Sen. Dick Durbin, the second most senior democrat in the Senate, cashed out his stock the day after meeting with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. Durbin took the money and invested much of the $115,000 in Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc.
The transfers occurred on Sept. 19th. The prior day he met with Paulson and Bernanke on the banking crisis. Bloomberg reports that “The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index plunged 4.7 percent last Sept. 15 after the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and Bank of America Corp.’s government-engineered takeover of Merrill Lynch & Co. By the end of October, the index had fallen 22.6 percent.”
I have long advocated a change in the ethics rules to require blind trusts for all members of Congress. Currently, members can make killings on the market by using their access to policy changes and special tips. For prior columns, click here and here.
Durbin, 66, insists that he was only doing what other people were doing: moving his money to safer investments. Moreover, he insists that the thrust of the information that he received from the Administration was released publicly the next day. This may be so. However, as noted in the above columns, senators have performed better than industry experts in the the past and the suspicion is that their success is due in some part to the special information that they received through their positions. More importantly, these trades and investments create an obvious appearance of self-dealing. Why should Senators (who generally have no skills or training in the market) insist on making these investments instead of using an expert in a blind trust? They obviously believe that they can do better — and historically they have. The result is that members routinely invest in areas where they are voting and legislating. If you want to write the laws affecting the markets, you should not be allowed to play the markets.
For the story, click here.
Just checked google finance. This date is just before a large drop in the S&P 500, and presumably other major U.S. indices. I don’t even have any outrage left.
This wasn’t the result of access. It was astute financial acumen on my part. That’s why I make the big bucks! I can’t believe you or anyone else would suggest otherwise.
Sincerely,
D. Durbin
Let see how the Blue Sky Laws work for Durbin it has no effect. Thanks for the term Blue Sky Buddha. It came from Kansas.
But the SEC which Durbin, clearly has violated:
Illegal insider trading refers generally to buying or selling a security, in breach of a fiduciary duty or other relationship of trust and confidence, while in possession of material, nonpublic information about the security. Insider trading violations may also include “tipping” such information, securities trading by the person “tipped,” and securities trading by those who misappropriate such information.
# Government employees who learned of such information because of their employment by the government; and
# Other persons who misappropriated, and took advantage of, confidential information from their employers.
Link to SEC:
http://www.sec.gov/answers/insider.htm
I think that Durbin should forfeit. If it is good enough for Martha it is good enough for him.
That doesn’t look suspicious at all, Dick. Nice going. I’d start using whatever stroke you have right now to start digging. Entertaining, sure, but what’s next? Videos of you whacking yourself in the crotch with a t-ball bat while you chase pages around your office clad only in shaving cream and mint jelly? If you’re going to keep this up, you should call Bob Sagat. He’s not on the show any more but I’m sure he can hook you up with the America’s Funniest Home Video people. That’s career ending-ly stupid, Dick. BTW, enjoy your audit.
Not being a lawyer I think dosent this have something to do with insider trading information. Didnt Martha Stewart do a few months for much less than this?
At the very least the man should resign his senate seat, if he acted on advice from this meeting. This appears to be an abuse of power.
But then I sold in September so maybe the guy is legitimate. It did not take a rocket scientist to see the writing on the wall. He could just be very prescient or just a venal pri….
Oookay, for the record.
The Junior Senator from the ‘Land of Lincoln’ is a side of the mouth yacking, slithering thru an extortionist minefield to get appointed Maroon, Burris.
The Senior Senator is now an unethical, impropriety dirty bird Maroon, Durban.
There’s zilch to see here, business as usual.
(How I wish that wasn’t the case.)
It’s illegal for brokers to front run orders, but not for Senator of the United States to front run markets.
Whoa, that’s a bad visual BIL! Ouch
Seamus your state is calling you to US Senate!
Surely, people like Senator DD. do not run for congress just so they have an inside track on the financial markets. I am also certain he had a news conference scheduled to alert his constituents of the pending fiscal collapse, but there were technical difficulties…
The corruption exhibited by all of our governmental officials is wearing us common folk out and I fear that we are just going to give up without caring anymore because there seems nothing we can do to stop the corruption.
Vote the mother f……. out of office, it seems pretty simple to me.
the problem is you have morons on both sides of the aisle that will not vote for a democrat or a republican because long dead great grandfather Augustus was a dem/repub. Stupid is a stupid does. So we get the government we are entitled to.
Maybe you should own land to be allowed to vote and be able to read and write at at least an 8th grade level.
I saw it coming and baled in June! Thanks Ravi Batra!
Next move, start buying gold QUICK
jim center:
gold bought in 2006 wish I would have bought more.
A.Y.,
Wouldn’t all of them be guilty of insider trading, not just Durbin? Paulson and Bernake forwarned him (I mean, had a great deal of financial acumen which they imparted to Mr. Durbin).
Seamus,
I second you for Senator! I know you won’t have any trouble, “swearing in”!!!
Jill 1, June 15, 2009 at 5:40 pm
A.Y.,
Wouldn’t all of them be guilty of insider trading, not just Durbin? Paulson and Bernake forwarned him (I mean, had a great deal of financial acumen which they imparted to Mr. Durbin).
**********************
I don’t think that they intended anyone to act personally on this. If they did the same thing, I want to be a fly on the wall in there office after this news.
“I have long advocated a change in the ethics rules to require blind trusts for all members of Congress.”
Quite!
“privilege”?
No matter the subject matter or which committee: they are all owned by the subjects of their scrutiny.
Just admit it.
Once these people (with very few exceptions) get in office and have some position, the coffers coff and then they are no longer worth jack shit.
Generally takes about 1.34 years.
Less than that if you are a VA Judge.
Doesn’t this just make you want to hold a Congressional Pride Festival.
Indeed it does. The rainbow of corruption parade!
If he cashed out his stocks and bought Berkshire Hathaway, then he just bought more stocks, because that’s Hathaway’s business and Buffett hasn’t been doing much better than the market. Sorry, I can’t see the outrage here.
Personally, Dick Durbin dressed like a slutty airline stewardess yesterday and I will not be surprised to hear the oldest Obama girl is already pregnant from all the “rappers” hanging around the white house, aka bama digs.
rich you piece of one way crap.
of course you don’t.
The curious firing of Gerald Walpin gets … curiouser
June 15, 2009
Senator Charles Grassley has demanded records from the Obama administration over the dismissal of the Inspector General for Americorps and raises the possibility that Barack Obama broke a law he co-sponsored in the Senate that protects the independence of the IGs.
