Powered by TypePad

« The Full Explanation | Main | End The Madness »

September 22, 2008


M. Simon


Within a couple of days of my complaining MP ads came out tying Raines and Johnson to Zero.

Today we have an ad tying Zero to Chicago (how dare they).

So either I moved things or I was in line with the movement.

If you have a short pithy idea I'll pass it on. It has been 5 or 6 days since I said anything so the channel should be open. BTW the last thing I said was a kudos for the Raines ad.


Are those rhetorical questions Clarice?

Congress has been looking pretty ridiculous for a while now. Wexler holding weekly lynchings. 'Pubs discussing energy policy in the dark?


I heard Obama say today that republicans had been in charge for 8 years. I assume he is referring to Bush, because if you do the math, the Senate has been split during these 8 years, about 4-1/2 years each party and democrats have held the house 2 of those 8 years. The last 2, which have proven to be the worst ever, democrats held both houses.

JM Hanes


I was just pointing out that the Dems stole a march on my proposed slogan for the Republicans to use (Don't Let the Democrats Fool You - Again).

JM Hanes


Everybody's just trying to blame as much on Bush as they possibly can before they don't have him to kick around any more.


The daughter and s-i-l of someone I know tried to move into an apartment in Dallas. Their credit was not good enough to move into the apartment complexes they were looking at. The next think I knew, they were living in a new home. Credit must have been cleared up right? Well, apparently not since they had their house foreclosed and are living in a dumpy duplex. Apparently they qualified to move into a new home, no money down but couldn't qualify to live in a gated apartment complex. And don't worry about them, though. They qualified for a new car loan. ::sigh::



I'm not taking all the blame away from Bush. He had the bully pullpit. He should have been talking and talking and talking since he first brought this up in 2001. But the gigantic portion of this blame belongs on those who opened up no money down mortgages to people who weren't qualified. When we built our house, we put 20% down. That was a lot of money for us to lose if we didn't think we could afford it. Made us careful in what we built. We paid it off without help from the government because the money we would have lost would have been ours. There is a reason why this tried and true method worked so well for years and years.


I know how to spell. I swear. My brain knows but my fingers don't listen.

Charlie (Colorado)

JMH, I really don't think it's fair to blame Bush for not bringing it up enough. he mentioned it 17 times in major policy statements. He put it in the State of the union. He put it in the budget. He did have a couple other things going on: the war, a couple little things like that.

Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Obama, Kerry, all said "nasty Republicans just want to take away poor people's houses." And the Fannie and Freddie lobbyists spent money like water.


The question "Who to blame?" will get answered by the MSM: Bush and the Republicans

"Who tried to prevent?" is a better question. Also "Who can you trust?"


Also, don't forget that the surrendercrats have spent the last 7 years blackmailing Bush over national security. He could fight the democrats with everything he had, or he could fight the islamonazis.

And if you gotta choose one or the other, that WAS the right decision, of course. Worst case Great Depression II is orders of magnitude better than sharia banking.

M. Simon

A couple of good videos for those who like to watch and for those who like to blog:

Thirty Missing Reporters



maybe its why we are hearing so little from the left....they know they did it....dont want to make a big fuss about it.......they dont want anyone following the trail to their own pockets

M. Simon

BTW what are my goto sites this election season?

JOM, No Quarter, Sara(Pal2Pal), and Uppity Woman.

Half of them are Dem sites. Whooda thunk?



Any JOM threads talking about the U-Tube spots that Ace and Jawa have been onto?


The Hartford Courant is demanding that Dodd leave the Senate. Well, I can add Dodd Out banners to the sharpened pikes leaning against my house.


I heartily re-recommend Firefox-Greasemonkey-Troll_Block_3 to scrub TCO-like belligerence. Even if someone like Cleo changes names regularly, he's disadvantaged because there is no continuity to his message.

Shame. It needn't be that way. To bad their definition of "discuss" is to win at any cost.

Barney Frank

Even if someone like Cleo changes names regularly, he's disadvantaged because there is no continuity to his message.

Yeah but before, using my specialized, optimized, mnemonic visual troll blockers, aka my eyeballs, I could just glance at the bottom, see cleo, and skip the dork.
Now I get halfway through a post before I realize 'Mamma's Little Baby Loves Shortenin Bread' is actually our own resident pustule.


CLEO: I won't change my name to avoid ignore lists. (Sometimes use a different nick on sites that have this one taken though.)

Simple Simon: Wealth transfer from savers to speculators will not stop a depression. Allowing speculators to deal with their losses will not cause one. In addition to the current situation, covering bets of speculators will increase moral hazard which based on actions to date is already high. Alowing speculators to take losses will decrease future moral hazard.

All: Arguing about who caused losses by speculators, while covering them misses the point. This is now. We either do the bailouts now or don't. This is the most critical thing to work on right now. And there is no ethical or economic reason to cover financial speculator's losses from taxpayer dollars.

Not that it should matter, but since you all seem to place politics above country, will just mention that trying to argue who caused this is a losing bet politically. The American people have their eyes concentrated on actions in the moment and will judge those more so than dithering about who caused this. Taking a position of having Republicans out in front doing bailouts to cover Democrat-caused losses is s miserable policy politically (as well as bad ethically and economically).


"CLEO: I won't change my name to avoid ignore lists. (Sometimes use a different nick on sites that have this one taken though.)"

You misconscrew my intent.


TCO may talk a little naughty at times, but he's smart. We've already given away in bailouts almost 7.5 billion dollars in rebates, ag bill, housing. Has that helped? No, it was just a drop in the bucket. We can't even get Congress to help us by building refineries, drilling for oil building nuke plants etc to get the economy rolling in a favorable direction. The government should cram down the banks a restructuring plan forcing a debt/equity swap. It's no worse than what we're doing now. I'll shut up too. Sorry, but there other ways. And I'll shut up too.

M. Simon


Consider the $.7 trillion an insurance premium against a $25 to $50 trillion loss.

If it helps you.

If you only look at the cost side of course it is absurd. If you look at the reward side it makes more sense. Not to you of course.

And you may be right it might not be enough. However, if that is the case it won't matter.


Simon: You keep blathering the same socialistic pabalum. The market does not need some intervention to keep it from irrational runs like that. The natural forces of the market will make it drop value when it should drop value and rise when it should. Get out of the way and let the market find it's level. Pouring money into it will do nothing, other than transfer wealth from savers to speculative losers.


Go read some Adam Smith.

M. Simon


I'm not against a drop in market value.

I think it should happen over a period of a few months. Not 12 hours.

When it happens in 12 hours you get a cascading failure. i.e. crack propagation.

I'm told you were a nuke at one time. You must know about crack propagation. They used to teach it in nuke power school when I went. ('66)


Damn the cracks, full speed ahead.


Damn the cracks, full speed ahead.


Just trying to keep up with TCO on the patois.


Simon: My background is of no concern to you. And Rickover would have ripped you up the belly for your trite analogies and lack of understanding of fundamentals.


I could have sworn before I pulled myself away from here and went to bed that TCO had angrily flounced out of here promising never to return.
Must have been a nightmare.

Cecil Turner

[Look! A submarine surfacing!]

Errr, but it's white . . .

[Are you saying . . .?]

Yep. Hand me that harpoon.


Clarice: Would it be a nightmare, were I to leave you? Dahling?

The comments to this entry are closed.