BS: Palin sips tea tonight

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 20 Feb 10 - 09:08 AM

Sarah finds herself in a tough spot in the Republican Senate primary in Arizona. Personally, she has to support McCain. I wouldn't be surprised if privately she would like to see Hayworth win. In either event, she'll be perfectly posed to support whoever wins in the general election against the Democrat.

            If the Republicans nominate her for president they'll lose most, if not all, of the independents. Surely they know that.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Ron Davies
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 10:25 PM

The "why" is the crucial question.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Ron Davies
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 10:24 PM

Ah, Carol, glad to see you again. Hope you're happier now. I speak German and a bit of French and Spanish--and learning Russian. But I bow to your mastery of gutter speech.   

I considered trying to teach you civilized discourse. But I decided that instructing you in the importance of logic--and thinking before you hit "send" --was perhaps a higher priority. We can start that as soon as you're ready.

I'd say "you're so cute when you're angry" but you might think that was not a proper feminist attitude. So I won't say it.

By the way, do you have any of your own thoughts--as opposed to links--on whether Sarah will be deserted en masse by the Tea Party--and why? Since, believe it or not, that is actually more germane to the topic than your choice of language.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 09:56 PM

(Note to self: stop feeding the troll.. )

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 09:54 PM

piss piss piss piss piss

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Ron Davies
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 09:52 PM

"...get new glasses".   I'm deeply hurt that the poster doesn't find my modest proposal a good suggestion. I felt sure she would see the wisdom and fairness of it. After all, we'd get answers to questions and she could still indulge her penchant for foul language. Everybody wins!

Congratulations to her for emerging from the gutter. I wonder if she will be able to stay out of it.



Returning to the topic:

Q-- if you don't think Sarah stands a good chance of winning the Republican primaries, based on her views on guns and abortion--and probably her unique appeal to women--non-liberal women, of course-- , who do you think would be stronger on those issues--particularly abortion?   The "Religious Right" has been very strong in the Iowa caucus recently as well as in several Southern primaries--and there is such a thing as "Big Mo". Consider on the Democratic side what a boost Iowa gave to Obama. Even a loss soon after in New Hampshire could not derail him.

People may now tell polls they cannot take Sarah seriously.   But if she starts winning caucuses and primaries, I rather doubt that attitude would hold up.

And it seems likely that the "Tea Party" will never be a party, in the sense of Perot's party, TR's Bull Moose etc.    There is no standard-bearer---unless they accept Palin.    And they are such a collection of malcontents nursing such a range of real or imagined grievances that they will never settle on a program.

The main question appears to be whether they actually want to stop what they see as the Obama administration's power grab--in which case they will eventually have to support a Republican.   Or whether they just want to make noise.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 06:31 PM

Rigs is right...

We used to have sanity-in-lending... It was called regulation... Then along came Ronnie Raygun and pointed his raygun at any lae that the corporations didn't like... Ya' see, the corporation and Ronnie were convinced that they could best police their own little ballgames... You know, kinda like puttin' the fox in charge of the hen house...

30 years later we now see that that wasn't a real good idea... Well, I say we see but it isn't we at all... All of the Repubs and alot of thr Dems still don't see because they get them bigass checks in the mail from the corporations so they just look the other way but it's not like they couldn't see if they wanted to see... They just like that money too much...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 06:25 PM

It probably ended up in the bonus check of some crook who worked for Goldman Sachs.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 06:13 PM

A lot of people lost a lot of money because of the economic downturn. They have not gotten their money back and they will not get their money back. A lot of them lost their jobs, and because of that, they lost their homes. A lot of small businesses lost a lot of business, and their owners and employees lost money because of that. The damages to those who are not among the economic elite have been massive, and those people will not ever get their money back.

My father and step mother lost more than $100,000 when they invested in my brother's business. It was a solid business with a solid track record until the economic downturn, and it went out of business because the products it offered were not essential enough for people in a cash strapped economy to be able to justify spending money on. There are many millions of people who have experienced similar losses. These people will not ever get their money back.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: mousethief
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 06:01 PM

People with money in funds that bought heavily into these funny paper things --- didn't come out so well.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 05:58 PM

The 'little people' that lost in most cases got their money back, if they had savings in the market. Just a matter of waiting. Most of those I know who had stocks in their savings portfolio have pretty well got balanced again. Some who had some cash in the matress made money when good stocks dipped low; it was bargain time.

