Warren Buffet misplaced his script and redirected some of the blame in the housing mess:
Warren Buffett, who controls the biggest shareholding of the No. 1 U.S. mortgage lender, said banks were victimized by some homeowners who refinanced their loans before getting evicted.
“Large numbers of people who have ‘lost’ their house through foreclosure have actually realized a profit because they carried out refinancings earlier that gave them cash in excess of their cost,” Buffett, chairman and chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A), said Feb. 25 in his annual letter. “In these cases, the evicted homeowner was the winner, and the victim was the lender.”
Say it ain't so - Elizabeth Warren and Barack Obama are getting the vapors
Berkshire Hathaway owns several bank and finance companises a factoid leading to an additional insight:
“It’s the mercenary side of Buffett,” said Jeff Matthews, a Berkshire shareholder and author of “Secrets in Plain Sight: Business & Investing Secrets of Warren Buffett.”
The most famous investor in the world has a mercenary side?
FWIW, Buffett is bullish on America - from his annual letter:
Housing will come back – you can be sure of that. Over time, the number of housing units necessarily matches the number of households (after allowing for a normal level of vacancies). For a period of years prior to 2008, however, America added more housing units than households. Inevitably, we ended up with far too many units and the bubble popped with a violence that shook the entire economy. That created still another problem for housing: Early in a recession, household formations slow, and in 2009 the decrease was dramatic.
That devastating supply/demand equation is now reversed: Every day we are creating more households than housing units. People may postpone hitching up during uncertain times, but eventually hormones take over. And while “doubling-up” may be the initial reaction of some during a recession, living with in-laws can quickly lose its allure.
At our current annual pace of 600,000 housing starts – considerably less than the number of new households being formed – buyers and renters are sopping up what’s left of the old oversupply. (This process will run its course at different rates around the country; the supply-demand situation varies widely by locale.) While this healing takes place, however, our housing-related companies sputter, employing only 43,315 people compared to 58,769 in 2006. This hugely important sector of the economy, which includes not only construction but everything that feeds off of it, remains in a depression of its own. I believe this is the major reason a recovery in employment has so severely lagged the steady and substantial comeback we have seen in almost all other sectors of our economy.
Wise monetary and fiscal policies play an important role in tempering recessions, but these tools don’t create households nor eliminate excess housing units. Fortunately, demographics and our market system will restore the needed balance – probably before long. When that day comes, we will again build one million or more residential units annually. I believe pundits will be surprised at how far unemployment drops once that happens. They will then reawake to what has been true since 1776: America’s best days lie ahead.
If that comes to pass Obama's Vice-President would willbe well-positioned to pick up a third Obama term. Of course, that assumes that Obama dumps Joe Biden, wins the election, enjoys the recovery foretold above, and avoides the sort of scandal (or fo-po debacle) that undermined Carter and Clinton.
Wonder what sort of side deals he's cutting with the Administration?
Posted by: RichatUF | February 28, 2012 at 07:20 AM
Rich-
I still get the shivers from the report I read that this Admin was officially going to an Industrial Policy approach because it is what other nations do. Later on it touted the Gates F as a premier example of a philanthropic entrepreneur driving economic policy.
Nontaxed why? So it can build up more assets to fund more social experiments to make America a "laboratory for democracy"?
But we do not want to be a lab.
Posted by: rse | February 28, 2012 at 07:55 AM
Well, I don't think anyone held a gun to the lenders' heads either, so I can't feel too sorry for them. The real loser is, as usual, the innocent taxpayer.
Posted by: jimmyk | February 28, 2012 at 07:58 AM
Hey, I've got an idea:Let the feds encourage divorce and double the housing needs. Who needs Buffett?
Posted by: clarice feldman | February 28, 2012 at 07:59 AM
So this slug, Lane didn't even go the school in question, but he did supposedly threaten
on Twitter,
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 08:07 AM
jimmy-
Have you read Bauer's work on what was wrong with development economics and how it hurt the 3rd world?
It feels apt for the US now.
Posted by: rse | February 28, 2012 at 08:11 AM
It's nice that Juan is going into standup, oh he's serious;
http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/juan-williams/212641-partisans-ignoring-stimuluss-success
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 08:17 AM
Who was it that said we should tear down lots of houses so that we'd need to build more?
