Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Obama And Romney Both Favor A One World Economic System That Kills American Jobs
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/obama-and-romney-both-favor-a-one-world-economic-system-that-kills-american-jobs
Either way this election turns out, American jobs are going to continue to get slaughtered by the millions. During this campaign, Mitt Romney and Barack Obama have both attempted to portray each other as the "outsourcer in chief". Unfortunately, they are both right. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have both participated in the outsourcing of American jobs, and both are openly admitting to the American people that they favor the emerging one world economic system which will continue to destroy millions of American jobs. In fact, they argue with each other about which of them will be more aggressive in pursuing more "free trade" agreements over the next four years. Unfortunately, the "free trade" agreements that the U.S. government enters into are never "fair trade" agreements. As a result, over the past decade we have lost tens of thousands of businesses, millions of jobs and trillions of dollars of national wealth. This year alone, we will buy about half a trillion dollars more stuff from the rest of the world than they will buy from us. This trade deficit will be about 7 times larger than the trade deficit of any other nation on earth. Our economy will continue to bleed jobs at a horrifying pace, but Obama and Romney insist that the answer to our problems is even more "free trade". What makes all of this even more dreadful is that most Americans continue to fall for this nonsense.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that merging our labor pool with the labor pools of nations where it is legal to pay slave labor wages was going to kill American jobs and drive down wages for the jobs that remain in the United States.
Why should some giant predator corporation pay you 15 dollars an hour plus benefits when they can pay a worker on the other side of the planet a dollar an hour with no benefits to do the same job?
During the second presidential debate, when Obama was asked why high tech products such as the iPhone could not be made here in the United States, Obama openly admitted that there are some jobs that aren't ever going to come back.
But why does that have to be so?
Why can't those jobs come back to America?
It seems to me that if you cracked down on nations that are cheating such as China, imposed a system of common sense tariffs and cut the corporate tax rate to a level more consistent with the rest of the world that you could get a lot of those jobs flooding back in by the end of next year.
But Obama is so blinded by his faith in the emerging one world economy that such measures are unimaginable to him.
In recent years, the Obama administration has entered into new "free trade" agreements with Panama, South Korea and Colombia. In addition, the Obama administration is making the Trans-Pacific Partnership ("the NAFTA of the Pacific") a very high priority.
Considering what a nightmare the first NAFTA was, do we really need another one?
The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a treaty that would essentially ban all "Buy American" laws. It is being touted as one of the most comprehensive "free trade" agreements in history, and it would open up the door for millions more good jobs to be shipped out of the country.
The workers of America simply cannot afford another four years of Barack Obama.
In fact, the Obama administration has actually spent billions of taxpayer dollars to create jobs in other countries. The following is from a pro-Republican website...
Over his four years in office, Obama promised that he would focus on creating "jobs that pay well and can't be outsourced." However, as he racked up trillions in new debt, billions of dollars did go to create jobs that were outsourced or spent overseas. Whether it is electric cars made in Finland or solar panels in Mexico, taxpayers would be astonished to learn that their hard earned money went abroad for jobs that weren't created in the United States.
You can get all the details right here. Needless to say, the Obama administration has been an absolute disaster on these issues.
So would Romney be an improvement when it comes to trade?
That is very doubtful.
The truth is that Mitt Romney was involved in outsourcing jobs while he was at Bain Capital. The following is from a recent article posted on Forbes.com...
David Corn of Mother Jones reports that “according to government documents . . . Romney, when he was in charge of Bain [Capital], invested heavily in a Chinese manufacturing company that depended on US outsourcing for its profits—and that explicitly stated that such outsourcing was crucial to its success.”
This didn’t happen after 1999, when Mitt Romney says he left Bain Capital to run the Salt Lake City Olympics (Corn was one of the first reporters to raise questions, now gaining wide exposure, of whether Romney really left Bain then), but the year before. On April 17, 1998, Brookside Capital Partners Fund, a Bain Capital affiliate of which Romney was the sole shareholder, sole director, president, and chief executive, invested an estimated $14.2 million in Global-Tech, an appliance maker in Dongguan, China. Global-Tech made products for American companies like Sunbeam, Hamilton Beach, Mr. Coffee, and Proctor-Silex. In September 1998 Global-Tech’s CEO announced that the company was postponing a factory expansion because Sunbeam was slowing its rate of outsourcing, and said, “Although it appears that customers such as Sunbeam are not outsourcing their manufacturing as quickly as we had anticipated, we still believe that the long-term trend toward outsourcing will continue.”
Since Romney left, Bain Capital has become even more aggressive with outsourcing jobs. In fact, Bain Capital has been forcing American workers to train their Chinese replacements even in the midst of this campaign. Aren't they concerned that they are making their former boss look bad? The following is from an article written by an American worker that is having his job shipped to China by Bain Capital...
On Monday, November 5th Bain Capital is outsourcing my job to China. On Tuesday, November 6th I'm casting my vote against Mitt Romney.
Yes, I blame Mitt Romney for the loss of my job. Here's why.
I've worked at the same factory in Freeport, Ill. for thirty-three years, making sensors and controls for the auto industry. It's tough work, but it pays a living wage with health benefits that folks can count on, and it fuels our town's economy and tax base.
That's been changing since Bain Capital came to town. Two years ago, our factory was sold to Sensata Technologies, a company created by Bain Capital, and they told us that by December 2012, all 170 of our jobs would be shipped to China. They even made us train our Chinese replacements.
Layoff notices have been sent out, and some folks have already been laid off. Where there was once lots of people and energy and life, now there's only the discoloration on the floor where the machinery used to be. It's depressing. They're not just dismantling the equipment and the plant; they're dismantling our community.
All of this outsourcing is killing America.
Back in 1950, the population of this country was less than half of what it is now, and yet there were more Americans working in manufacturing back in 1950 than there are today.
The decline in manufacturing jobs in the United States has been really dramatic since the year 2000.
In 2000, there were more than 17 million Americans working in manufacturing, but now there are less than 12 million...
I think that it is interesting to note that China joined the WTO in 2001. Since that time we have been losing jobs to them at an astounding pace. According to a new report by the Economic Policy Institute, U.S. trade with China "cost more than 2.7 million jobs between 2001 and 2011".
The Chinese slap huge tariffs on many of our goods, they manipulate currency rates to make sure that U.S. companies cannot compete, they steal our intellectual property and they deeply subsidize their own businesses.
And yet Obama and Romney insist that this is "free trade".
What a joke.
And our tax structure is absolutely killing us as well. The following is from a recent article by Ernest F. Hollings...
A U.S. manufacturer exporting to China pays the 35% Corporate Tax and a 17% VAT when its exports reach Shanghai. A China manufacturer exports tax free to the U.S.
Are you starting to get the picture?
Our trade policy is a complete and total disaster, and yet Obama and Romney continue to insist that we just need to become even more integrated with the emerging one world economic system.
Well, in a previous article I listed 22 statistics which prove that the current path that we are on has been absolutely disastrous for American workers...
#1 One professor has estimated that cutting the U.S. trade deficit in half would create 5 million more jobs in the United States.