Of course those that took out mortgages that were beyond their means and were foreclosed lost, but that was not in "bundled" instruments but in direct mortgages.

Business losses- when people stop spending, losses are inevitable and marginals will fail or at the least jobs are cut. To me, these are the most damaging losses of all.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 05:52 PM

We had it once, but then we were afflicted with Ronald Reagan.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 05:37 PM

Let's not lose sight of the fact that a lot of people lost a lot of money because of this kind of misbehavior, though. It may be true that the bailout money is being paid back with interest, but that doesn't help all of the "little people" who were not made whole by the bailouts. We need better regulation of the financial markets to ensure that this kind of thing doesn't happen again.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: mousethief
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 05:35 PM

So far, the bailout is the greatest accomplishment of the Obama administration.

Sad because of course it wasn't his doing at all. It might be the answer, years from now, to "What's the one thing President George W Bush did right?"

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 05:24 PM

Back to digression-
"Because of the way they were packaged, .... It was not possible for investors to know what they were getting?"
The investors were AIG, Bear Stearns, banks in Scotland, etc.
These were the big bundles, gathered up as the bigger firms bought and repackaged, but they started with local loans from banks such as "Bank of Lolita" Left Branch Savings & Loan to Joe Blow wand on up.
Of course, the individual mortgages were not identified except by name and number of instrument, but certainly the banks and investment firms at the top should have known that they were riding a bubble that was approaching the critical stage.

Old history now, the banks and investment firms are stabilized and making money again. The federal government is getting its money back with interest.
Let's hope that some controls are put in place since it is doubtful that firms such as Bear Stearns had more than a cupful of brains among their many thousands of staff.
So far, the bailout is the greatest accomplishment of the Obama administration.



(I apologise to Bank of Lolita, which is a real bank in the old gold mining country of California. I just like the name).

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 02:41 PM

Yeah, they sang -- "Swing low, sweet chariot, comin' for to takin' me home --"

                So I figured all them illegal aliens was leavin'!

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 01:45 PM

You been talking with them, Riginslinger?

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 01:34 PM

At least to the extent that you can believe in angels.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 01:32 PM

Angels have a stance on immigration?

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 10:25 AM

They must have basic intelligence and reasoning skills. Most of them are backing J.D. Hayworth, and he's on the side of the angels when it comes to immigration.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 08:22 AM

Yes, Sarah seems to be walking the plank, supporting McCain in the primary.

Assuming facts not in evidence- that her supporters have even basic intelligence & reasoning skills.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 01:09 AM

Looks like he did. Still trolling, though, I see.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 01:01 AM

I think the resident troll in this thread needs to read the thread again. Or get new glasses.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 12:57 AM

No 'vehicles' were fraudulently rated- the rates were those generally accepted although they had been riding the upward swing into oversold territory; this possibility was overlooked hence the sharp downward plunge.

I don't know whether the term "fraud" would be legally applicable, but because of the way they were being packaged, it was not possible for investors to know what they were getting. Many of the individual loans that had been repackaged into the "vehicles" were rated way below the rating of the "vehicle" in which they were bundled. There was some very creative bookkeeping that was allowed with those "vehicles".

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 19 Feb 10 - 12:52 AM

I don't really think Palen will be the selected candidate. She, Beck, Perry abd others are useful to firm up the Obama opposition, but there should be better candidates out there.
I look for a newcomer like the senator from Mass. but there is still plenty of time for others. He may be too liberal.