Rse, a long time ago. Bauer was wise ahead of his time. We keep having to relearn the same lessons the hard way.
Posted by: jimmyk | February 28, 2012 at 08:26 AM
rse-
Would like to see it if you have a link. I thought it up through my untrained eye. Good morning all, different to see the sun rise.
Posted by: RichatUF | February 28, 2012 at 08:26 AM
Ned Rooney needs to check his figures better;
http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2012/02/warren-buffetts-corporate-tax-myth.html
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 08:35 AM
The only reason the taxpayer is on the hook is the brilliant politicians in years past decided that that if only we could use the credit rating of the USA everyone could borrow a 1/2 point cheaper on their mortgage. So we put the full faith and credit of the country behind FNMA and FHLMC. There were mortgages before both of these entities. There was no need to do so, but the politicians did it anyway, and we let them.
Posted by: GMAX | February 28, 2012 at 08:38 AM
Buffet forgot to mention the idiotic policies and there has been several rounds from this incompetent administration, delaying and impeding the foreclosure process. When folks believe that there is a bottleneck in the process, they rightly expect that sooner or later those houses will be foreclosed and flushed out into the system and drive down prices. So why buy now, a better bargain awaits sooner or later.
We would be far better served to flush the system and let the market do its magic.
Posted by: GMAX | February 28, 2012 at 08:44 AM
No, he didn't forget, he probably profits from it,
http://babalublog.com/2012/02/yet-another-attack-on-marco-rubio-must-be-tuesday/
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 08:47 AM
Is there an alternative universe where I'm supposed to care about what that self-serving codger Buffet has to say?
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 08:52 AM
It's Warren's world, we merely are a victim of his schemes.
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 08:53 AM
It's nice that Juan is going into standup, oh he's serious
I wonder if Juan includes in his tax filings his former salary with NPR as an uncompensated business expense.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 08:55 AM
This will not help the Bakken Reserves (which are Buffets responsibility to get to tmarket) but its a start.
Keystone Light.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | February 28, 2012 at 09:01 AM
Occupy Berkshire!
Posted by: Ignatz | February 28, 2012 at 09:03 AM
So this slug, Lane didn't even go the school in question
Correct despite the WSJ saying an FBI spokeswoman stating otherwise; maybe she's still behind the Gorelick wall.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 09:04 AM
JiB-
Read Chaco's take on it, from his 'lanche point.
It's all about the visuals, aka "The Big Lie".
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | February 28, 2012 at 09:06 AM
Powerline tells us the Thomas Eagleton parallel this AM:
Gleick has taken a leave of absence from his post as president of the Pacific Institute in California, which had initially issued the McGovern-like statement that they were 1,000 percent behind Gleick. Maybe that lasted until they began to notice how much damage Gleick had done (or started to hear from donors).
Posted by: GMAX | February 28, 2012 at 09:07 AM
I believe Mr. Buffet is indicating a willingness to play Grand Theft - Housing (you have to read the Qualification and Summary stuff to get the full flavor).
I wonder who he will pick in order to satisfactorily answer the 'Is you is or is you isn't a Diverse Owned Business?' question? Is there another Jackson available to be become a housing baron to offset the beer baron and Congresscritter?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 28, 2012 at 09:11 AM
Yes the Luigi Vercotti treatment is underway,
meanwhile speaking of Denebian slime devils,
http://www.wkyc.com/news/article/232808/396/Chardon-High-School-shooting-Lawyer-issues-statement-for-Lane-family-
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 09:14 AM
From the Daily Caller this morning:
6.) BIRTHDAYS! -- Liberal New York Times columnist Paul Krugman turns 59 (h/t no one because he can't possibly have any friends); legendary comic Gilbert Gottfried turns 57 (h/t the Aristocrats); Pakistani cricketer Yasir Hameed turns 34; Princess Lalla Khadija of Morocco turns 5.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | February 28, 2012 at 09:15 AM
No, when you start shooting that presumption goes out the window.
http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/oh_geauga/students-call-chardon-shooting-suspect-caring-tj-lanes-family-releases-statement
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 09:18 AM
JiB-- "Bam's crew (Plouffe, Axelrod) are obviously telling him that gas prices and soon food prices are killing him in swing states. So 'Bam will yield to reality to try to save his own sorry ass. Expect some time in August after Nebraska works out a 'safe' route for the Alberta pipeline for 'Bam to approve the Alberta-Cushing transnational route. 'Bam will say, see I approved the Northern pipeline branch once it was 'safe' as opposed to the stupid Repubs who wanted to give away the store. He'll tell the Enviro nazis and the Buffett rairroad interests that's there's plenty of time after the election to screw up approvals for the pipeline. 'Bam really is a punk-- as bad as we say he is in this comments-- or worse.