The firing comes as the Obama administration cut a sweetheart deal with a major Obama backer that allows him to receive federal funding as mayor of Sacramento, and fails to repay taxpayers for the money Kevin Johnson admittedly took illegally
The curious firing of Gerald Walpin gets … curiouser
June 15, 2009
Senator Charles Grassley has demanded records from the Obama administration over the dismissal of the Inspector General for Americorps and raises the possibility that Barack Obama broke a law he co-sponsored in the Senate that protects the independence of the IGs.
The firing comes as the Obama administration cut a sweetheart deal with a major Obama backer that allows him to receive federal funding as mayor of Sacramento, and fails to repay taxpayers for the money Kevin Johnson admittedly took illegally
The curious firing of Gerald Walpin gets … curiouser
June 15, 2009
Senator Charles Grassley has demanded records from the Obama administration over the dismissal of the Inspector General for Americorps and raises the possibility that Barack Obama broke a law he co-sponsored in the Senate that protects the independence of the IGs.
The firing comes as the Obama administration cut a sweetheart deal with a major Obama backer that allows him to receive federal funding as mayor of Sacramento, and fails to repay taxpayers for the money Kevin Johnson admittedly took illegally
June 15, 2009
“Conservatives” Are Single-Largest Ideological Group
by Lydia Saad
PRINCETON, NJ — Thus far in 2009, 41% of Americans interviewed in national Gallup Poll surveys describe their political views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 20% as liberal. This represents an increase for conservatism in the U.S. since 2008, returning it to a level last seen in 2003. The 20% calling themselves liberal is in line with findings throughout this decade.
As Michelle Obama was strutting around the White House dressed like a slutty airline stewardess……….kids knocked up….
Sorry kids, it’s not insider trading. Lots of people, myself included, closed all their positions when the market topped in mid 2007. Every advisory service that was worth a damn was issuing warnings to cash out by November. Anyone who was still invested in securities by March 2008 wasn’t paying attention or had a really lame fiduciary.
As posted above, “Illegal insider trading refers generally to buying or selling a security, in breach of a fiduciary duty or other relationship of trust and confidence, while in possession of material, nonpublic information about the security. Insider trading violations may also include “tipping” such information, securities trading by the person “tipped,” and securities trading by those who misappropriate such information.” If someone tells you the stock market is about to crash, selling all your stock on that advice does not meet the definition of “insider trading”.
Now, if Durbin sold his Lehman Bros. stock on Friday on the tip from Paulson that Lehman was going to be bankrupt on Monday, THAT would be insider trading. But I don’t think he or Paulson could be that stupid.
Well, Former MSNBC, that’s one way to look at it. But the right shouldn’t get too excited about the advantage reported today.
These results have been pretty steady for a couple of decades now. Conservatives now outnumber moderates and liberals, but we’re still dealing with modest fluctuations. For that matter, the traditional model of throwing everyone into one of these three categories doesn’t reflect the diverse ideological landscape.
There’s also the practical effect to consider. Self-described liberals have trailed badly for a very long time, but it hasn’t translated into Republican victories at the ballot box. Democrats still easily outnumber Republicans, despite the ideological breakdown.
What’s more, it’s one thing for Americans to describe themselves as “conservative” in a general sense, but it’s more important to consider these same Americans’ attitudes on more specific matters. Right now, for example, the number of conservatives is nearly double the number of liberals. But that doesn’t change the fact that most Americans support universal health care, disagree with Republican foreign policy, believe global warming is real and in need of a response, don’t want to see Roe v. Wade overturned, etc. So don’t expect a big conservative takeover any time soon.
getplaning:
ram it where the sun doesn’t shine liberal.
Jerk in Chief:
Obama: Respect Iran’s Voters
President says he’s ‘deeply troubled’ by violence in Iran but adds choosing Iran’s leaders ‘is up to Iranians’
Well so much for the Iranians expecting Hope & Change out of Obama….
Jerk in Chief (Obama) blocks access to White House visitor lists… Developing…
What the F is this all about? Talk about CORRUPTION!
Enjoy being deleted soon, troll-bait. You’re not even trying any more, are you?
To Borrow A line from foo.
“I don’t even have any outrage left.”And that dosen’t just apply to this situation either.Its Like Bill Maher Said the other day,this is not what the people voted for.
We thought we finally had someone who understood”our pain” but I am really begining to wonder as are a lot of people.
A little more depth on this story:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aQyYKbwMItyc#
Its Like Bill Maher Said the other day,this is not what the people voted for.
We thought we finally had someone who understood”our pain” but I am really begining to wonder as are a lot of people.
I would say there are plenty of idiots who voted for the guy, but I am not one of them. I saw this long ago and have been warning people ever since.
I warned that he was a shill for Corporations (and he is), That he is certainly far from liberal, and that his brand of change is precisely the same shit we have been dealing with for 30+ years.
It isn’t Obama, it is the ignorant that voted for him.
Liberal vs Conservative
Right vs Left
You people are so damned gullible. Just like Sheep.
Wake up.
Former MSNBC, the poll you described also means that 55% of the population is moderate to liberal. And the 40% who describe themselves as conservative cover a broad spectrum. The problem for Republicans is that close to half of the 40% constitutes the current hardcore of the party, a marginalized collection of religious fundamentalists, racists, conspiracy theorists and other fringe elements who, like yourself, view the election of a black president as proof positive that the country is no longer “ours.” If the party intends to win any elections again, it will need to get rid of that crew and broaden its appeal to moderates. So far, it doesn’t appear willing to do that, thus allowing intellectual heavyweights like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to define the party. The alternative is to form a new Republican Party, and permit Rush and the kids to play in their own sandbox.
So BuelahMan,since you say that you”warned”us who should we have voted for?
Kucinich, Paul or Nader.
In that order.
Kucinich is the man. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: had he been elected, Cheney would be wearing prison orange by now.
Hi Buddha,
I wrote the following in Nov 07:
http://buelahman.wordpress.com/2007/11/18/kucinichpaul-is-that-the-ticket/
I saw it way back then…
Nader
I ended up petitioning and campaigning for Nader. However, Kucinich was my first pick.
I knew that the Big Two were lying scumbags long before most did (how I was able to discern something so obvious, while many others were duped, is beyond me).
BIL: ‘Kucinich is the man.’