#2 The United States has a trade imbalance that is more than 7 times larger than any other nation on earth has.
#3 Overall, the United States has run a trade deficit of more than 8 trillion dollars with the rest of the globe since 1975. That 8 trillion dollars could have gone to support U.S. businesses and pay the wages of U.S. workers. Federal, state and local taxes would have been paid on that 8 trillion dollars if it had stayed in the United States.
#4 When NAFTA was passed in 1993, the United States had a trade surplus with Mexico of 1.6 billion dollars. In 2010, we had a trade deficit with Mexico of 61.6 billion dollars.
#5 In 2001, American consumers spent 102 billion dollars on products made in China. In 2011, American consumers spent 399 billion dollars on products made in China.
#6 The Chinese undervalue their currency by about 40 percent in order to gain a critical advantage over foreign competitors. This means that many Chinese companies are able to absolutely thrive while their competition in the United States goes out of business. The following is from a recent Fox News article....
To keep Chinese products artificially inexpensive on US store shelves, Beijing undervalues the yuan by 40 percent. It pirates US technology, subsidizes exports and imposes high tariffs on imports.
#7 According to the New York Times, a Jeep Grand Cherokee that costs $27,490 in the United States costs about $85,000 in China thanks to all the tariffs.
#8 The U.S. trade deficit with China during 2011 was 295.4 billion dollars. That was the largest trade deficit that one nation has had with another nation in the history of the world.
#9 Back in 1985, our trade deficit with China was only about 6 million dollars (million with an "m") for the entire year.
#10 U.S. consumers spend about 4 dollars on goods and services from China for every one dollar that Chinese consumers spend on goods and services from the United States.
#11 The United States has actually lost an average of about 50,000 manufacturing jobs a month since China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001.
#12 According to the Economic Policy Institute, America is losing about half a million jobs to China every single year.
#13 The United States has lost more than 56,000 manufacturing facilities since 2001.
#14 During 2010 alone, an average of 23 manufacturing facilities closed their doors in America every single day.
#15 Since the auto industry bailout, approximately 70 percent of all GM vehicles have been built outside the United States.
#16 As I have written about previously, 95 percent of the jobs lost during the last recession were middle class jobs.
#17 According to Professor Alan Blinder of Princeton University, 40 million more U.S. jobs could be sent offshore over the next two decades if current trends continue.
#18 The percentage of working age Americans that are employed right now is actually smaller than it was at the end of the last recession.
#19 The average duration of unemployment in the United States is nearly three times as long as it was back in the year 2000.
#20 Due in part to the globalization of the labor pool, only about 24 percent of all jobs in the United States are "good jobs" at this point.
#21 Without enough good jobs, more Americans than ever before are falling into poverty. Today, more than 100 million Americans are on welfare.
#22 In recent years the U.S. economy has embraced "free trade" and the emerging one world economy like never before. Instead of increasing the number of jobs in our economy, it has resulted in the worst stretch of job creation in the United States in modern history....
If any single number captures the state of the American economy over the last decade, it is zero. That was the net gain in jobs between 1999 and 2009—nada, nil, zip. By painful contrast, from the 1940s through the 1990s, recessions came and went, but no decade ended without at least a 20 percent increase in the number of jobs.
At this point, more than 41 percent of all working age Americans do not have a job, and the vast majority of the new jobs that are being created are low paying jobs.
Median household income has fallen for four years in a row. In fact, median household income is down by more than $4000 since Barack Obama entered the White House.
One recent survey found that about 40 percent of all Americans have $500 or less in savings. We are a country that is full of broke people.
What we need are more good jobs. But Obama and Romney are both determined to keep shipping good jobs out of the country.
The path that we are on will only lead to disaster. Please wake up America.
Massive Foreclosures after Election-Fabian Calvo
Democrats threaten payroll tax cut consensus
s
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/f88c5f78-1b8a-11e2-90cb-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2A2EutGho
By James Politi in Washington
Some Democrats in Congress are seeking to include an extension of the $120bn payroll tax cut in negotiations over the looming “fiscal cliff”, shaking what had appeared to be a bipartisan consensus to allow the measure to expire as planned at the end of the year.
The move could complicate the budget talks due to begin after the November presidential election and alarm rating agencies – since the sunset of the payroll tax measure is the only big provision that both parties seem comfortable directing towards deficit reduction.
But it could ease worries among some economists of the hit to growth and consumption that would occur if the payroll tax cut lapsed, reducing disposable income for many middle-class working families across the country.
The payroll tax cut – reducing the taxes on wages used to fund the social security pension scheme from 6.2 per cent to 4.2 per cent – was introduced in December 2010 to be in place for just one year.
But it was extended for an additional year after a series of fraught negotiations between Congress and the White House.
In February, Tim Geithner, Treasury secretary, told the Senate budget committee it would be the last time. “This has to be a temporary tax cut,” Mr Geithner said. “I don’t see any reason to consider supporting its extension.”
Meanwhile, Republicans on Capitol Hill who were never enamoured with the payroll tax cut – Paul Ryan, the vice-presidential nominee, even called it “sugar-high economics” in June 2011 – have been satisfied that it should revert to normal levels.
The payroll tax cut is one of the biggest elements of the so-called “fiscal cliff” – which could remove $600bn from the US economy in 2013 unless Congress acts to avert it.
The others are the expiration of Bush-era tax rates on income, capital gains and dividends, as well as $100bn in automatic spending cuts, including a big hit to the Pentagon budget. As preparations for the “fiscal cliff” negotiations move into high gear, all sides know they have to strike a balance between limiting the economic damage and offering some downpayment towards deficit reduction.
But Democrats on Capitol Hill are showing signs of balking at the notion that the payroll tax cut should be sacrificed to help solve the US’s debt problems. Their top objective still remains to force Republicans to accept the expiration of Bush income tax cuts for the rich, while extending middle-class income tax cuts.
“[The payroll tax cut] could potentially be in the mix, just not at the top of the priority list,” said one Democratic aide in the Senate. “There’s not necessarily a big push at this time to extend it?.?.?.?in the Senate.”
Chris Van Hollen, the top Democrat on the budget committee in the House of Representatives, told C-SPAN television at the weekend: “I don’t think anyone thinks we should permanently extend the payroll tax cut but, given the situation we’re in, I don’t think that should be taken off the table.”
Republicans scoffed at the idea. A spokeswoman for Orrin Hatch, the top Republican on the Senate finance committee, said he “believes the payroll tax, which was intended to be temporary, should expire at the end of the year. I’d also point out that there has been strong, bipartisan support to let that tax provision expire.”
But it was still unclear whether this would become a big bone of contention in November and December. Democrats are being tugged in both directions. Larry Summers, the former Treasury secretary, and other Democratic economists have been saying that this was the wrong time to raise payroll taxes. But the AARP, an influential senior group, is lobbying in favour of expiry, on the grounds that it would set a bad precedent for the funding of social security.
However, JPMorgan downgraded its forecast for US economic growth early next year, partly as a result of its expectation that the payroll tax cut would run out. Michael Feroli, a senior economist at the Wall Street bank, said growth would be 1 per cent in the first quarter, down from 1.5 per cent, and 1.5 per cent in the second quarter, down from 2.25 per cent.