Posted by: NK | February 28, 2012 at 09:19 AM
Ready, set, Gleick. A Hail Mary, to the WRONG ENDZONE!
=================
Posted by: rse see NCSE | February 28, 2012 at 09:20 AM
I dont particularly care for Tom Jensen and his blatant commentary cheerleading Democrats, but I will grudgingly concede he has been quite accurate in his polling this primary season. So here is the poll conclusion from last evenings polling in Michigan:
We will know tonight, or if its this close tomorrow morning...
Posted by: GMAX | February 28, 2012 at 09:22 AM
narciso,
All the reports I am hearing on radio this morning has TJ Lane as a "bullied kid" who catches a bus to an althernative school at Chadron HS and had issues with the kids killed.
He gave himself up to passerbyers and not the cops.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | February 28, 2012 at 09:23 AM
Hey! Why not?
Neutrino's can wait:)
Posted by: Jack is Back! | February 28, 2012 at 09:30 AM
Rick, your link tortures my phone for some reason. I won't be by my computer for some time. Will you give me a little more flavor from your "grand theft" link?
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 28, 2012 at 09:35 AM
Orwell strikes again: According to the NYT, the Republicans' opposition to contraceptive mandates are "efforts to limit contraception in health care plans."
So an effort to prevent an encroachment on our freedom is characterized as an intrusion. Well played, NYT. I only wade into the MSM muck to be alert to the new Dem talking points.
Posted by: jimmyk | February 28, 2012 at 09:36 AM
Minus 14 at Raz today.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 28, 2012 at 09:39 AM
So now the families of the victims not only mourn their children but have to endure the allegations of their bullying. Great. Can't wait to watch the professional handwringers going ape on this one.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 28, 2012 at 09:41 AM
TK-
It's a pdf file that may not play well with certain phones. It's also a Federally designed blueprint for The Big Land Grab, via mortgage mess haze.
Theft is putting it mildly.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | February 28, 2012 at 09:43 AM
Well that's been true since Columbine, if not sooner, I think the Heisenberg principle is involved;
Minitrue does their part in the approval stats for Big Brother
http://www.kansascity.com/2012/02/27/3455586/obama-gains-with-women-jobs-social.html
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 09:49 AM
porch-
It is very important that the school's piloting of certain practices not become a focus for the media. Might prevent national rollout which would get in the way of everything Arne has pushed for.
The bullying focus gets the School Climate frameworks more widely enacted. I know it's a big deal because those frameworks are getting quietly incorporated into those NCLB waivers. The fact that the School Climate Center used to be the Center for Social and Emotional Education and was created at Columbia Teachers College tends to get overlooked as we discuss the horrors of bullying.
New names for intrusive practices.
Posted by: rse | February 28, 2012 at 09:57 AM
Todays poor economic numbers (housing prices continue to decline, capital goods orders) may be the start of other poor numbers, that may tank a skittish stock market. Trading volume has been pathetic, and the rise in stock values has been almost certainly the result of liquidity created from thin air by the ECB and other central banks the last 5-6 months. If stocks tank, will the Fed go with QEIII? If there is a QEIII, what happens. It may stop a stock slide, but it will explode oil prices and increase gas prices at the worst possible time for 'Bams' sorry re-election. For that political reason, the FED may NOT pull the trigger on QEIII. Thoughts?
Posted by: NK | February 28, 2012 at 10:03 AM
It does seem the more they do, the worse things become,
http://schoolclimate.org/about/history.php
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 10:04 AM
So now the families of the victims not only mourn their children but have to endure the allegations of their bullying. Great. Can't wait to watch the professional handwringers going ape on this one.
But the broken family of the perp wants some privacy because God forbid they be considered complicit in this. That might be JUDGEMENTAL!!11!
rse, you are aware that the perp attended some alternative/vocational/reform school, no?
