But, his proposal is CLEARLY not Constitutional
Remember, Napolitano taught Constitutional Law:
Of course, for so-called “Progressives”,
the United States Constitution is nothing more than
a pesky impediment standing in the way of their Socialist agenda.
Click here for a few hundred more insights into Obama.
10 comments:
It's sad that so few people look at this blog. It's very amusing. Anything that makes people laugh makes the world a better place. Your blog makes people laugh, ipso facto, it makes the world a better place!
Especially this posting. I love it that you think the banksters, who are the bought-and-paid-for employees of us, the taxpayers, are victims of socialization here. Of course they are! We socialized their trillion $$$ losses and now they're whining because we want to socialize their billion $$$ bonuses!
Ben,
I’m guessing you’re young -- under 25 and inexperienced.
It is no surprise to see that you have been well indoctrinated in the tenants of Marxist class warfare. Obviously, you are more concerned with what you perceive to be “sticking it to the rich” than with the preservation of our Constitution.
For the record, I was vehemently opposed to TARP I from the very day Hank Paulson announced he would seek it. I KNEW this sort of thing would happen. As was the case with the so-called stimulus, TARP I only served to make matters worse. Government created this mess and the government “solution” -- as always -- made it worse. Now, as always, government is making it worse still.
Tell me this…
At any point in your “education”, have any of your “teachers” ever required you to read the United States Constitution? Have you ever taken a class devoted to the study of the United States Constitution? Sorry, that was a rhetorical question.
P.S.) This tax on big banks is nothing but a hidden consumer tax. The tax will be passed right back to us in the form of higher fees and/or lower rates of return on our accounts. If you doubt me, just look at the line item accounting on any of your utility bills.
For the record, son, I'm old and I took Con Law in college. The Bush administration chose to socialize the bankersters' egregiously stupid trillion $$$ losses, so obviously, as any 12 y.o. w/a lemonade stand could tell ya, the banksters are no longer Ayn Randian free market heroes, as you posit. Instead they're employees of the socialist state. Socialist drones, created by President Bush's big govt welfare state.
Let's put this in lemonade stand terms, since hopefully that'll be w/in your intellectual grasp. The banksters took bull piss (hundreds of billions in sub-prime loans) and repackaged it as AAA-investment grade lemonade, mixing in the bull piss w/various citrus juices (creating trillions of $$$ in CDOs). And sold it to people as DEEE-LISH-USH LEMONADE.
Of course, even a 12 y.o. or a bankster would know that eventually customers would figure out that bull-piss flavored citrus juice is... bull piss. And that customers would stop buying and try to sell it.
So the 12 y.o. lemonade sellers (banksters) created CDSs -- which are nothing more than Las Vegas bets -- tens of trillions of $$$ worth of CDS, some betting that the customers would decide that the lemonade (sub-prime loan flavored CDOs) was bull piss and some betting that the customers would never stop loving the bull piss (the housing market would continue it's annual double digit expansion forever).
Well, we know how that ended. The 12 y.o.s selling lemondade on Wall Street are now living in a socialist paradise, where they can sell bull piss and get billions in bonuses... and if the bottom falls out of the bull piss market, we taxpayers will socialize their losses. Again.
And since you can't argue w/the fact that banksters aren't operating in a free market, all you got left is ad hominem insults like 'Marxist'. Actually, you're projecting your own support of the banksters' Marxist paradise. You're the Marxist here, learn to love it. ;-)
But seriously, though. This issue is how I separate Big Government Conservatives from the free market libertarians. The free marketeers I know are just as p.o.ed as I am that Bush and his successors are socializing Wall Street's losses and endorsing 'too big to fail' as the business model for the banksters. The Big Gubmint Conservatives I know turn off their brains and ignore the crashing cognitive dissonance of a 'free market' where losses are covered by taxpayer money. If the losers are big enough... and their former CEOs and top execs are named Paulson and Bernanke and were running the Federal Reserve and Treasury when the whoo finally hit the fan.
Ben (Jan 15, 2010 10:42:00 AM),
1) My apologies for misjudging your age. I frequently mistake so-called “Liberals” for children. There’s probably a reason for that.
2) Which part of -- I would like to see Hank Paulson tried in a court and hung in a public square -- do you STILL not understand?
3) The behavior of the bankers was more of a symptom than a cause. Click here and here to get a jump start on the larger set of indisputable facts (which even the NYT saw coming).
4) The Marxist charge is not an “ad hominem” insult. It is an accurate and fully substantiated observation.
Ben (Jan 15, 2010 11:04:00 AM)
If you had bothered to read the very first link in this post (or the links in my first comment), you would know that I “get it”. But, you chose -- instead -- to make a fool of yourself by falsely accusing me.
Congratulations! You succeeded!
Which part of 1. 'Actions speak louder than words' don't you understand? You've spent 10 years applauding the GOP's actions, which led us into the mess we're in today. I don't care that you say you spoke up against TARP. Your party, the GOP, and your President Bush created the mess we're in and you bailed the banks out because you knew that if you didn't you'd have a second Great Depression.
Where were you for the 8 years that economists like Paul Krugman were warning that the sub-prime loan debacle was coming and this administration chose to go ahead w/it's deregulate at all costs strategy?
Back in December, 2000, GOP Senator Phil Gramm (you know, the guy who John McCain chose as his economic brain?) tacked on a dead-of-night 262-page measure called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act deregulating the energy futures (remember Enron?) and sub-prime markets to the must-pass $384-billion omnibus spending bill. Which has gotten us to where we are today.
Senator G also chaired the Senate Banking Committee repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated well-regulated commercial banks from unregulated investment banks. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act allowed FDIC insured banks to make risky investments... the sort of which led to the Great Depression and our present on-the-verge-of-Depression.
Do I need to skool you further or are you willing to admit that totally deregulated energy-futures and sub-prime markets were a bad idea? A multi-trillion $$$ cost to the taxpayer bad idea?
Yes or no?
Son, I'd love to stay and chat, but I got work to do. I guess you don't.
For the record, talk is cheap. The mistakes of former Senator Gramm (who got millions from Enron and sub-prime lenders), former Treasury Secretaries Rubin and Paulson and Presidents Clinton and Bush and their endorsement of deregulated energy and sub-prime markets brought us to where we are today... which is the verge of a new Great Depression.
If you spent the previous 8 years ignoring the socialization of risk and losses for Wall Street, then your amazing awakening to the problem once a Democratic president was elected... is exactly what I'd expect from a GOP cheerleader.
Ben,
1) You bring to mind the following phrase:
It’s better to remain silent and let people think you a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
2) Like all so-called “Liberals”, you have an enormous capacity to spew mindless rhetorical talking points while willfully ignoring the substantiated facts. Each of your mindless talking points is refuted by a comprehensive reading of this post and all the links.
3) I am not now and never have been a registered Republican. I am a lifelong registered Independent. But, thanks for proving yourself the presumptuous fool one more time.
Post a Comment