Meet The Billionaires Behind The Best Presidents Money Can Buy
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-21/meet-billionaires-behind-best-presidents-money-can-buy
The last time we checked on the (funding) status of America's real presidential race - the one where America's uber-wealthy try to outspend each other in hopes of purchasing the best president money can buy - the totals were substantially lower. With November 6 rapidly approaching, however, the scramble to lock in those record political lobbying IRRs is in its final lap. And thanks to the unlimited nature of PAC spending, look for the spending to really go into overdrive in the next 2 weeks as the spending frenzy on the world's greatest tragicomedy hits previously unseen heights.
Total raised as of Sept. 30: $110.5 million - supports Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney
Bob Perry - Houston builder who was a major donor to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group that helped undermine 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry by attacking his Vietnam War record. Total donations: $10 million
Sheldon Adelson - billionaire Las Vegas casino magnate who built the Venetian hotel and casino. Donation: $5 million
Miriam Adelson - Sheldon's wife. Donation: $5 million
Bill Koch - brother of conservative financiers David and Charles Koch. He runs Oxbow Carbon, a Florida-based firm that is also a donor and shares its address with another contributor, Huron Carbon. Total donations, including through firms: $4 million
Steven Lund - runs Nu Skin, a Utah skin care and cosmetics company whose former executives have been linked to two other firms that share an address in Provo, Utah, and donated to the Super PAC: F8 LLC and Eli Publishing. Lund's wife Kalleen is also a donor. Total donations from the Lunds and firms: $3 million
Julian Robertson - hedge fund industry legend at Tiger Management. Total donations: $1.3 million
Crow Holdings - Dallas-based investment firm managing the wealth of the family of the late Dallas real estate mogul Trammell Crow, whose sons Harlan and Trammell S. Crow are also donors. Total Crow Holdings and Crow donations: $1.3 million
Harold Simmons - billionaire Dallas banker and CEO of Contran Corp who has contributed to PACs supporting Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich. Donations: $1.3 million
Frank VanderSloot - Idaho businessman who runs the nutritional and cosmetics company Melaleuca. The firm and its subsidiaries have also donated. Total donations: $1.1 million
The Villages of Lake Sumter - a community in Florida run by billionaire Gary Morse, who is also a donor alongside his wife Renee and their several children. Along with the Morse family, thirteen companies controlled wholly or partially by Morse that share an address in The Villages have also contributed. Total donations of all: $1.7 million.
Kenneth Griffin - Chicago-based hedge fund manager and CEO of Citadel LLC. Total donations: $1.1 million
Bob Parsons - billionaire founder of web hosting giant Go Daddy. Donation: $1 million
Jim Davis - chairman of New Balance Athletic Shoes Inc. Donations: $1 million
Stanley Herzog - CEO of Missouri-based Herzon Contracting Corp. Donation: $1 million
Bruce Kovner - billonaire hedge fund manager at Caxton Alternative Management. Donation: $1 million
Rocco Ortenzio - Pennsylvania healthcare executive and founder of Select Medical Corp. Total donations: $1 million
John Childs - founder of private equity firm J.W. Childs Associates LP in Florida. Donation: $1 million
Edward Conard - a New York investor and former executive at Bain Capital, a private equity firm co-founded by Romney. Donation: $1 million
John Kleinheinz - Texas hedge fund manager for Kleinheinz Capital Partners Inc. Donation: $1 million
J.W. Marriott Jr. - chairman and CEO of Marriott International, brother of Richard. Total donations: $1 million
Richard Marriott - chairman of Host Marriott International. Total donations: $1 million
Robert McNair - owner of the Houston Texans football team. Donation: $1 million.
Robert Mercer - New York hedge fund manager at Renaissance Technologies. Donation: $1 million
John Paulson - a prominent New York hedge fund manager at Paulson and Co. Donation: $1 million
Rooney Holdings Inc - private investment firm formed in 1980s to acquire the Manhattan Construction Co. and has since expanded into many areas. Total donations: $1 million
Paul Singer - hedge fund manager who helped fund efforts to legalize gay marriage in New York. Donation: $1 million
Paul and Sandra Edgerly - Paul Edgerly of Brookline, Massachusetts, is an executive at Bain. The Edgerlys each have given $500,000. Total donations: $1 million
Steven Webster - private equity executive at Avista Capital in Houston. Total donations: $1 million
Robert Brockman - executive at Reynolds and Reynolds, a Dayton, Ohio-based car dealership support company that shares a P.O. Box with CRC Information Systems Inc, Fairbanks Properties LLC and Waterbury Properties LLC, which split the donation three ways. Total donations: $1 million
Miguel Fernandez - chairman of MBF Healthcare Partners, a private equity firm. MBF Family Investments also donated to the Super PAC. Total donations: $1 million
Renco Group Inc. - owned by New York billionaire Ira Rennert, another frequent contributor to Republicans this year. Donation: $1 million
OdysseyRe Holdings Corp - reinsurance underwriting company in Stamford, Connecticut that is a U.S. subsidiary of Toronto-based Fairfax Financial. Donation: $1 million
PRIORITIES USA ACTION
Total raised as of Sept. 30: $50.1 million - supports Democratic President Barack Obama
James Simons - billionaire hedge fund manager, founder of Renaissance Technologies Corp. Donation: $3.5 million
Fred Eychaner - founder of Newsweb Corp. Donation: $3.5 million
Jeff Katzenberg - chief executive of DreamWorks Animation. Donation: $3 million
Steve Mostyn - Houston attorney. Donation: $2 million
Irwin Mark Jacobs - former CEO of Qualcomm Inc. Donation: $2 million
Jon Stryker - billionaire activist and heir to the medical supply company fortune of his grandfather. Donation: $2 million
Anne Cox Chambers - billionaire daughter of James M. Cox, founder of Cox Enterprises. Total donations: $1.5 million
National Air Traffic Controllers Association - union representing more than 16,000 workers. Donation: $1.3 million
S. Daniel Abraham - billionaire creator of Slim-Fast brand, chairman of S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace. Donation: $1.2 million
Barbara Stiefel - retiree in Coral Gables, Florida. Donation: $1.1 million
United Auto Workers - Donations through various funds: $1.1 million
Kareem Ahmed - chief executive at Landmark Medical Management in California. Donation: $1 million
David Boies, Jr - New York lawyer. Donation: $1 million
Morgan Freeman - Hollywood actor. Donation: $1 million
Amy Goldman - writer and heiress to the New York real estate fortune of Sol Goldman. Donation: $1 million
Franklin Haney - owner and CEO of FLH Company, a Washington-based real estate company. Donation: $1 million
Bill Maher - stand-up comedian. Donation: $1 million
Mel Heifetz - real estate developer and gay activist. Donation: $1 million
Michael Snow - Minnesota lawyer. Donation: $1 million.
Steven Spielberg - film director. Donation: $1 million.
Ann Wyckoff - Seattle philanthropist. $1 million.
Service Employees International Union Committee on Political Education - union representing more than 2 million workers. Donation: $1 million.