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 10:07 AM
NK, Bernanke may be more interested in his own legacy than Obama's reelection. If Ben thinks he could, with QE3, postpone the reckoning until his successor takes over, he may not give a hoot about the impact of QE3 on Obama's reelection chances.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | February 28, 2012 at 10:08 AM
Did you see that blurb from that bottom dwelling slug, Captain, maybe he doesn't understand that the point of the exercise
is not to make your client 'look shiny' but to show remorse.
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 10:11 AM
No QE3, just rerack the "Twist".
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | February 28, 2012 at 10:14 AM
Call it the Watusi, then.
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 10:18 AM
Yes ch.
I am also aware that the publicity surrounding Columbine slowed down implementation plans and forced name changes because of what they were piloting.
If you are already broken inside, these practices seem to create a lashing out effect. It doesn't excuse but it should create alarms on what is really going on. Which I am doing. This was also an issue in the Swedish shooting this summer from his writings well before the massacre. State sanctioned psychological manipulation of children should never be OK. The ed lit I have has been aware for decades on the need to gain access to the kids between 10-15 to create lasting changes in their psyches and personalities. Awful stuff.
Posted by: rse | February 28, 2012 at 10:19 AM
Yes narc but I particularly like the statement about how this couldn't have been predicted; well not when you don't pay attention to your child.
I've still yet to read any hard hitting editorials on the shooting of Saint Gabby, and those other less-important people who died including a Repub judge, on how the perp's donk parents used their connections to keep him on the streets. I've sure seen a lot of Palin bashing over it though.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 10:20 AM
TK,
The GSE's are dumping at the bottom of the market (Buffet's points are correct wrt household formation). It appears that they are going to give preference to investors who grant 25% participation to 'Diverse Owned Businesses'.
85% of the units are already leased, meaning that the GSE's are giving up cash flow at the bottom of the market in order to enrich "investors" (think Buffet or George Kaiser) and further impoverish taxpayers.
If the price offered for the properties reflects a decent cap rate it might be a positive move in the sense of market stabilization. If the cap rate is wrong it will drive the entire market down. Again. Whether the cap rate is right or wrong, the timing, given the existing income stream, is criminal.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | February 28, 2012 at 10:21 AM
Thanks rse and keep doing the work you've undertaken.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 10:22 AM
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/no-housing-recovery-case-shiller-shows-8th-consecutive-month-house-price-declines
Recovery?
Posted by: pagar | February 28, 2012 at 10:23 AM
TC/MelR-- I think MelR is right to guess that the "Twist" is rebooted. That won't explode oil prices , and maybe someone -- anyone-- will do a long-term real estate investment with even lower long-term financing, and more importantly, the further destruction of fixed returned yields will drive money to equities. You know, if we had a pro-business Congress and POTUS, 'Twist' and low rates would have led to massive economic growth. I really believe that everything that the Dems have done since January 2009 has destroyed economic growth.
Posted by: NK | February 28, 2012 at 10:25 AM
NK-
Add an Irish referendum to your global finance calculations.
Heehee!
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | February 28, 2012 at 10:35 AM
MelR-- the Treaty is actually wise for GER/French/GB/Dutch Europe, because it prevents future crazy debt. It's a terrible idea for the PIIGS because stuck in the Euro, and unable to take on on more debt than Germany, will impoverish them forever. VE 'R AULL JERMENZ NOW!!! So the 4th Reich in Europe has begun.
Posted by: NK | February 28, 2012 at 10:48 AM
Read Chaco's take on it, from his 'lanche point.
The annoying part is that I mainly linked an article from two years ago. They're still falling for it.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | February 28, 2012 at 10:49 AM
I did not do this, I did not do this, I did not do this, I did not do this, I did not!
But it's not because I didn't want to:)
It's because we don't currently have that capability:(
It's a malfunction of the ground based "honey bucket" mechanism, or else a result of an inadvertent, uninitiated uncontrolled auto-dump at altitude.
Makes me finally pumped about pushing the Union to demand a new capability from management during the next Union Contract negotiations---I/we demand a cockpit handle allowing us to dump the shitter over Newark:)
I'll happily pound the pavement for that concession until the management bastards cave.
OT
Cecil, you been shitting on Long Island?
Posted by: daddy | February 28, 2012 at 10:50 AM
Daddy and CT, if your flight path ever takes you over an Oppression Studies Department building at one of the pseudo-elite coastal colleges, . . . .