I agree with that totally but had he been elected he would have been treated exactly like Jimmy Carter by both sides of the isle and frozen out of any success whatsoever except possibly some foreign policy initiatives IMO. Kucinich is the ultimate outsider in Washington.
Just to get close to being on topic: And Durbin is the ultimate insider; insider knowledge and insider trading. I’m betting corruption because if he had actually known what he was doing with his investments he would have moved his money earlier to minimize his losses; I did and I don’t know anything about the finer points of our economic system.
If he got his money out in the window between the opening of business and the announcement of the same info being made public the next day then his behavior fits the description AY posted at the start of this thread.
This is important. If you are able to make calls on this it would help. It’s one piece of corruption we may be able to prevent. This involves the cover up of war funding, WH and Congressional pressure on new House members to do as they are told and an agreement to keep hidden the pictures of torture Obama refuses to release. Glenn Greenwald has a link to the Congresspeople’s phone numbers at the end of his entry yesterday.
————————————————————–
“Will 39 Democrats Stand Up to Stop the War Funding?
The current battle over supplemental war funding will clearly reveal exactly how many Democrats actually oppose these wars. Where does your Representative stand?
By Jeremy Scahill
The White House and the Democratic Congressional Leadership are playing a very dirty game in their effort to ram through supplemental funding for the escalating US war in Afghanistan and continued occupation of Iraq. In the crosshairs of the big guns at the White House and on Capitol Hill are anti-war freshmen legislators and the movement to hold those responsible for torture accountable…
Rep. Lynn Woolsey of California, a leader of the antiwar Democrats, said the White House is threatening to withdraw support from freshmen who oppose the bill, saying “you’ll never hear from us again.”
She said the House leadership also is targeting the freshmen.
“It’s really hard for the freshmen,” she said. “Nancy’s pretty powerful.”…
The current battle over war funding has brought with it a couple of high-stakes actions, which have threatened passage of the bill. Many Democrats were up in arms about an amendment sponsored by Senators Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham that would have blocked the release of photos depicting US abuse of prisoners (which the White House “actively” supported. Facing warnings that the provision could derail the funding package, the White House stepped in, deploying Rahm Emanuel to the Hill to convince legislators to drop the amendment, while at the same time pledging that Obama would use his authority to continue to fight the release of more photos:
White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel ‘rushed’ to Capitol Hill and prevailed upon Senate Democrats to remove the torture photo measure in exchange for an explicit White House promise that it would use all means at its disposal to block the photos’ release. Obama also issued a letter to Congress assuring it he would support separate legislation to suppress the photos, if necessary, and imploring it to speed passage of the war-spending bill. The rider would “unnecessarily complicate the essential objective of supporting the troops,” Obama wrote.”
http://rebelreports.com/
lotta,
I agree the obstructionists in Congress would have tried to Carter him, but I think Kucinich has something Carter didn’t: a stomach for a fight. I also think his first move would have been to clean house at DOJ and sick the meanest AG he could find on the traitors and thus removing him from some of the fray. We don’t need warm fuzzies about the tools in DC to fix this country. We need the criminals who broke it to go to prison. Obama has one chance to fix this, which it looks like he’s tossing out the window in fantastic sell out fashion. Like I said, I voted for him because the choice was another open fascist working for War Inc., but I do not trust Obama to do the right thing anymore. He had the qualifications to know what needed to be done, but so far he’s shown himself to have no spine at all when it comes to the Bush Crime Family. The good news is that Obama showing he’s just another K St. Whore is that next cycle there will be more heat than ever for third party action. I’ll say this too. If Prof. Turley were to show interest in forming a third party based on upholding Constitutional principles to field candidates in not just national but local elections against incumbents from either craptastic party we have to deal with now, I’ll volunteer today. R. D. What’s the damn difference? One is owned by Halliburton and Exxon and the other is owned by the insurance lobby. Screw ‘em both and the lobbyist graft they rode in on. We voted for change and we didn’t get it? Well, then maybe it’s time to force change down Washington’s greedy gullet. I’m about all out of patience with those criminal egoistic children. It’s time to administer a spanking.
Buddha,
I agree with you that Kucinich would put up a fight and do the right things. Obama is very effective as Lottakatz said, but to what end?
Obama is very effective as Lottakatz said, but to what end?
Effective at what, per se?
He is an extremely effective liar and actor. He is terrifically effective as an Imperialist. He is wonderfully effective at garnering the vote (with the complicit media’s assistance and unequaled ability to provide bullshit for their listener’s to brainwash themselves with). He is magnificent in his ability to protect the war crimes of his predecessor and in laying further groundwork for the ultimate theft of the American public to benefit the Bankers. He is the ultimate Zionistic protectorate and flip-flopper on the Palestinian issue.
He is not an effective leader for the pains and ailments that plague the USofA. He is instrumental in the pain and will contribute even more in his lackadaisical kowtowing to Corporations.
He is an opportunist of the highest order.
And the American Sheople may now say, “Amen!”
I’ve admired Dennis Kucinich since he was first elected as mayor of Cleveland at what, 26? However, his chances of being elected president are probably not much greater than mine, which means not a chance.
The post “Senatorial Privilege? Sen. Dick Durbin Cashed Out His Stocks and Shares After Meeting With Paulson and Bernanke on Economic Crisis” and the comments on the post are classic examples of why some people never let facts never get in the way of their opinions.
Here are some basic facts:
On or about September 1, 2008 BRK.B went above the 50 day moving average. At about the same time the DOW, NASDAQ, and S&P 500 went below the 50 day moving average. So what Durbin did seemed prudent at the time based on these facts.
Of course if Durbin still holds BRK.B it is likely that what he did has not worked out so well. BRK.B is down significantly more than the DOW, NASDAQ, and S& P 500 since mid-September 2008.
However, his chances of being elected president are probably not much greater than mine, which means not a chance.
And why do you suppose that is?
BTW: I find a Wiki link to Kucinich quite easily, not so much for any “Mike Appleton”.
Methinks that you stand far less a chance at getting elected POTUS than Kucinich. However, I seem to remember he was on the ticket and I have yet to see a Mike Appleton.
Do you think that he is unqualified? What makes you believe that statement you made?
Well folks let me throw this headline at you:
“Obama blocks list of visitors to White House
Taking Bush’s position, administration denies msnbc.com request for logs”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31373407/ns/politics-white_house/
@eniobob:
This is about as much “change” as I can stand.