United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry - union representing some 340,000 workers. Total donations: $1 million
AMERICAN CROSSROADS
Total raised as of Sept. 30: $68 million - supports Republican candidates for federal offices
Harold Simmons - Total donations together with Contran Corp: $15.5 million
Bob Perry - Total donations: $6.5 million
Robert Rowling - an Irving, Texas, businessman and a conservative and active Republican donor. His company, TRT Holdings Inc, which runs Omni Hotel and Gold's Gym chains, is also a donor. Total donations: $4 million
Joe Craft - billionaire coal executive from Tulsa, Oklahoma, and CEO of Alliance Holdings, which is also a donor. Total donations: $2.1 million
Jerry Perenchio Living Trust - a trust of billionaire television tycoon A. Jerrold Perenchio, who is a former chairman of Spanish-language broadcaster Univision. Donation: $2 million
Crow Holdings - Dallas-based real estate investment firm. Total donations: $1.5 million
Weaver Holdings and Weaver Popcorn - Indiana-based company specializing in popcorn. Total contributions: $1.9 million
Stephens Inc - a Little Rock, Arkansas, broker dealer. Total donations: $1.3 million
Armstrong Group - telecommunications conglomerate in Pennsylvania. Donation: $1.3 million
JWC III Revocable Trust - Donatoin: $1.3 million
Robert Brockman - executive at Ohio-based Reynolds and Reynolds. Similarly to Restore Our Future, three firms sharing a P.O. Box - CRC Information Systems Inc, Fairbanks Properties LLC and Waterbury Properties LLC - split the donation three ways. Total donations: $1 million
Whiteco Industries - Indiana-based company involved in advertising, construction, entertainment and hotels. Donation: $1 million
The Mercury Trust - entity linked to California private equity firm of Saul Fox. Donation: $1 million
Clayton Williams Energy Inc - Midland, Texas-based drilling company. Donation: $1 million
Jay Bergman - of PETCO Petroleum Corporation. Donation: $1 million
Kenneth Griffin - Citadel Investment Group chief executive. Total donations: $1 million
Wayne Hughes - Founder of Public Storage. Total donations: $1 million
John Childs - Chairman and CEO of Boston-based JW Childs Associates. Total donations: $1 million
Philip Geier - New York executive. Total donations: $1 million
Irving Moskowitz - a Florida bingo magnate who runs a charity in California and is known for his support of Jewish settlers in East Jerusalem. Donation: $1 million
Robert Mercer - co-CEO of hedge fund Renaissance Technologies. Donation: $1 million
BARACK OBAMA (Democrat)
Total raised, including transfers: $609.4 million
Raised in September, including transfers: $136.2 million
Total transferred from the funds jointly used by the campaign and the Democratic Party: $176.6 million
Transferred in September: $39.8 million
Total spent: $469.9 million
Spent in September: $111.4 million
Cash on hand: $99.3 million
Debt: $2.6 million
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
Total raised: $253.6 million
Raised in September: $20.3 million
Total transferred in: $108.4 million
Transferred in September: $4.0 million
Total spent: $261.6 million
Spent in September: $22.8 million
Cash on hand: $4.6 million
Debt: $20.5 million
OBAMA VICTORY FUND 2012 (The main joint Obama/DNC fund)
Total raised: $371.1 million
Raised in September: $80.0 million
Cash on hand: $45.2 million
MITT ROMNEY (Republican)
Total raised, including transfers: $337.2 million
Raised in September, including transfers: $76.2 million
Total transferred from the funds jointly used by the party and the Romney campaign: $236.4 million
Transferred in September: $34.2 million
Total spent: $298.2 million
Spent in September: $54.7 million
Cash on hand: $63.1 million
Debt: $5.0 million
REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE
Total raised: $331.2 million
Raised in September: $48.4 million
Total transferred in: $127.5 million
Transferred in September: $28.6 million
Total spent: $249.4 million
Spent in September: $42.4 million
Cash on hand: $82.6 million
Debt: $9.9 million
ROMNEY VICTORY INC (Joint Romney/RNC fund - third quarter, July through Sept.)
Total raised: $375.6 million
Raised in third quarter: $235.2 million
Cash on hand: $37.4 million
Appendix: SUPER PACS:
RESTORE OUR FUTURE, a Super PAC supporting Romney
Total raised: $110.5 million
Raised in September: $14.8 million
Total spent: $94.9 million
Spent in September: $4.6 million
Cash on hand: $16.6 million
PRIORITIES USA, a Super PAC supporting Obama
Total raised: $50.1 million
Raised in September: $15.3 million
Total spent: $43.6 million
Spent in September: $12.8 million
Cash on hand: $7.3 million
AMERICAN CROSSROADS, a Super PAC supporting Republicans
Total raised: $68.0 million
Raised in September: $11.4 million
Total spent: $53.4 million
Spent in September: $27.9 million
Cash on hand: $15.8 million
Source: Reuters
Plutocracy Rising: Moyers, Freeland, and Taibbi
http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2012/10/plutocracy-rising-moyers-freeland-and.html
Video at the link.
I was struck by the comparison that Taibbi makes between post-Soviet Russia and the emerging US plutocracy. I have drawn the same conclusion some years ago, that post-empire America may face the same outcome. The merging of private and state power is well underway. And everyone lost the Cold War, except a predatory few.
Is that too big of a statement? A presidential candidate, Jill Stein of the Green Party, is denied access to the 'debate.' She goes to the debate to protest this peacefully, is arrested, and is then gratuitously handcuffed to a chair for eight hours, just to show her how things are. A Wall Street fund manager refuses to pay a cabdriver his legitimate fare, stabs him, and flees the scene. All charges are dropped by the prosecutor despite the protests of the cabbie. A powerful friend of the President breaks every taboo against stealing millions in customer money, and no one knows anything, and no one is charged.
As they used to say in show biz, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Bill Moyers concluding remarks:
"Here’s a significant revelation of which you may not be aware. The plutocrats know it and love it, and the rest of us should be forewarned. When the Supreme Court made its infamous Citizens United decision, liberating plutocrats to buy our elections fair and square, the justices may have effectively overturned rules that kept bosses from ordering employees to do political work on company time. Election law expert Trevor Potter told us that now “corporations argue that it is a constitutionally protected use of corporate ‘resources’ to order employees to do political work or attend campaign events—even if the employee opposes the candidate, or is threatened with being fired for failure to do what the corporation asks.”
Reporter Mike Elk at In These Times magazine came across a recording of Governor Mitt Romney on a conference call in June with some business executives. The Governor told them there is quote, “nothing illegal about you talking to your employees about what you believe is best for the business, because I think that will figure into their election decision, their voting decision and of course doing that with your family and your kids as well.”
And here’s Governor Romney two months later, campaigning at an Ohio coal mine:
"This is a time for truth. I listened to an ad on the way here. I’ll tell you, you got a great boss. He runs a great operation here. And he—Bob? Where are you Bob? There he is."