Posted by: Thomas Collins | February 28, 2012 at 11:01 AM
CecilT-- excuse my ignorance I didn't realize you were an aviator/zoomie. Lucky you.
Posted by: NK | February 28, 2012 at 11:07 AM
I take issue with the Kingdom, being included in this pile, except at the last moment;
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/02/liberals-decide-they-dont-like-propaganda.php
Posted by: narciso | February 28, 2012 at 11:10 AM
Yes blah blah blah blah VOMIT blah blah blah BULLYING blah blah OUTLAW GUNS, blah blah blah blah blah.
Bullying NOT NEW.
Guns, WON AMERICA'S FREEDOM.
Good morning all.
Posted by: Gus | February 28, 2012 at 11:12 AM
The NCAA was obviously feeling left out of the badmouthing of sports commissioners and TOP MEN sprung into action: http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7611324/ncaa-moves-kickoffs-30-yard-line-35
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 11:20 AM
Cecil, you been shitting on Long Island?
Not that you know of.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | February 28, 2012 at 11:23 AM
Another OT
Thomas Jefferson---Tattoo Artist.
From my current read, Lions Of The West---Heroes and Villains of the Westward Expansion" comes the following:
It's a synopsis of Jefferson trying to get somebody, way prior to lewis and Clark, to do the exploration of the continent.
"While he was in Paris in 1787, Jefferson made another attempt to persuade someone to explore the western half of the North American continent. He met an adventurer named John Ledyard...who had sailed with James Cook on his second voyage...
"(Ledyard) proposed that he... journey across from Kamchatka to North America...make his way inland..." to Virginia.
"Jefferson was skeptical"..."but he couldn't say no, and so offered his support."
"Ledyard proposed to Jefferson that he would cross the American continent, once he had reached it, on foot, with no horses and no White companions...Ledyard charmed Jefferson and they spent hours discussing the plan. Since Ledyard could not carry scientific instruments with him on his proposed dash across Russia and North America, Jefferson suggested that he tattoo on his arm the measure of an English foot, and showed Ledyard 'how he could determine latitude with nothing more than this measurement, two sticks, and a circle drawn in the dirt."
Jefferson also described to him a way of measuring the breadth of a river and suggested that once he had made those calculations, Ledyard could record the result on his own skin with tattoos made from berry juice."
Posted by: daddy | February 28, 2012 at 11:25 AM
File under "Judge the quality of a person by the company they keep":
Gag - I just got an invitation from POLITICO to a party next Friday to watch "Game Change" (the new trash-Palin movie starring Julianne Moore), with commentary by the authors of the book AND Steve Schmidt. Wish I could go just to spit in Schmidt's face.
Posted by: rockmom at February 28, 2012 11:26 AM (YPgCz)
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 11:36 AM
Raz:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 28, 2012 at 11:44 AM
Mark Levin was sublime yesterday debunking the fallacy of "separation of church and state" -- tracing from whence the idea originated (not the Constitution) and describing the devastating effects of secular tyranny and a citizenry that is ignorant and disrespectful of the huge foundational idea that unalienable rights are bestowed by a higher power, and how secularism is making every effort to grind that idea into sand and make man the source of rights, which is the foundation of tyranny. Taking calls: "Oh,yeah? tell me how a manger scene forces you to pray or change your religion...come on, tell me ... "
Posted by: Chubby | February 28, 2012 at 11:45 AM
daddy,
Considering their recent history, it was probably a Regime plane:)
Posted by: Jack is Back! | February 28, 2012 at 11:46 AM
Chubby, that's Levin at his best. If he designed a high school civics class, we'd have a much more informed group of citizens on the foundation of the country.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 11:53 AM
I linked this on the other thread.
Keith Urban's video "For You". It is played during the closing credits of "Act of Valor". The video uses clips from the film. Very good.
Posted by: Janet | February 28, 2012 at 11:57 AM
File under "Judge the quality of a person by the company they keep"
Cap'n, I don't know if you've seen The Undefeated, but the section documenting all the bile and filth spewn at Palin during the 2008 election is titled "By Their Fruits Ye Shall Know Them."
Posted by: Porchlight | February 28, 2012 at 12:01 PM
Hey Gus, I like your style. Glad you are commenting here.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 28, 2012 at 12:02 PM
Romney:
"It’s very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments. We’ve seen throughout the campaign if you’re willing to say really outrageous things that are accusative, attacking of President Obama, that you’re going to jump up in the polls. I’m not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support. I am who I am. I’m a person with extensive experience in the private sector, in the economy."