The Republicans have an excellent opportunity to get back in power in 2012; Sarah is good at stirring up a crowd, but I can't see her leading the party to victory.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 10:24 PM

Yes, Sarah seems to be walking the plank, supporting McCain in the primary. But the important issue here is whether the citizens of Arizona will, in fact, support J.D. Hayworth. If they will, one of the pro-big business advocates (those who want to bring American workers to their knees) will be gone, and the country can go about fixing the disasterous immigration policies that McCain has supported in the past.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: mousethief
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 10:23 PM

I hope the Tea Party fields its own candidates. They're just stupid enough they might.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 10:09 PM

I will certainly acknowledge that I may be wrong in my prediction that Sarah will be able to use Tea Party fervor to forward her own ambitions. Lord knows I hope I'm wrong and that bitterness engendered by bloody primaries between Tea Party activists and Republicans will in fact derail Sarah.   We'll see if her support of McCain--which seems to be the main objection of self-styled "Tea Party" firebrands--hurts her enough so said malcontents do not support her in primaries--which I would submit are still a ways off.

Or whether, on the other hand, as sober observers (including both Q and I), in contrast to some other rather flighty and emotional posters, believe, "Tea Party" positions will be taken up by Republicans-- ( Sarah was after all just recently rapturously received at the Tea Party gathering)--and the Tea Party, which is in fact just a catch-all term for people angry at government for a whole host of reasons, will be co-opted. As has happened to 3rd parties in the US so often in the past---as already pointed out in this thread.

It seems to me that actually the only question is whether the co-opting happens before or after the 2012 election.   And that of course makes all the difference in the world.   At this point--keeping in mind it is still early-- a split in his opposition looks like the only way President Obama would have a decent chance at a second term--especially the way the midterms are shaping up.

And as I have already noted, if Sarah were to run in 2012, the Tea Party would not have to compromise on much at all--assuming they have such a thing as a program.

We would of course want the Tea Party to either stay home or field their own candidates against Sarah, starting with the IA caucus. It's a bit premature to say they will do this. But, at any rate, here's to a vicious, hardfought primary in AZ this summer, with as many Tea Party stalwarts (whatever that is) supporting Hayworth as possible.





Interesting that the poster with whom I had a disagreement has opted to take a 2-prong approach--first stupid vulgar attacks, then providing the links requested.

Thanks to her so much for the links.   I must confess a grievous fault--when someone responds with pointless vulgarity to a perfectly polite request for information backing up a statement, I do tend to consign that person to the nether reaches of humanity--and not pay much attention to what they say or do later.

I must learn to realize that--since we were earlier discussing matters Swiftian--not every such poster is a hopeless yahoo incapable of at least finding, if not articulating , an answer. ( Most, perhaps, but not all.) And further, I would like to make a modest proposal--not nearly so drastic as that of Dean Swift--that perhaps the links could be given before the obscenity next time.

Not that I would want to deprive her of the satisfaction she obviously derives from foul language and absurd accusations. Whatever floats her boat.

But perhaps next time, first the answer, then the vulgarity.   Then everybody would be happy.   Something for everyone, comedy tonight.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: gnu
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 07:58 PM

Hope this wasn't already posted.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 05:36 PM

It was called a guillotine!

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: mousethief
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 04:21 PM

As more and more money moves into the upper crust, and stays there (because that's what money does), there will be less and less money to run the economy. Which will lead to a dearth of lending especially at lower levels (consumers, small businesses), and flat consumer spending, and stagnant unemployment. And money will continue to trickle up because money trickles up and has never in a million years trickled down. And as the uber-rich guffaw about the money they have, the middle-class-becoming-poor will get angrier and angrier. Whoops! What's that thing the French had back in 1789?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 01:52 PM

Along with the Tea Party adherents and the other groups rising to challenge the direction being taken by Obama and the democratic Party are the Tenthers, supporters of the 10th Amendment which reserves, according to them, mostly military matters to the federal government and little else.

They feel that health care reform is unconstitutional, as are other federal efforts of the type.

Rick Perry of Texas is running a Tenth Amendment Town Hall.
Glenn Beck seems to be a supporter of this group.

Watch for more of these loosely organized groups to rise, and add to the Republican base in the next elections.

Digressions-
George Soros seems to be expecting more market turmoil, as he has doubled his holdings in gold (BBC News). Should we also be reducing our exposure in a volatile market?
(Of course the market sheep will buy gold, guaranteeing Soros a profit even if nothing happens in the market).