Look at all those miners around him, steadfastly standing in support, right? They work for a company called Murray Energy and attendance at the rally, without pay, was mandatory. Murray Energy is notorious for violating safety regulations, sometimes resulting in injuries and deaths. And the company has paid millions in fines. The CEO, Bob Murray, a well-known climate change denier and cutthroat businessman, insists that his employees contribute to his favorite anti-regulatory candidates, or else. In one letter uncovered by “The New Republic” magazine, Murray wrote quote, “We have been insulted by every salaried employee who does not support our efforts.” So much for voting rights and the secret ballot at Murray Energy.
Mike Elk discovered that the Koch Brothers, David and Charles – who have pledged to spend $60 million defeating President Obama – have sent a “voter information packet” to the employees of Georgia Pacific, one of their subsidiaries. It includes a list of recommended candidates, pro-Romney and anti-Obama editorials written by the Koch’s and a cover letter from the company president. If we elect the wrong people, Dave Robertson writes, “Many of our more than 50,000 US employees and contractors may suffer the consequences, including higher gasoline prices, runaway inflation, and other ills.” Other ills? Like losing your job?
This is snowballing. Timeshare king David Siegel of Westgate Resorts reportedly has threatened to fire employees if Barack Obama is re-elected and Arthur Allen, who runs ASG Software Solutions, e-mailed his employees, “If we fail as a nation to make the right choice on November 6th, and we lose our independence as a company, I don’t want to hear any complaints regarding the fallout that will most likely come.”
Back in the first Gilded Age, in the 19th century, bosses and company towns lined up their workers and marched them to vote as a block. As we said at the beginning of this broadcast, the Gilded Age is back with a vengeance. Welcome to the plutocracy. The remains of the ol’ USA.
That’s it for this week. On our website, BillMoyers.com, at your request, we’re starting a book club. Our first is Chrystia Freeland’s “Plutocrats.” Read the book, ask questions, share your thoughts. Then let’s have a lively conversation.
That’s at BillMoyers.com. I’ll see you there and I’ll see you here, next time."
Maybe the Banks will threaten to crash the stock market if their indentured servants, the American people, do not vote the right way. It worked when the noble Congressional bureaucrats were cowed into submission when the Banks demanded their 'no strings' bailouts and the people were adamantly against it.
Why the Occupy Movement Frightens the Corporate Elite
The Vietnam era was a most interesting and trying time in our history. The propaganda of the time was the "domino theory". If Vietnam fell to the communists the rest of se Asia would fall like dominoes. Funny how that didn't happen. At least not there it didn't happen. Change focus to the middle east, early 70's. We were still in the "cold war" with Russia. The ruling shah of Iran convinced then sec of state Henry Kissinger that he should be allowed to nationalize Iranian oil wells so he could get more money from selling the oil himself rather than the royalties paid from the oil companies. The much needed money was to beef up the Iranian military to counter the possible Russian threat on it's northern border. The oil companies were always dealing with the local rulers clamoring for more money but would deal with the problem by just turning off the wells and pump others as needed until quiet was again maintained. Against the protests of the oil companies Kissinger sold it to Nixon. Iran nationalized the oil and beefed up their military much to the glee of our military industrial complex. Then one by one the rest of the middle eastern countries nationalized their oil wells as the dominoes fell. OPEC came into being, the price of oil exploded, the sheiks got richer and richer, extremists found funding- take it from there.
Clarification noted-
I don't think either party has done good for our country. Both parties are too beholden to special interests and they put those interests ahead of the good for the country. Each party has their own special interests they cater to first. The needs and general welfare of the country and citizens place a far behind second. Just consider the recent frauds by the banking industry. Neither O's justice department did anything, nor did any republicans come out demanding justice for the people. Dodd-Frank is a joke filled with loopholes you can drive a truck thru. Regulators won't do anything to harm their chance of employment when their term is up, yet neither party is demanding enforcement of laws already on the books. A big help might be total public financing of elections up to a set amount by law, with felony prosecution of anyone taking money from any other source. Never happen, though.
........al
who has been best for the masses in the last 40 years?
Ayock-
I'm sure no offense was meant and none taken on my part. Many put in years of their lives so that we can today have these discussions without fear of gov't control and intervention and censorship. We all have a right to our opinions and beliefs. I will definately vote in November as if I don't I have no right to complain. Years ago when our elected representatives went against the will of the people and voted for TARP, I took a vow to never vote for anyone that voted for it. Romney is a 1%er and is clueless about the real America. I think the only time he ever got his hands dirty was spilling ink on them. That leaves third parties or a write in. I know I was army, but semper fi.
.....al
Issues are just data that is neutral. Whether it seems positive or negative is solely up to the interpretation of the reader. Politicians throw out issues to keep us arguing and fighting among ourselves while the wealth and power keep consolidating in the hands of a few, the few that fund the ones making the laws. Their biggest fear is that the people will stop arguing and wake up to the fact that total control of the masses is the ultimate goal. If anyone cannot see that happening in the still so far unrestricted age of the internet, they have my sympathies.
.......al
soxfan- thanks for your sympathies, but it is not necessary. No matter which bozo gets elected, I am prepared for the worst.
......al
Pass The Salt; Pass The Government
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-19/pass-salt-pass-government
Via Mark J. Grant, author of Out of the Box,
How many European nations does it take to screw in a light bulb?
Twenty-seven. One from Brussels to identify that the object in question is, in fact, a light bulb. Someone from Northern Europe to hold the bulb. A group from Southern Europe to turn the guy holding the bulb around and around until the thing is screwed in. A person from Germany or France to flick the switch and then the rest of the group, after tea, strudel and champagne to stand in front of the microphones and laud the effort.
In the recent summit, however, they couldn’t even identify the light bulb. Since the European countries could not agree on almost anything they performed their usual trick once again. We will have a supervisor of banks in some fashion, at some time in the future, under someone’s direction that will supervise some amount of banks. More tea, more strudel, more champagne and at what time am I scheduled at the microphone?
Nothing is as foolproof as sufficiently engineered promises of future results.
Did the European summit deal with the Cyprus issue; no. Did they provide an answer for Greece or Spain; certainly not. Was anything of value accomplished at the European summit past platitudes and congratulatory speeches that they had come up with a few lofty notions of someone doing something with the European banks; decidedly a negative answer. More fluff, more stuff and more “pass the risotto if you please.”
In the meantime the markets, all of the markets, are living off of intervention. The world’s central banks provide capital and we all have to put the stuff somewhere. Euroloans by the ECB, the printing of money by the Fed and the Bank of England and “the spice must flow.” This is a rather famous comment in Frank Herbert’s wonderful novel, “Dune.” In this science fiction book intergalactic commerce could only happen if the navigators imbibed spice so that they could steer their ships from one galaxy to the next. No spice; no commerce.
In our present circumstances the normal course of some type of fiscal responsibility provided by governments had significantly diminished and virtually faded away.
No one in America or Europe wants to own up to the very serious problems facing both continents and so the central banks are acting not only as lenders of last resort but decision makers of last resort. This has been in play continuously since the American Financial Crisis starting in 2008. We live in a dream state where no one wants to decide anything and so the central banks not only provide liquidity but they have taken over as the government by fiat. Ben Bernanke and Mario Draghi, elected by no one, are effectively in control of the purse strings of the western world. From here you get to two scary questions; “what happens when all of this stops” and then “what happens if it never stops?”