Beulahman, I think Kucinich is very well qualified, but I believe there are several reasons why he could not be elected:
1. His views are too far left for most mainstream Democrats. That is one of the reasons he has not done well in primaries. The fact that he is well respected by many regulars on this site should tell you that.
2. He has never been able to develop a broadly based national organization to support his candidacy.
3. He doesn’t have any star power. I know that sounds cheap and trivial, and it is, but his stature and personality have hampered his ability grab the public’s imagination.
Those are the regrettable facts.
Mike A.,
1) You know everything is in how you present it, counselor. From a campaigning standpoint, this is an addressable issue. I’m not saying it’s not an issue either, just that it’s addressable.
2) Lack of organization is an issue. Correctable, but the question is at what cost? Would he have to sell out to get the money to finance an adequate organization for the task of national politics? It was and is a concern.
3) This is, unfortunately, I have to agree is Kucinich’s Achilles Heel. Sad. Not for him but rather for our patently superficial society as a whole. Democracy at its best is a marketplace of ideas. He’s got those in abundance. As far as looks go, eh, yeah, his wife got all them all.
Ahhh
My favorite FLILF
http://buelahman.wordpress.com/2008/01/18/flilf-not-flilf/
Mike,
I agree. Democrats have long ago left “the Left”. I speak often of the Singular Party with two schisms dependent upon the wedge issues to appease the weak Americans who believe it MUST be a two party system. They believe it because these two parties tell them to believe it, in lieu of all the obvious detriment to that purpose.
I didn’t choose Kucinich because he was a Democrat (as a matter of fact, that was an obstacle with me he had to overcome). So, in response to your issue 1: it is America who reaps the adversity and chaos of playing the Two party game. If more would snap out of it, those parties would be forced to actually merge or disband. The reTHUGlicans are a breath away, anyway.
2: it is difficult when even your own party is fighting against you with as much heart as they fight against the “opposite” party. My biggest complaint to Kucinich was that there was, in fact, disorganization. There were times I could not send money because the website had problems. That could be improved, however, with the backing of his party he could excel (which will never happen). So, I wrote the article in Nov 07 saying that he and Paul should run Independent. Would he have won? Dunno, but I bet it would have been a three way race, had they done it.
3: Sad. America is sad. From what I have seen of recent “stars” in politics, they virtually end up all as crooks and liars. But, they were certainly deemed “stars”.
America must wake up.
This is one reason why i bother. If I didn’t think I could work to convince more and educate those about the realities facing us, I wouldn’t waste my time. Hopefully the more people will be willing to see the third party guy (like Nader: whom I eventually worked to elect after Dennis left the race).
I think Kucinich should run under the ELF party, as he does look like an elf– he should go with it. This could be the Economic Liberation Front or the Economic and Legal Freedom Party! One way of dealing with lack of “star power” is to grab onto something about yourself and laugh at it. But it’s no joke that we need economic and legal freedom in this nation of tyranny. We need it very badly.
Hay, BuelahMan,
You crafty ol’ cyber-Hick, y’all got ‘nother hit offin’ yur website a’sendin’ me thar to decifer whut “FLILF” mint. Hit warn’t whut I thot hit wuz tho.
Dat’ yeller summer squash ya growed and cooked up a mess of shore looked like sum fine vittles. Fried yellow summer squash covered in corn pone batter is a southern favorite of mine.
You dirty old man, you.
LOL
Buelah, et al.
Look at how heavily the game is rigged for the two established parties: There’s the way the press covers the two “major” parties vs. “third party candidates;” There’s ability of the two parties to pump so much money into the race to make it impossible for any third group to compete; and the fact that there isn’t a voter around that can remember when the choices weren’t R or D. All this gives us the example of Buddha (and myself), who was realistically faced with the choice of voting either for someone we hoped would do the right thing, someone we knew wouldn’t, and a whole group of people who stood no chance of getting elected. The outcome only reinforced the two party entrenchment.
So how do we change that?
BuelahMan, you should also know that I voted for George McGovern, so I’m not totally against committing to lost causes.
It is only a lost cause because we end up
faced with the choice of voting either for someone we hoped would do the right thing, someone we knew wouldn’t, and a whole group of people who stood no chance of getting elected.
As long as America believes that (and Gyges is correct in that assessment… which is heavily “taught” us by the very ones we know are screwing us).
I would say that if everyone that has told me those sentiments had actually voted their conscience and against the other reasons, then there would have been a landslide for the alternative candidate. At the very least, it may have been a 4 or 5 way race (which is absolutely fine by me).
But no, we let them mindfuck us into “voting for the lessor of two evils”.
When we allow the Corporate Party (which includes both DemoRATS and reTHUGlicans) to control the election process and don’t vote their sorry asses out, then we find ourselves in the same, tired old GroundHog Day over and over again.
We are the problem.
This is not said to pick a fight, so please don’t take it that way. Several people on this blog believe I never liked Obama which is true and that I never considered voting for him, which is not true.
I asked the people I trusted why they were voting for him and I listened. I took what they said seriously. On this blog I asked rafflaw this question because I had come to trust his judgement through reading his posts. Beyond that, the many other people who write here and who’s opinion I value, I read with an open heart and mind. JT was pro-Obama as were most others, except trolls of course. and I honestly considered what everyone wrote. The person I trust most in this world, my husband, voted for Obama. I kept asking questions, reading, looking things up and I just couldn’t shake my fears that Obama would be exactly the kind of president he is. The imperial and lawless president was in his voting record and his every action. The last straw for me was when the tide turned against Hillary and the defense/mercenary companies started pouring all their money into his campaign.
Like Gyges (and I’m guessing almost everyone else here), McCain/Palin were out of the question. But I could never get my questions about Obama answered in a way that made sense. I just could not ceed my conscience to him and vote for him.
I’m with BuehlahMan. We should stop thinking “we the people” can win in an election between evil and less evil. We are the problem and we have got to make a better choice in the future. Continuing to do the same thing and believing there will be a different outcome is really not thinking very clearly (a bad paraphrase). In the meantime we must figure out a way to make the current crew accountable to the law and the people. If we don’t, we won’t have to worry about any more elections.
Call me irresponsible, call me unreliable, but it’s undeniably true….I’m irresponsibly mad about Obama. I mean that as in happy with him, sorry everyone. So far and it is far too early to really see, he appears to me to be the best President of my
conscious lifetime, being born near the end of of WWII. As many of you gasp in shock wondering if I’m an Obamamaniac, deluded, or just another centrist liberal, please be assured I am not.