The takeover of smaller companies continues. One noted here in Canada is the purchase of California-based Zenith Nat. Insurance, a worker compensation Insurance company, by Fairfax Financial Holdings of Canada.

Royal Bank of Scotland, coming back strongly after its bailout by the UK government, has built a $500 million headquarters in Connecticut and rumors are that it plans purchase of one or more small financial institutions.
Stories in the Financial Times and NY Times.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Feb 10 - 08:32 AM

Bobert,

"Oh sure, the upper 5% want you to know that they pay 50% of the income taxes... What they don't want you to know is they control 80% of the wealth... That leaves 30% of the wealth not taxed"


Let me see... I did not know that all wealth should be paid in taxes.

What about the next 25% or so, that pay the rest of the taxes?

And do you agree that those in the bottom 50% or so that pay NO taxes should get none of the wealth?

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 11:15 PM

"I don't argue with trolls".   Let me translate:   "I don't answer any question I don't feel like answering."

First let me say how it pains me that the poster still maintains her residence in the gutter. But, who knows, perhaps she's more comfortable there. And we want her above all to be comfortable.

I have to say I cannot begin to convey how shocked I am that the poster, despite being asked politely to do so (15 Feb 2010 11:59 AM), has somehow not found time to provide any evidence whatsoever that "tea-baggers" are rejecting Sarah (a topic which actually has far more relevance to the thread than many others now under discussion).

This is truly a cataclysmic event, since the poster in the past has always without fail been so calm, well-informed and rational.

Nor has she admitted she was incorrect in her assertion. This is also a first, since one of her most positive attributes has always been her easy willingness to acknowledge any misstatement.

I suppose we may have to grapple with the awful possibility that she may, in this instance, be mistaken.

Another idol shattered.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 10:39 PM

"Everybody knew the content of the mortgage bundles..."

                No they didn't!

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Bobert
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 08:36 PM

The problem, Q, is that this was repeating the smae things that occured in the 80s with similar results...

The other problem is that the growth in the economy for the last 8 years has been built upon debt... Now, I fully understand that if I borrow $100K that my new worth does not increase by $100K but that's kinda what we did in the 80s as well as the OOs... We created false growth by borrowing too much to support an industry (housing) that in the end did not leave us with any additional capacity to compete.... Had we borrowed for infastructure, or even for education, we would have at least come out of the end of the pipe better off.... As it turns out, we are worse off... That purdy much makes the 00s economy bogus in the big scheme of things... While others retooled, we partied...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 08:18 PM

Everybody knew the content of the mortgage bundles which were bought by the major institutions who buy from smaller investment firms so that the smaller firms would have the cash to loan out to still smaller fish so they could loan on mortgages to individual builders who....
The hope was that the upward swing would continue.
It didn't.

Some large investment and holding corporations, like Berkshire Hathaway (Warren Buffett, CEO), saw the red signal and largely bailed out of the mortgage paper.
Buffett has just used his bucks to take control of Burlington Northern Santa Fe (US, biggest railway).

Goldman Sachs, who also saw problems ahead, was varied in its investments, so was able to gobble up a competitor or two.

AIG is fast getting back on its feet.

The big investment banks, insurance, pension, etc. companies are our engines for growth; improvement will be slow, but steady unless EU problems and unnecessary wars derail the US again.

China has dumped some US and EU bonds, which doesn't help.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Bobert
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 08:10 PM

And then along came the "credit default swap" schemes where even more money was made (wrong word) on bundles of shakey paper...

Yeah, the system was designed for one purpose only: to make (wrong word) a few people alot of money and at the expense of everyone else... The sda thing is that most of the folks who made (wrong word) all that money were the first people to be made whole by the government after last year's melt down...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Amos
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 06:47 PM

Q:

How can you say no instruments were fraudulently rated?? Bundles comprising masses of sub-prime mortgage notes were rolled up together and sold as triple-A investment paper. How is that NOT fraudulent?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Bobert
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 06:25 PM

Yes, the US goverenemnt could will end up bankrupt if it continues to allow 30% of the wealth to not be taxed... Oh sure, the upper 5% want you to know that they pay 50% of the income taxes... What they don't want you to know is they control 80% of the wealth... That leaves 30% of the wealth not taxed...