“They did nothing, absolutely nothing and it was everything that they thought it would be.”
-The Wizard
While almost no one recognizes it; we have not only “passed the buck” but we have passed the government. The famous sign that once resided on Harry Truman’s desk, “The Buck Stops Here” has now been moved to Ben Bernanke’s office. We have dysfunctional governments now in both America and Europe and the central banks are now in control because there is no one left. This is a dangerous state of affairs in my opinion and the consequences are mystifying.
Pass the salt, pass the government and no I did not ask for the check.
NH- trouble is, there is no lesser of the evils this time around. Both are inherently evil in their own way. I may vote a third party or write in another. some may say it's a waste, but as we both know many have died over the years to preserve the right to vote unimpeded. To not cast a vote or to write in is also a choice. To me it's a waste to vote for either of the offerings of both of the largest political parties. One of them will occupy the white house come January and it will be a sad day for America no matter which one it is. Pray the congress stays gridlocked. The less they do the better off we are.
........al
Newhampsha- agree completely, but it is also applicable to Romney and the rest of the clowns in DC. IMHO no matter who wins in Nov we the people will become and are the ultimate losers. They all bow to the same masters.
..........al
Food for thought:
A common social theory in libertarian circles is that positions of power are inherently dangerous because they attract people with a predisposition to abusing that power. A petty thief holds up a liquor store, or mugs people leaving the ATM. But an evil genius doesn’t construct an entire evil empire from scratch. He simply puts on a placid smile and a flag pin and runs for office. It’s much easier, and less expensive, for an evil genius to deceive a gullible electorate than to acquire the same degree of power in the free market. Besides, guile is a much more common trait among sociopaths than business acumen.
London Trader - The LBMA Is A Massive Ponzi Scheme
http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2012/10/17_London_Trader_-_The_LBMA_Is_A_Massive_Ponzi_Scheme.html
On July 20th, the ‘London Trader’ told King World News, “The LBMA’s price fixing scheme is coming to an end.” Gold quickly rose $200 after that interview. Today the source now tells KWN the LBMA has, “... incredibly large quantities of paper silver and gold being traded each day, but the real problem here is there is virtually nothing to back this up.” The source also said, “This is all part of the LBMA Ponzi scheme.”
King World News has now released a total of three written interviews with the London Trader. This is the third in a series of blockbuster interviews which uncovers what is happening behind the scenes in the gold and silver markets. The source also discussed the incredible tightness in the physical silver market.
Here is what the source had to say in Part III of the interview: “The physical silver market is extraordinarily tight. It’s insanely tight right now. In other words, there isn’t any for sale. We are seeing large premiums in places like Shanghai. If a buyer wants size in physical silver, you are going to have to wait a long time.”
“When the commercials see a large order enter the market, they just turn the market around. They don’t have that quantity of silver in inventory. Every day the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) clears 5,000 tons of silver, and between 600 and 700 tons of gold through paper trading. When you think about it, that is a ridiculous amount.
This is all part of the LBMA Ponzi scheme. You have these incredibly large quantities of paper silver and gold being traded each day, but the real problem here is there is virtually nothing to back this up....
“So they have paper silver as an example, and it’s heavily leveraged.
So if I turn up to the LBMA and I say, ‘Out of your 5,000 tons of silver that you clear every day, I just want 300 tons.’ It shouldn’t be a problem. It shouldn’t even cause a ripple. But when you think about it, and that physical silver is leveraged 100 to 1, that’s more than the annual mine production of silver for the entire year when you do the math, including the leverage implications.
Of course they can’t deliver the 300 tons. They don’t have it. So when you actually go and send a Brinks truck to go and pick this silver up at the back door of Scotia Mocatta, you aren’t going to get it. An order like that takes at least two months to get filled.
The problem right now is that there is such a large overhang of orders in both of these markets, and specifically silver. Every day there are people turning up at the fix to buy physical, regardless of price. As the markets are taken down, it exponentially increases the amount of physical silver that needs to be filled.
I would also add that the local traders are heavily short now. So we are seeing a large short position building in silver on this price decline. And don’t forget, the COT reports are groomed. I don’t trust them.
So when they see a large physical order enter the market, that’s the point where the commercials start covering. Remember, the gold and silver markets on the COMEX are all about chasing out leveraged longs. That’s all that market is about right now.
But we will see a day when silver can no longer be capped through paper trading and various games being played at the LBMA and COMEX, and in the end, it will be the physical market which will be the deciding factor. At that point you will see the real price of silver for the first time, and it will leave people in disbelief.”
A tribute to the American education system
sometimes you just have to grin and bear it.
The ‘Romney/Ryan tax plan still makes no sense’: Matt Taibbi urges the media to demand answers
Been holding this one in 2 accounts long enough for capital gains. Lotto play, imho.
.............al
Inverted Totalitarianism
http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/
10 October 2012
Inverted Totalitarianism
"Thus the elements are in place: a weak legislative body, a legal system that is both compliant and repressive, a party system in which one party, whether in opposition or in the majority, is bent upon reconstituting the existing system so as to permanently favor a ruling class of the wealthy, the well-connected and the corporate, while leaving the poorer citizens with a sense of helplessness and political despair, and, at the same time, keeping the middle classes dangling between fear of unemployment and expectations of fantastic rewards once the new economy recovers.
That scheme is abetted by a sycophantic and increasingly concentrated media; by the integration of universities with their corporate benefactors; by a propaganda machine institutionalized in well-funded think tanks and conservative foundations; by the increasingly closer cooperation between local police and national law enforcement agencies aimed at identifying terrorists, suspicious aliens and domestic dissidents."
Sheldon Wolin, Inverted Totalitarianism, 2003
I thought it would be useful to find the seminal essay from 2003 in which Sheldon Wolin describes the emerging US empire as an 'inverted totalitarianism.' It is still not quite clear to me what the distinction is between this and an oligarchy, although the difference from fascism is apparent. If the US is an inverted totalitarian regime, what are China and Russia today?
Certainly not the personal fascist dictatorships of the era of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, the latter two with a proletarian façade, but more a totalitarianism by bureacracy or committee perhaps, wherein business and government are in partnership for their own ends, because they are increasingly one. Is it a matter of emphasis? I cannot yet say. And what of the UK, which is without empire but has a remarkably similar political structure to the States, but with vestigial figureheads to enhance the illusion. A sidekick to Empire, in the manner of Robin to Batman, or faithful retained, like Afred?
I am a little disappointed that I was not familiar with it contemporaneously, but I was deeply involved in the study of money and macroeconomics from 1999 through 2006 and missed quite a bit.
I am surprised that I did not encounter this perspective through my readings of Chalmers Johnson, whose review of Wolin's book Democracy Incorporated is included below. I also have a video excerpt of Chris Hedges' use of the concept.
The Nation
Inverted Totalitarianism
By Sheldon Wolin
May 1, 2003
The war on Iraq has so monopolized public attention as to obscure the regime change taking place in the Homeland. We may have invaded Iraq to bring in democracy and bring down a totalitarian regime, but in the process our own system may be moving closer to the latter and further weakening the former.