My perspective on this country is that it is and always was an
oligarchy composed of shifting Corporatist interests, melded with an elite composed of the very wealthy. As much as I admire Jefferson, Franklin and Washington for instance, they were very wealthy men who were fully concerned in their lifetimes with the perquisites of their wealth and status. We are of course a Republic, with certain democratic features, but have never come close to being a democratic nation.
While I’ve personally known far too many Marxists to be interested in that type of political theory, I nonetheless have certain core beliefs that place me out of the American mainstream politically. I believe in governmental control of corporations; universal health care; the right to have decent shelter; the right to have wherewithal for food and clothing; the right to free education through and beyond college; a truly progressive tax system; the Bill of Rights and the imperative need for a legal system that is fair to everyone; the end of of the concept of American hegemony, prejudice (racial/ethnic and sexual) and a humane foreign policy. That was not in any particular order of importance and certain not all of what I believe in.
I offer the foregoing as examples of what I’m for. All of the above I believe are concepts worth struggling for, but none of them individually, or in toto are in the least mainstream with more than perhaps 25% of all Americans. I’m not naive and know that the reason for this low figure is the result of ongoing propaganda that blinds our citizens to what is really going on. Given that I believe this is the state of affair I never expected President Obama, or anyone else to come close to what I would call ideal and in fact I would expect anyone who is elected in the current political clime of America, to be a disappointment to people who share my beliefs. That’s the reality.
I don’t preach despair though. I believe in commitment to healing my country and the world. I know that for real change to occur it has to be incremental and only can come about when a majority of the people want it. The task for me and those of similar beliefs is to try to not educate people, because that pre-supposes our own infallibility, but to get people to try to think independently and iconoclastically. This is an age old struggle that will not be resolved in our lifetimes and yet it is a cause to believe in.
Given that, President Obama has checked some of the faux conservative excesses and is trying to move positively in some areas that are of most concern. People are out of work.
People lack adequate health care. People are losing their homes. Until you check the emergent nature of this for most people, you will not change their perspective. To paraphrase a quote I used earlier in another thread and with respects to the writer of “The Americanization of Emily.”
God save us from the ideologues of the world, because they are the ones who in their demand for political purity, kill the momentum of the movement.
While I’ve personally known far too many Marxists to be interested in that type of political theory, I nonetheless have certain core beliefs that place me out of the American mainstream politically. I believe in governmental control of corporations; universal health care; the right to have decent shelter; the right to have wherewithal for food and clothing; the right to free education through and beyond college; a truly progressive tax system; the Bill of Rights and the imperative need for a legal system that is fair to everyone; the end of of the concept of American hegemony, prejudice (racial/ethnic and sexual) and a humane foreign policy. That was not in any particular order of importance and certain not all of what I believe in.
And in that one paragraph I can find not a single instance that Obama could possibly have made you feel like he was with you.
I doubt that he agrees with a single issue of yours (and I do, btw), yet he is the best POTUS you have seen?
Dear God.
BuelahMan,
So which President in your lifetime was better? JFK died to quick to know, but did attack Cuba and up the ante in Viet Nam.
LBJ enacted the War on poverty and the civil Rights Act, but brought new brutality to the Viet Nam War, which he knew from early on couldn’t be won. Too many people died because of him because he refused to quit. Jimmy Carter, was totally ineffective. Bill Clinton, was and is a corporatist. I’m assuming you find none of the Republicans up to snuff.
President Obama, faced with a corporate led financial crisis has done the best he can, given the control of congress by the corporatists of all stripes. He is trying to move health care into the mainstream of concern. He is working on winding down Iraq, but needs to do more on Afghanistan and Pakistan. These are foreign policy issues of long standing and despite any wish for a magic wand America in not easily or safely disentangled. He has pushed understanding that global warming is a major issue. He has shown a desire to deal with unemployment and entwined energy independence with economic opportunity. He has presented a clear cut policy on the Israel/Arab conundrum. That’s just a part of what he’s done in just five months.
The specifics and rapidity of pace on any of these issues may displease you, but who else really could have done more?
Kucinich, please. He’s a good man, but they would already be moving to impeach him and there would be billion$ invested in getting that job done. This is the reality of this country. You and I may not like it, but it exists. In my 64 years I’ve spent too much time in baying at the moon politically. I’m not quitting, but I think new tactics are in order. One of them is being satisfied in small victory’s as one presses for moving the line further. What I see presented here, by many I respect, is that they are expecting much more from any President than is humanly deliverable given our system and then decrying them when they don’t deliver. Many may call it honesty, but I call it self-fulfilling prophecy, that ignores recognition what most of you already know about this country and this world. It is
O as in Oligarchy and that is not easily dispatched with.
Mike,
More than anyone on this site I respect your ability to disagree with people civilly and avoid personal attacks. With that being said you cant dispute the fact that this is the best, most free country in the world.
Chris:
This is the most backward country in the world with the least amount of freedom.
We have low taxes, no national health care, an oppressive military, the right to bear arms, college education is not free to anyone, we have property rights, the constitution is a constant irritation, and many other things that limit our freedom from want.
And if that weren’t enough I cant go and bash my neighbor on the head and take his property by force. That would be competing with our government.
“With that being said you cant dispute the fact that this is the best, most free country in the world.”
Chris,
I don’t really disagree with you. I don’t believe that there are any countries in this world that are truly democratic, free and not run by monied elites and corporations. No countries that I know of are run for the benefit of their people, rather than for a small percentage of the country’s “haves.” I love America and love being an American.
Nevertheless, with all that said, we are not a republic or a democracy. We are controlled by an oligarchy of mutual interests that use their wealth to control our citizens and our politicians. That we have it better in some things then the rest of the world, does not mean that this country has lived up to its Constitution or the hopes of its founders. It simply hasn’t been a government or country that has acted in the best interests of most of its’ people. This needs to be changed and it needs to be changed by people getting beyond the old left/right ways of thinking and learning to
see it’s not the politics. The solution is making the government responsive to the needs of all of the people, rather than just a few wealthy ones.
“This is the most backward country in the world with the least amount of freedom.”