When is he going to figure out this is the primary, not the general? Even McCain held his friendly fire a little longer IIRC.
Ah well, I guess we should be grateful he's being honest.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 28, 2012 at 12:04 PM
I'd pay money to see this guy destroy Manbearpig in a debate: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100139690/why-i-am-so-rude-to-warmists/
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 12:05 PM
The Christian Science Monitor was founded by Mary Baker Eddy who was sick of the yellow journalism of her day, in which she was constantly reviled. When I read a bunch stuff in the Monitor tearing a strip off Palin, I commented that considering the circumstances of the Monitor's founding, they should be treating Palin far more positively. I was not at all suprised that they censored the comment.
Posted by: Chubby | February 28, 2012 at 12:10 PM
Porch, can't you change your Lenten pledge to something that doesn't impact me so negatively?
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 12:10 PM
Slowly we are starting to get some race specific evidence of the flood that I have been predicting is forming. Road Island to quote our V/P may elect a Republican to Congress. LI has more or her is a link:
http://www.wpri.com/generic/news/politics/local_politics/campaign-2012-exclusive-poll-results-q2
RI is one of the most heavily Catholic states. Might it cause a problem for Sheldon Whitehouse? If his opponent, a no name, can tie Whitehouse to Zero and the mandate, you betcha...
Posted by: GMAX | February 28, 2012 at 12:10 PM
And then there's this:
And more at the link, if you want it.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/212817-romney-tells-michigan-crowd-about-attending-event-that-happened-before-he-was-born
Good times with the electable frontrunner dude.
Posted by: Porchlight | February 28, 2012 at 12:11 PM
narciso,
Rubio bashing so early means only one thing: The Donks fear him big time. What do you want to be they have very scary poll number on Rubio being on the ticket.
But I love the tactic of the hispanic donk community organizer refusing to call him a Latino.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | February 28, 2012 at 12:13 PM
Cap'n, I am playing hooky today. Pledge has been changed from "not going online when at home" to "not going online when at home and the kids are around."
So, it is lame of me to soften up but I hope to be around more in the late evenings....
Posted by: Porchlight | February 28, 2012 at 12:15 PM
“I like those fancy raincoats you bought,” he said, according to The New York Times. “Really sprung for the big bucks.”
It sounds like he's Lurch Kerry's long lost brother.
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 12:17 PM
Hey, Gmax must be right. Last night Dick Morris said there was no way--as in no way--Obama could win.
I'm not worried anymore.
Posted by: MarkO | February 28, 2012 at 12:23 PM
But, if Obama can't win, why is Santorum going after the dems in the Republican primary? That was Obama's suggestion. Are the MI dems part of the "base" now?
Regardless of one's view of Rick, that's a bit off, isn't it? It is like Rush's way to beat Hillary because he feared Hillary.
What a primary season. But, we're safe. Aren't we?
Posted by: MarkO | February 28, 2012 at 12:27 PM
Boy you cut me to the quick. Compare me to Dick Morris?
How about I compare you to Pee Wee Herman or something? Sheesh...
Posted by: GMAX | February 28, 2012 at 12:29 PM
Boy you cut me to the quick. Compare me to Dick Morris?
Hahahaha...yeah, that was pretty low.
Posted by: Janet | February 28, 2012 at 12:31 PM
Rubio should just pick HIS running mate and get this shyte over with.
Posted by: Gus | February 28, 2012 at 12:31 PM
GMAX, I didn't compare you to him, I just noticed you two have the same expressed belief. I have much more respect for you than for Morris, but if he believes that, you might rethink your position.
Or, you could call me a name. But, don't call me Shirley.
Woody Herman, maybe. Or, you could compare me to a summer's day.
Posted by: MarkO | February 28, 2012 at 12:35 PM
if you’re willing to say really outrageous things that are accusative
So what happens if you're willing to say really outrageous things that are dative? or genitive?
Posted by: DrJ | February 28, 2012 at 12:36 PM
Don't compare Marko to Summers Eve. If you smell what I'm cookin'.
Posted by: Gus | February 28, 2012 at 12:41 PM
So what happens if you're willing to say really outrageous things that are dative? or genitive?