The change has been intimated by the sudden popularity of two political terms rarely applied earlier to the American political system. "Empire" and "superpower" both suggest that a new system of power, concentrated and expansive, has come into existence and supplanted the old terms. "Empire" and "superpower" accurately symbolize the projection of American power abroad, but for that reason they obscure the internal consequences.
Consider how odd it would sound if we were to refer to "the Constitution of the American Empire" or "superpower democracy." The reason they ring false is that "constitution" signifies limitations on power, while "democracy" commonly refers to the active involvement of citizens with their government and the responsiveness of government to its citizens. For their part, "empire" and "superpower" stand for the surpassing of limits and the dwarfing of the citizenry.
The increasing power of the state and the declining power of institutions intended to control it has been in the making for some time. The party system is a notorious example. The Republicans have emerged as a unique phenomenon in American history of a fervently doctrinal party, zealous, ruthless, antidemocratic and boasting a near majority. As Republicans have become more ideologically intolerant, the Democrats have shrugged off the liberal label and their critical reform-minded constituencies to embrace centrism and footnote the end of ideology.
In ceasing to be a genuine opposition party the Democrats have smoothed the road to power of a party more than eager to use it to promote empire abroad and corporate power at home. Bear in mind that a ruthless, ideologically driven party with a mass base was a crucial element in all of the twentieth-century regimes seeking total power.
Representative institutions no longer represent voters. Instead, they have been short-circuited, steadily corrupted by an institutionalized system of bribery that renders them responsive to powerful interest groups whose constituencies are the major corporations and wealthiest Americans. The courts, in turn, when they are not increasingly handmaidens of corporate power, are consistently deferential to the claims of national security.
Elections have become heavily subsidized non-events that typically attract at best merely half of an electorate whose information about foreign and domestic politics is filtered through corporate-dominated media. Citizens are manipulated into a nervous state by the media's reports of rampant crime and terrorist networks, by thinly veiled threats of the Attorney General and by their own fears about unemployment. What is crucially important here is not only the expansion of governmental power but the inevitable discrediting of constitutional limitations and institutional processes that discourages the citizenry and leaves them politically apathetic.
No doubt these remarks will be dismissed by some as alarmist, but I want to go further and name the emergent political system "inverted totalitarianism." By inverted I mean that while the current system and its operatives share with Nazism the aspiration toward unlimited power and aggressive expansionism, their methods and actions seem upside down. For example, in Weimar Germany, before the Nazis took power, the "streets" were dominated by totalitarian-oriented gangs of toughs, and whatever there was of democracy was confined to the government. In the United States, however, it is the streets where democracy is most alive--while the real danger lies with an increasingly unbridled government.
Or another example of the inversion: Under Nazi rule there was never any doubt about "big business" being subordinated to the political regime. In the United States, however, it has been apparent for decades that corporate power has become so predominant in the political establishment, particularly in the Republican Party, and so dominant in its influence over policy, as to suggest a role inversion the exact opposite of the Nazis'. At the same time, it is corporate power, as the representative of the dynamic of capitalism and of the ever-expanding power made available by the integration of science and technology with the structure of capitalism, that produces the totalizing drive that, under the Nazis, was supplied by ideological notions such as Lebensraum.
In rebuttal it will be said that there is no domestic equivalent to the Nazi regime of torture, concentration camps or other instruments of terror. But we should remember that for the most part, Nazi terror was not applied to the population generally; rather, the aim was to promote a certain type of shadowy fear--rumors of torture--that would aid in managing and manipulating the populace. Stated positively, the Nazis wanted a mobilized society eager to support endless warfare, expansion and sacrifice for the nation.
While the Nazi totalitarianism strove to give the masses a sense of collective power and strength, Kraft durch Freude ("Strength through joy"), inverted totalitarianism promotes a sense of weakness, of collective futility. While the Nazis wanted a continuously mobilized society that would not only support the regime without complaint and enthusiastically vote "yes" at the periodic plebiscites, inverted totalitarianism wants a politically demobilized society that hardly votes at all. Recall the President's words immediately after the horrendous events of September 11: "Unite, consume and fly," he told the anxious citizenry. Having assimilated terrorism to a "war," he avoided doing what democratic leaders customarily do during wartime: mobilize the citizenry, warn it of impending sacrifices and exhort all citizens to join the "war effort."
Instead, inverted totalitarianism has its own means of promoting generalized fear; not only by sudden "alerts" and periodic announcements about recently discovered terrorist cells or the arrest of shadowy figures or the publicized heavy-handed treatment of aliens and the Devil's Island that is Guantánamo Bay or the sudden fascination with interrogation methods that employ or border on torture, but by a pervasive atmosphere of fear abetted by a corporate economy of ruthless downsizing, withdrawal or reduction of pension and health benefits; a corporate political system that relentlessly threatens to privatize Social Security and the modest health benefits available, especially to the poor. With such instrumentalities for promoting uncertainty and dependence, it is almost overkill for inverted totalitarianism to employ a system of criminal justice that is punitive in the extreme, relishes the death penalty and is consistently biased against the powerless.
Thus the elements are in place: a weak legislative body, a legal system that is both compliant and repressive, a party system in which one party, whether in opposition or in the majority, is bent upon reconstituting the existing system so as to permanently favor a ruling class of the wealthy, the well-connected and the corporate, while leaving the poorer citizens with a sense of helplessness and political despair, and, at the same time, keeping the middle classes dangling between fear of unemployment and expectations of fantastic rewards once the new economy recovers. That scheme is abetted by a sycophantic and increasingly concentrated media; by the integration of universities with their corporate benefactors; by a propaganda machine institutionalized in well-funded think tanks and conservative foundations; by the increasingly closer cooperation between local police and national law enforcement agencies aimed at identifying terrorists, suspicious aliens and domestic dissidents.
What is at stake, then, is nothing less than the attempted transformation of a tolerably free society into a variant of the extreme regimes of the past century. In that context, the national elections of 2004 represent a crisis in its original meaning, a turning point. The question for citizens is: Which way?
Thanks for the updates. eom
Great article. I have always thought that Obama's failure to obtain justice for the American people by vigorously prosecuting the corruption and fraud by the banksters would make him a one term president. However the best the republicans could do was Romney, a true one percenter advocating things that appeal to the radical right of the party. He does more to galvanize traditional democrat constituancies and get out the vote than $millions spent in the same pursuit by the democrats IMHO making Obama a shoe-in in November. Our savior will not be Obama, rather the continued gridlock of the house and senate. A gridlocked gov't does far less than a united one party gov't and the less they do the better off we the people are.
.........al
I may be uninformed but the reason I ask is I don't understand how they can take the licenses away from creditors in a bankruptcy situation. They are the only asset the company had.
............al
anything new on the bankruptcy? eom
SEC Sues the One Rating Firm Not on Wall Street’s Take
http://www.silverdoctors.com/sec-sues-the-one-rating-firm-not-on-wall-streets-take/#more-14799
The SEC is coming after the Egan-Jones Ratings Co, guns blazing. Surely it just happens to be a coincidence that the SEC has filed suit (for missing a comma in a filing) against the only ratings firm that is funded by investors rather than Wall Street banks, and also happens to be the firm that has downgraded US debt to AA?