IS,
This is hyperbole to say the least. The truth is that you know it is hyperbole, but are making the statement out of your anger with all that is not happening, that should. I’ll take America over for instance, Indonesia, India, China, England, France, Germany, Russia, etc. Perhaps Sweden is better, but I don’t think they’re into immigration, nor is a personal favorite of mine Denmark. I like Holland because of the sexual openness and legal marijuana, but they have been having a lot of immigrant problems of late. Face it, there are not many places where the needs of the people override the needs of the elite.
Jill
Jill, as I’ve said elsewhere: evil, you’re pure evil 
I love it, ROFLMFAO.
1, June 16, 2009 at 3:52 pm
I think Kucinich should run under the ELF party, as he does look like an elf– he should go with it. This could be the Economic Liberation Front or the Economic and Legal Freedom Party!
———
I’ve written in Kucinich and Carter for president on more than one ballot. I was going to write in Kucinich right up to the time I was sitting in my car thinking about it at my polling place in ’08. McCain/Palin scared the s*** out of me, more specifically, that SP could end up as President. I’ve voted my conscience on a number of occasions and would vote for a third party- even the ELF party, if the candidate wasn’t nuts. I put Paul into the ‘nuts’ category.
Personally, I feel like Carter was a better president (and Clinton, as well). But they are all of the same basic Big Money owned cloth.
Barack Obama is as bad as most Republicans, Bush notwithstanding.
You are loyal and that is too bad. He has fooled you and you seem to refuse to acknowledge that.
Did you notice me calling you on the things you look for and suggesting that Obama has none of those things.
Can you tell me that he has met any of your qualifications? Some of them? All of them?
What is nuts about Kucinich? Or Paul (other than he refuses to acknowledge evolution)?
Buddha Is Laughing
1, June 16, 2009 at 10:35 am
lotta,
I agree the obstructionists in Congress would have tried to Carter him, but I think Kucinich has something Carter didn’t: a stomach for a fight.
——————
I think Carter was smart. He saw how it was going to go and looked for a way to do the job in areas that had less Congressional control than domestic policy. Presidents have a lot of latitude in foreign policy. I think Carter just saw the future 3 years for what they would be and decided an end run around Congress could be productive.
Beulah,
This election was the first and only time I voted for the lesser of the two evils. I’m not one to vote based on fear, but McCain with the Football was one of my foremost considerations. I also will say that President Obama’s platform wasn’t that far off from my views.
My point wasn’t to hash and rehash the same leftover phrases from every discussion about what’s wrong with the American system, most of us know what that meal tastes like. I’m honestly at a loss as to how to change the system (short of armed rebellion, no-one would win that war). The best I’ve been able to come up with is start locally and work nationally (which I think is the mistake most “third parties” make, is they try the opposite). Even if that strategy were to work, you’re still facing Duverger’s law. Further more, how do we convince people that control the media, campaign rules, and most of the money that is spent on politics to change the rules to not favor themselves?
BuelahMan
1, June 16, 2009 at 10:00 pm
What is nuts about Kucinich? Or Paul (other than he refuses to acknowledge evolution)?
————-
Nothing about Kucinich is nuts- I was not clear in that regard. Even a quickly pulled together 3rd party with a candidate that was to my liking (Kucinich aside) no matter how non-mainstream could get my vote.
I have heard Paul speak and read his website during the campaign. He advocated the reduction of the federal government to the point that it was an abdication of the basic responsibilities of a central government. IMO. I characterize that as nuts even though he had a couple of positions I could agree with.
I thought Gravel was a better candidate than Paul in that he had more positions that I could find agreement with but I considered them both fringe.
Did ya hear the one about Congressman Conyers wife:
Congressman’s wife snarled in bribe probe
Detroit councilwoman caught in scandal over sludge contract payoffs
link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31395275/ns/politics-more_politics/
Jill wrote: I think Kucinich should run under the ELF party, as he does look like an elf– he should go with it.
The hurdle for a “short” President with big ears in the White House is probably greater than the glass ceiling hurdle. He could have increased his chances by letting his wife first run for president and himself for vice-president.
An earlier short candidate, Ross “The Boss” Perot, in my opinion made perhaps the most prescient statement ever about NAFTA: “the giant sucking sound” of American jobs heading south of the border.
Should have gone with the short guys.
Sen. Durbin says Senate Intelligence Committee Knew Bush Administration was Lying about Iraq
lotta,
I may have agreed with your Carter End Run analysis back in the day, but from what I’ve seen from the man since his time in office really makes me lean on the “no stomach” stance. It’s not that he’s not smart, hell no, I’m not going to challenge that, but I just think he’s so non-confrontational in his methodology in everything else that is seems likely his lack of aggression in tackling Congress, rationale or not, is more rooted in his basic personality. He’d have tried to find as smooth a road to resolution no matter what composition he’d have been faced with in Congress. He’s addicted to the “win-win”. I could be wrong, but that’s the kind of guy Carter strikes me as being.
Sen. Durbin admits the Bush Administration Lied the U.S. into illegal War. Obama was conspiring, selling and waging the Iraq War of Aggression as early as 2003.
Obama’s carrying on Bush’s mass murder in illegal wars makes;
“Barack Obama – Mass Murderer”
By Dan Spielberg
“The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names” ~ Chinese Proverb
“The Chinese proverb that opens this piece is true in all times and places, so let’s call Mr. Obama by his real names: Wall Street Stooge, Zionist lickspittle, National Socialist, liar and above all, mass murderer.”
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22607.htm
Whollie wrote:
“Should have gone with the short guys.”
__________________
Yes, we should go with the short guys with the statuesque brains and the big ears because they think and listen.
Now now boys before you all go jump on the Short Guy bandwagon, let’s take a moment to consider that Napoleon fellow.
I’m just sayin’ . . .
Ross Perot had Big Ears (still does) and he made his wife buy a used Buick Enclave. I guess that means he is frugal?
“You are loyal and that is too bad. He has fooled you and you seem to refuse to acknowledge that.”
BeulahMan,
I assume this comment was directed at me, I apologize if it wasn’t, since you averred that you preferred Carter and Clinton as Presidents which seemed to respond to my question.
Given that, I would ask you to go back and read my post again and show me where I am so loyal to President Obama. BTW I didn’t even vote for him in my states Presidential Primary. My current judgment on President Obama and yours is based on 5 months in office. That is too short a time to make a full assessment, give me a year and we can all see the picture with more clarity. The opening paragraph of my first post:
“Call me irresponsible, call me unreliable, but it’s undeniably true….I’m irresponsibly mad about Obama. I mean that as in happy with him, sorry everyone. So far and it is far too early to really see, he appears to me to be the best President of my conscious lifetime, being born near the end of of WWII.”