Or, of course, as the Republicans have always wanted, we could just cut the heck outta Social Security and Medicare... Of course, that would leave our country lookin' more like a 3rd World country but, what the heck, right???

There aren't a whole lot more options here, folks...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 06:04 PM

"Bad government decisions and possible default on the part of Greece would damage the EU's common currency and credit."

          Bad government decisions, or crooked manipulators of markets and currencies?

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 05:44 PM

The Banking Act of 1933, aka Glass-Steagall bill, which set up the FDIC,is still in effect. Only part was repealed by the Financial Services Modernization Act aka Gramm....
The result was that commercial and investment banks, securities firms, and insurance firms could merge or consolidate.

No 'vehicles' were fraudulently rated- the rates were those generally accepted although they had been riding the upward swing into oversold territory; this possibility was overlooked hence the sharp downward plunge.

The major institutions have been stabilized, but it will be a while before confidence is regained and they will start to lend again, enabling businesses to grow and begin to employ again.

Controls are needed, but tearing apart the financial institutions by putting back the part of the Banking Act that was repealed by the FSM Act won't help.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 05:16 PM

Also, while predatory lending was definitely a part of the problem, an even bigger contributor to the problem was the creative ways they repackaged those loans and put top ratings on them in order to hide the risk from investors. This would not have happened while Glass-Steagal was still in effects, and is one of the reasons we need that kind of regulation of the financial institutions in this country.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 05:16 PM

The Greek government has continually borrowed beyond its means of repayment. The problem goes back years. The budget deficit now is 13% of GDP, according to websites.
The EU may be in for a shakeup, since Spain and Ireland also are close to broke. Bad government decisions and possible default on the part of Greece would damage the EU's common currency and credit.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 05:04 PM

If the banks in the US had been regulated the way the banks in Canada are, this whole global economic catastrophe of the last couple of years would never have happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Riginslinger
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 04:37 PM

"Steal? OK, prosecute!"


          Yes, let's. And now we can probably get a lot of Greeks to jump on the bandwagon.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Smedley
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 04:04 PM

A slight drift: I wonder how many of the teabagging community have seen a film which I am told was one of last year's big online porno successes. It is called 'Who's Nailin' Palin ?' and I report this purely in a spirit of spreading information.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Amos
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 03:17 PM

WHile I agree no-one should take on debt they cannot afford, let us not spare the bold turks who lied through their teeth to people in order to sell those mortgages to the unquialified in order to amp up their own bonuses; nor the institutions who flogged thosemortgages in bundles as nameless instruments and got them fraudulently rated as reliable instruments because their contents were invisible by reason of the massive bundling of mortgages. As a result, huge institutions invested in fraudulently rated vehicles and crashed heavily when their real value took over instead of their revealed fraudulent value. To this day their are people rolling in millions derived directly from these fraudulent lending practices. THe Glass-Steagall act prevented this kind of thing.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 03:10 PM

Steal? OK, prosecute!
Nonsense, the bubble burst and both banks and 'poor' people lost as values evaporated.

Too many people taking on mortgages that they couldn't ever hope to pay off, and banks too willing to lend, all riding the bubble.
US banks should have had the same lending restrictions as banks in Canada.
A slight dip in prices in Canada, but valuations already approaching pre-bubble valuations in Alberta; lower in some other provinces but within the normal expected swings.

Subject: RE: BS: Palin sips tea tonight
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 17 Feb 10 - 03:00 PM

It is easy to blame Clinton, if one does not agree with repeal of the section of the Glass-Steagall by the Financial Services Act, but a majority of Congressmen were in favor of the new Act.
A veto by President Clinton could not have overridden Congress.

Senate
90-8; Republicans 52-1, Democrats 38-7, in favor.

House
343-86; Republicans 205-16 Democrats 138-69, in favor.
House Democrats favored the new Act 2-1)

Figures from Wikipedia.