It depends. To whom are you speaking?
Posted by: Cecil Turner | February 28, 2012 at 12:43 PM
if Obama can't win, why is Santorum going after the dems in the Republican primary?
My understanding is that the person who gets the most votes in the primary is considered to have won. The question isn't why a candidate is going after all the votes that are available, the question is why the party structures the primaries so candidates have an incentive to seek votes outside the party.
Posted by: bgates | February 28, 2012 at 12:44 PM
"Oh,yeah? tell me how a manger scene forces you to pray or change your religion...come on, tell me ... "
It doesn't force anyone to do either. If it did, it would violate the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.
But that's an entirely separate issue from whether the display of a manger scene by a governmental entity violates the establishment clause. Levin should know better.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 28, 2012 at 12:44 PM
Has anybody told pizza-face that it helps to know wtf he's talking about on any topic: http://weaselzippers.us/2012/02/28/lefty-degenerate-bill-maher-claims-jesus-christ-was-palestinian/
Posted by: Captain Hate | February 28, 2012 at 12:45 PM
Gmax,
We will know tonight, or if its this close tomorrow morning...
Even if Mitt wins the popular vote, Rick will probably win more delegates to the convention.
Michigan lost 50% of delegates for having their Primary before Super Tuesday.
It’s a ‘hybrid’ Primary.
AFAICT, the ‘winner take all’ aspect is in regard to each District per the new 2012 rules: each congressional district gets two delegates to the national convention.
Per latest projection, Santorum leading 9 of 14 districts.
Mitt’s popular vote is mostly concentrated in the higher population districts of Southeast Michigan. Most of the rest of Michigan districts tend more conservative.
Posted by: SWarren | February 28, 2012 at 12:47 PM
Yes, bgates, there are many questions about the party. But, I've never really noticed a candidate affirmatively going after the other party's votes. Robocalls. Moreover, Rick's theme, if I understand it, is that he is the true conservative which should not really grip Dems.
I would be equally put off if Mitt had gone for the Dem vote and I feel certain we'd hear no end of criticism that this was proof he was a RINO.
Posted by: MarkO | February 28, 2012 at 12:49 PM
Mark Latrine was against Rubio(anchor baby) before he was for Rubio (anchor baby).
http://www.marklevinshow.com/Article.asp?id=1915467&spid=39685
Actually he is for both at the same time. Respecting the Constitution while wiping with it. What a dope.
Posted by: Threadkiller | February 28, 2012 at 12:49 PM
Hey, loved that Keith Urban vid. Looks like 29 Palms (Gypsum Ridge?). Having shots of harriers launching off LHDs is just a bonus.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | February 28, 2012 at 12:51 PM
((But that's an entirely separate issue from whether the display of a manger scene by a governmental entity violates the establishment clause. Levin should know better.))
I don't think so. On the same show he catalogued a bunch of religious imagery that is currently on government buildings and said the people who want to efface is are asses. (paraphrase)
Posted by: Chubby | February 28, 2012 at 12:53 PM
Unexpected:
Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 28, 2012 at 12:55 PM
Heh, it's like they think somebody will leak it or something.
Israel will NOT warn the US if a strike on Iran is launched.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | February 28, 2012 at 01:00 PM
Congress shall make no law.
CONGRESS.
Contrary to LIBTARD belief, the CONSTITUTION is NOT a living breathing document.
No where in the Constitution does it say CITY FATHERS SHALL NOT PUT A MANGER ON THE FRONT LAWN at CITY HALL.
Talk amongst yourselves.
Posted by: Gus | February 28, 2012 at 01:04 PM
I would be equally put off if Mitt had gone for the Dem vote and I feel certain we'd hear no end of criticism that this was proof he was a RINO.
True enough, MarkO. And it was just a week or two ago that posters here claimed that the Dems in Michigan would be urged to crossover vote for Romney, knowing he would be easier than Santorum for Obama to beat in the general. Challengers to that assertion were ignored. Heh. Namely me.
Posted by: (Another) Barbara | February 28, 2012 at 01:04 PM
tell us DOT, how does a government sponsored office displaying a manger scene is making a law that establishes a religion? And how is passing a law prohitibing such displays not a law preventing the free exercise of religion?
"The First Amendment to the United "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...."
Posted by: Chubby | February 28, 2012 at 01:08 PM