That was, to me at least, a tongue in cheek parody of some of the attacks made against the President’s supporters both right and left. The body of the remainder of that comment and the one following clearly detail that in my opinion no current president could live up to my political wants. We are faced with a systemic problem characterized by an imbalance of power between the Corporatist interests and the People’s interests. For the time being this precludes anyone becoming president who can really effect the changes we need. As far as Carter and Clinton’s being better presidents, let’s look briefly at the record.
Carter made a great nomination acceptance speech, I was there in MSG as a guest of the NYS delegation and was enthralled and happy. He then proceeded to alienate a more left wing Democratic congress than exists today. His staff was unable to properly liaise with them. The Camp David Accords were his only and best accomplishment, but he did not stop Begin from increasing the size and number of West Bank settlements. He lacked the ability to express a clear vision of progress domestically to the American people and his “malaise” speech was classically stupid, even for his avid, though becoming lukewarm, supporters like myself.
Finally, his admittance of the Shah of Iran into the US led to the Iranian hostage crisis, which he bungled. A long held diplomatic necessity is the sanctity of Embassy property, which is considered the territory of the country represented. The attack upon the embassy thus was an act of war and should have been responded to in that fashion. We should have attacked strongly, in force, retrieved the prisoners and gotten out. Instead we mounted a small helicopter attack that never got off of the ground. I am hardly a militarist but some acts of aggression require response. This lost him the election to Reagan and began this round of full Corporatist dominance doubling taxes on the middle class and rollbacks of the “Great Society” programs. It also turned Democrats in congress towards the center and right wings out of fear for their offices.
Clinton, was a disaster from early on. His “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was a complete capitulation to the military brass, which sent the signal that this president can be pushed around, which in turn was read loud and clear by the Corporatists. He and Hillary completely blew the Health Care
Initiative by letting it be written by the industry, who then didn’t support it. His “Welfare Reform” was a total sham
that he instituted to get himself reelected and really eroded the safety net without the promised Welfare to Work capability. I know this well since I was an executive in NYC welfare at the time. His reappointment of Alan Greenspan to the Fed was total cowardice and accommodation to the Corporatist interests. His aid in pushing NAFTA and destroying Smoot/Hawley led to the outflow of American jobs. His deregulation of banking and industry has led us into the current sorry economic state of affairs. I’d actually rank Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and Dwight Eisenhower above him as 20th century presidents and they were no bargain.
President Obama is not where I am politically, but I do believe he has the potential (and I’ll tell you in a year if I’m wrong) to be the best president since FDR. This is of course limited by the oligarchic system now in place.
Incidentally, for those who might wonder why I always insist on using the “President Obama” or “The President” forms for this current administration it is far from obsequiousness. It is a recognition that many in their discussion of The President will try to diminish him by simply using his last name. Whatever you think of him, our first black President should receive the proper respect as befitting all of the white ones.
“I’m honestly at a loss as to how to change the system (short of armed rebellion, no-one would win that war). The best I’ve been able to come up with is start locally and work nationally (which I think is the mistake most “third parties” make, is they try the opposite).”
Gyges,
Even with your caveats I think this is the only way. Its real problem is the patience of the human being. Building from the ground up takes a lot of work. However, Howard Dean proved the methodology, now if we could only get it done without the corporatist dollars, we might have a viable, though arduous path.
Buddha,
Napoleon is a good case in point. Stature isn’t the problem, outlook is.
To All:
What is the value of a protest Presidential vote? What does it change. BTW Eldridge Cleaver ran for President in 1968 how far did that go? Homework: google Farrell Dobbs.
Mike Spindell is totally right. Obama is so much better than what we have had. Supporting the fringe candidates accomplishes nothing and sometimes does harm. Al Gore would not have invaded Iraq.
Mike S., BIL, I think one of Carters big problems and most ‘noble’ attributes is he actually is a good Christian. He takes the conciliatory and non-violent path whenever possible. In fact almost everything he has devoted himself to since leaving office speaks to those qualities and raises his esteem in my eyes.
I think he would have been happy to work quietly for years if necessary to retrieve the hostages and avoid violence. Unless he was prepared to field an army (which would have probably have gotten them all killed) the prospect of retrieving that many people by stealth would have taken a miracle. I thought then and now that fielding a small expeditionary force to retrieve them was insane. Also he knew that there were American diplomatic personnel being hidden in the British Embassy that might well be in danger (as well as the the British diplomats helping them) if he used force. The act that was out of character for the man and the situation was sending is the helicopters IMO.
I’m one of those people (along with a Congressional Committee as I recall) that believe a deal was made by Regan’s people and the CIA with Iran to hold up the hostage release until after the election and that Iran got arms from Israel (or probably more to the point, through Israel) for doing so.
I don’t think Carter is a coward, I think he has the kind of conviction good Christians, real followers of Christ are supposed to have. I do think he has the stomach for a fight and will probably be in one fairly soon:
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/06/16/carter-says-palestinians-being-treated-like-animals/
It seems to me he just deals with conflict in a manner that people are not used to seeing in a President and probably don’t want in a President.
Lottakatz,
I too believe that Reagan’s handlers made a deal. I don’t agree with you on whether or not an attack should have occurred. There are certain international incidents that require response, due to their nature and attacking one’s embassy is akin to attacking one’s territory. This is understood internationally. Carter should have given them a deadline to release the hostages and clearly laid out the military action if the deadline passed. The Iranian Revolutionaries were quite sophisticated and this was a move made to solidify their position internally. His lack of response did just that and made others believe that the US were “paper tigers” leading to further incursions down the line.
I think you understand that I am not a militarist at all. However, I believe that the Iranians would have caved with a deadline and description of drastic consequences. BTW to me the Iranian Revolution was initially a very good thing. The Shah was corrupt and his secret police the Savak were as brutal, or mo so then the KGB. By responding so weakly Carter gave credence to the Fundamentalist crazies within the revolution and helped turn a heretofore secular state into a fundamentalist bastion.
lotta,
Sure, I have no problem with that assessment. As far as his faith goes, yeah, he walks the walk. I was perhaps trying to avoid caching it in terms of his faith, instead relying upon the ethics of his actions.
Mike S., I’m not at all inclined to brand you as a militarist because of your posting or history of postings that I have read, I’m certain that your opinion was reached after a great deal of thought and analysis of the situation.
