally ignore - is that the mortgage aspect is just a tiny little part of the entire shitpile.

The mortgage part of it is what really started to show the cracks in this scam, and it is one of the very few parts of this ponzi scheme with real and tangible assets to show at stake - the bulk of this shitpile are scraps of paper with absolutely zero value.

While it may look superficially similar to the recent implosions of such investment giants as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Lehman, the takeover and bailout of AIG is quite different, and means that the market is entering the next and even more dangerous phase. What is driving the fall of AIG – and potential government losses that may far, far exceed the $85 billion bailout announced late on September 16th - is not mortgages or real estate (directly), but fears that AIG’s huge, global credit-default swap positions will unravel. The $62 trillion dollar credit derivatives market is 50 times the size of the subprime mortgage derivatives market, and is indeed larger than the entire global economy.

Unfortunately, few people understand credit derivatives, or the full risks to the United States and global markets and economies. In this article, I will take a Credit Derivatives Primer that I published in the spring of 2008 - which anticipated this exact type of event - and update it for the current situation. Through reading this article, you should be able to greatly increase your knowledge of what credit derivatives are, and why they are a far greater danger than subprime mortgages. We will end with introducing some concepts about how individuals can protect themselves and even profit from these unprecedented market conditions – something you won’t find in recent financial history or conventional investments.

...snip...

On September 1st, few knew that AIG, the largest insurance company in the world with over $1 trillion in assets, was in deep trouble. By September 12th, the rumors about major trouble were everywhere. By September 15th AIG’s corporate life expectancy was being measured in days, and the question was: bankruptcy, buyer or bailout? By the evening of September 16th, the federal government had massively intervened, making an $85 billion loan to AIG in exchange for a controlling 79.9% equity share of the company.

Welcome to the brave new world of credit derivatives driven collapses. A world that is far more dangerous than the world of subprime mortgage derivatives. A complex world that because of its sheer size can potentially cause more damage in a matter of days than the subprime mortgage derivatives caused in their first year in the headlines.

The people that were selling and buying these scraps of paper, their managers, partners and firms profiting from and behind it all are negligent in their dealings - criminally negligent, IMHO - AND the Feds that backed all of this are equally criminal.

But whom exactly will all of the taxpayer money benefit?

A little clue to Joe and Suzy Sixpack: Unless you own a bank or one of these other failing businesses, it ain't you! And the beneficiaries of said scam are already out there trying to seed the blogosphere with disinformation on it:

Everybody's An Expert

I get emails like this sometimes, from insiders who know what they're talking about, and over time I've learned that while they may be insiders all that means is they have access to more gossip. That gossip often doesn't turn out to be true.

In any case, a straw man is being erected. There is no crisis which requires $700 billion to Hank Paulson's friends THIS WEEK. That's the argument. There may be serious problems in the financial sector which require government attention. There isn't something which requires an insane act of Congress NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW.

-Atrios 10:40

It is a fucking election fabrication and a scam, and I still say...

Fuck the banks - Let them fail

I am sitting here listening to the hearing on this and all I keep hearing is “think about this from the American taxpayer who is already on the hook”… BS

The only people already on the hook are the one’s that own these banks.

The Europeans are having the same problem and their answer? Let the banks get through it on their own. If that doesn’t clue everyone into how much of a fallacy this whole issue is, I don’t know what will?

Rush into the Iraq war…
fear! fear! FEAR!
Rush into the patriot act!
fear! fear! FEAR!
Rush into fixing (PRIVATIZE IT, DAMNIT!) social security…
fear! fear! FEAR!
Rush into a bailout of incompetent banks...
Fuck the fearmongering!

Banking disaster? Only if you own one of these failed banks… I am not buying this “bush reality” - not even a little bit.

It all looks like a massive transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich for no other purpose than to support their failure at our expense.

The fear of a looming recession? We are in it whether or not these banks fail and it is going to get worse whether or not these banks fail. I have a great idea! Let a couple of these banks go under and watch what happens? If I were a betting man, I would be willing to bet someone will profit off of it, and we will still be in a recession.

You want me to buy your shitpile? Not just NO! But...

HELL NO!

You can buy our shitpile instead:

Buy My Shitpile

With our economy in crisis, the US Government is scrambling to rescue our banks by purchasing their "distressed assets", i.e., assets that no one else wants to buy from them. We figured that instead of protesting this plan, we'd give regular Americans the same opportunity to sell their bad assets to the government. We need your help and you need the Government's help!

Use the form to submit bad assets you'd like the government to take off your hands. And remember, when estimating the value of your 1997 limited edition Hanson single CD "MMMbop", it's not what you can sell these items for that matters, it's what you think they are worth. The fact that you think they are worth more than anyone will buy them for is what makes them bad assets.

I have a stack of papers sitting beside my desk - not to mention the rolls of it in the bathroom - that I can value at trillions of dollars too!