“By responding so weakly Carter gave credence to the Fundamentalist crazies within the revolution and helped turn a heretofore secular state into a fundamentalist bastion.” The ‘victory’ of the hostage taking for the new regime can’t be minimized and I have wondered more than once if the legitimacy the hardliners in Iran received because of it ended up bringing even more grief over the long term to the people.
That the government was seized by fanatics didn’t surprise me particularly because I just chalked it up to a need for an equal and opposing force to depose the Shah’s long rule. I thinks it’s physics as much as politics and I’m not being flippant with that statement. That may have been part of Carter’s analysis; ‘they need to publicly punish us for the grief we caused by supporting the Shah and as long as the hostages aren’t brutalized or killed we can just suck it up and work diplomatically to free the hostages. Once we get past that hurdle things can begin to normalize for them and us.’ Factoring some level of public attrition and forbearance into the equation would not have been out of character for him. It was a miscalculation if that was part of Carter’s rationale.
On the other hand, he was a military man so maybe he deemed having to take a threatened military action, and inviting a deadly countermeasure, was just too high of a risk.
I think that after some smallish initial period of time had past there wasn’t much use in threats of force or/and military actions. The attempt so late in the game was a mistake, the time had passed for any effective show of force or military action.
That embassy grounds are accorded the status of foreign soil is something I’m aware of. We are in more agreement on the mechanics of this aspect of his presidency than disagreement I think.
Actually, I think Carter is the ONE politician you can talk about and factor his living his faith into the discussion.
Regarding the rest of your first posting way back toward the top of the queue. I agree totally that Obama shows no difference between his Administration and Bush’s on most of the heart and soul issues that make this a (usta’ be) Constitutional Democracy. We are so screwed. If you look at the laws in place now it’s pretty obvious that the mechanism of the kind of gloves-off authoritarianism we associate with cold war Russia or China are in place and rounding up people by the trainload is only as far away as the President (through delegation) making a list and giving the order.
I didn’t vote for this from Bush or Obama. I see the demonstrations in Iran and am heartsick that such public outrage isn’t playing out in the streets here.
Lotta,
You said, “I see the demonstrations in Iran and am heartsick that such public outrage isn’t playing out in the streets here.”
I couldn’t agree more.
Lottakatz:
Lottakatz:
“Regan’s people and the CIA with Iran to hold up the hostage release until after the election and that Iran got arms from Israel (or probably more to the point, through Israel) for doing so”
I had a TA in college in about 1982-84 who was from Iran and told me his brother, an Iranian naval officer, was in Norfolk taking shipments of weapons. He even told me the sailors loading the crates were writing death to America on the sides of the crates. I thought he was full of sh… until the spectacle of Oliver North testifying before congress a few years later.
So I think you are probably right, except the arms did not go through Israel if my former TA is to be believed.
Lottakatz,
I’ve been thinking the same thing. Why aren’t Americans in the streets protesting? I don’t know. We are so screwed (as you said). The economic devestation I see around me is so horrible. The dollar store food shelves are bare. I see so many people paying for groceries with plastic and I don’t think it’s for the miles. The streets are rather empty of cars. A coworker of my husband’s pointed out how quiet the Post Office machines were lately. People here are very scared, even the health care industry is laying off. I don’t think we have that much to lose by going to the streets. As to foreign policy here’s what Jeremy Scahill has to say below. Of course, JT has done a fine job covering the civil liberties angle of “no change, you can believe in that!”.
“What I think the policies of the Obama administration over the past five months show is that we need independent political movements in this country that cannot and will not allow themselves to be co-opted by the Democratic Party–that don’t function as partisan movements for the promotion of one of the two corporate parties, but rather keep as their primary focus ending U.S. wars of aggression around the world, fighting for single-payer health care and fighting for the rights of working-class people and the poor in this nation.
I think we have a moment now where there are people coming forward and saying, “I feel like I’ve been tricked,” or “I’m really disappointed,” or “This isn’t what I voted for.” I think that the anger and frustration that many people are expressing now is increasing, and it can be funneled into movements that fight for true change.
I think we’re at a crossroads where if we seize the day, we really can look toward building independent political movements that are not so easily co-opted by the Democratic Party, as many, many antiwar and social justice groups were in the 2008 election campaign.” (from Jeremy Scahill at rebel reports)
Lotta,
My militarist plea was pure defensiveness on my part. I’ve never purported to a totally together person, I know myself too well for that, and I’m subject to my own neurosis at times. We mostly are in agreement on him and I do think that the military option’s viability receded with time. It was precisely those miscalculations you point out that disappointed me with his Presidency.
It is possible that after time President Obama will be fully proven to have misjudged the correct position on many issues and if that is the case I will be the first to decry it. To me the point for making those judgments of him is in the future. All leaders have to play Machiavelli and indeed Machiavelli was not the monstrous cynic he is made out to be. I am not happy with some of the seeming directions he has gone in and I’ve made that clear in my postings here and in my frequent calls to the White House Comment line, calling congress people, E mails to politicians and signing petitions. Yesterday, for instance I signed a Bernie Sanders petition re: health care and called the WH regarding the insiders who are helping him shape the economic controls that need to be put in place.
Lotta,
sorry for this but I’m not in proofreading mode this AM, to early to be up for me.
“I’ve never purported to *be* a totally together person.”
“We mostly are in agreement on him **him being Jimmy Carter** and I do think that the military option’s viability receded with time.
I’ll bet Martha Stewart wished she had the same “privledge” after she cashed out on her stocks after the heads up she got from her broker.
I know, she got convicted of lying. But I don’t think she would’ve even had the oppurtunity to lie if the feds didn’t come breathing down her neck over the insider “privledge” she recieved.
I just fail to realize how Durbin didn’t recieve insider privledge and how if that isn’t breaking the law, it’s at least highly unethical.
This is the kind of thing that leads to the apathy in the general population. These “privledged” classes do NOT even have the common decency to go through the motions. They do what they want without fear of even covering their tracks then dismiss the fact that they even have to explain themselves to the people that elect them.
And as for Paulson, he is the biggest theif in the history of mankind. That bailout was the biggest financial fraud perpetrated on the American taxpayer ever.
When it was all going down I think everybody could see the grave look of concern on Paulson’s face. YA, that was because he NEEDED money REAL quick to make sure his Wall Street cronies were going to pay themselves their usual bonus’.
Bernie Madoff’s got nothing on Paulson.
…