The Securities and Exchange Commission, it seems, has finally lost its mind.
From Bloomberg:
In April, motivated by what I consider pure maliciousness, the SEC initiated a “cease and desist” administrative proceeding it deemed “necessary for the protection of investors and in the public interest” against Egan-Jones Ratings Co., a privately owned, 20-person firm based in Haverford, Pennsylvania, and against its principal owner, Sean Egan…
See what happens when you attempt to inform the public of the US’ true fiscal status?
Now, incredibly, Egan-Jones is the sole rater that the SEC has decided to attack. The trouble for the firm started on July 16, 2011, when Egan-Jones downgraded the U.S.’s sovereign debt by one notch, to AA+ from AAA. Egan-Jones cited “the relatively high level of debt and the difficulty in significantly cutting spending.” Two days later, the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations contacted the firm seeking information about its rating decision. (The next month, S&P also downgraded the U.S.’s sovereign debt, but neither Moody’s nor Fitch did.)
Then, on Oct. 12, Egan-Jones received a call from the SEC notifying the firm of a Wells Notice, an indication that it was being investigated. On April 5 of this year, Egan-Jones again downgraded the U.S. sovereign debt, to AA from AA+. On April 19, leaks started emanating from the SEC that it had voted to start an “administrative law proceeding” against the firm. And on April 24, the SEC filed its complaint.
Just what does the SEC object to so vehemently about Egan- Jones? The commission claims that on its 2008 supplemental application to be a “nationally recognized” ratings firm, Egan- Jones “falsely stated” that it had already rated the credit of 150 asset-backed securities and of 50 sovereign-debt issues. The SEC claims Egan-Jones “willfully made these misstatements and omissions to conceal the fact that it had no experience issuing ratings on ABS or government issuers.” The SEC intends to fine Egan-Jones and to possibly censure Sean Egan.
Message to the ratings firms- play the game by our rules or face massive fines and personal harassment.
Remembering 100 Years of Conquered Rule
S
http://thedailybell.com/4346/Ron-Holland-Remembering-100-Years-of-Conquered-Rule
Monday, October 01, 2012 – by Ron Holland
Ron Holland
"A people should know when they are conquered." Maximus responds, "Would you, would I?" – From the movie, "Gladiator"
One hundred years ago the American republic was overthrown and captured by financial elites and money power during the Taft and Wilson administrations, the first Republican and the second Democrat. Both the Federal Reserve and federal income tax were born and you know the rest of the story consisting of two world wars, the Great Depression and stock market crash, the rise of communism and fascism and the Cold War. Since that time directed current events, history and financial markets have ruled at the expense of free markets and free people.
The minor policy differences with one agenda shared by two different parties and their presidents back during the Taft and Wilson presidencies are somewhat similar to Obama and Romney today, should the GOP win this election. The only real difference is in the political rhetoric preceding the election. The America and republic established by our founding fathers effectively died 100 years ago and real, productive Americans have been a conquered people since that time.
William H. Taft served as president of the US during the years 1909 to 1913. In 1904, President Theodore Roosevelt had appointed Taft, his close ally, to Secretary of War in order to promote Taft as his handpicked presidential successor. In this way the widespread support for Teddy Roosevelt helped propel Taft to the presidency in the 1908 campaign.
To some degree Taft continued the imperialist foreign policy of Roosevelt through his "Dollar Diplomacy" in Latin America and Asia, buying and supporting corrupt leaders who would advance American political, international and economic interests. In time, however, Taft's differences with Roosevelt began to grow. He showed both decisiveness and restraint regarding a revolution in Mexico but to former Roosevelt interests and supporters, he appeared blind to the political considerations at home.
Taft began to alienate many of his former constituencies and elite supporters with his trust-busting aimed at powerful wealthy elites, the major reason he was defeated in his attempt to secure a second term as president. Along with Wilson, Taft will be forever hated and despised by productive American citizens for passage of the 16th Amendment that allowed Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it based on Census results among the states. Second, the Federal Reserve Act was enacted under President Wilson on December 23, 1913, creating the hated Federal Reserve System and granting it the legal authority to issue Federal Reserve Notes.
It should be noted that the Federal Reserve Act and the establishment of the Federal Income Tax were criminally crafted and forced on the American people by both parties during the terms of Republican Howard Taft and Democrat Woodrow Wilson. Since these acts were passed Americans have increasingly lost control of their federal government, the value of the dollar has depreciated by more than 95 percent and now all Americans suffer under a two-party monopoly that can be neither controlled nor even impacted by productive Americans.
Our nation's "mob rule" style democracy and closed political system guarantees that ultimate control and policies of the power elites will be enacted and carried forward regardless of public support or opposition. Thus, since 1913 it really has not mattered which party or presidential candidate has won the election because both are controlled and act for the interests of the power elite.
Therefore, in the 2012 election – as has been the case during the previous 100 years – voting is actually an exercise in futility and only used to convey false credibility to a controlled political system totally divorced from the people. Whether readers vote third party or for either of the two monopoly parties, little of substance will change despite the propaganda and political rhetoric offered up this year, just like every four years.
It is easy to say Americans should know they are a conquered people but do we really understand the situation? Like conquered peoples during Roman times believing they might still have power and influence over those who ruled over then, the answer is sadly no.
yes, and no, eom
The Greatest Threat to Gold Ownership
http://www.internationalman.com/global-perspectives/the-greatest-threat-to-gold-ownership
Category: Global Perspectives
Published on Monday, 19 September 2011 15:31
Written by Jeff Thomas
If you hold precious metals in your portfolio, there is a good chance you fear hyperinflation and the crash of fiat currencies.
You probably distrust governments in general and believe they are self-serving and have no interest in your economic well-being. It is likely your holdings in gold are your lifeline; your hope to get you through these times while holding on to your wealth.
But have you ever given it any thought to the possibility of having this lifeline confiscated by the authorities?
In my conversations with friends and associates, I have often raised this question. The typical responses:
“They’d never do that.”
“I’ll deal with that if and when it happens.”
“I just wouldn’t give it to them.”
I consider these wishful thinking responses.
It’s an interesting thought that the greatest threat to gold and silver investment might not be the possibility of losing on the speculation, but the government taking it away from you. It’s a thought that I’ve found few want to even think about, let alone discuss.
If you fall into this camp, you’re in good company. Some of those forecasters whom I respect most highly also treat it either as “unlikely” or, at best, “something we may need to look at in the future.” To date, in conversing with top advisors worldwide, the two primary reasons they believe gold will not be confiscated:
“Confiscation would mean the government acknowledges the reality of the value of gold.”
Yes, this is quite so. They would be changing their official view… which, of course, they do all the time. But I submit that all that they need to do is put the proper spin on it.
“They would meet greater resistance than they did back in ’33.”
I expect that this is also true, but that a plan will be put in place to deal with that resistance.
We’ll address both of these assertions in more detail shortly, but first, a bit of history.
In 1933, Franklin Roosevelt came into office and immediately created the Emergency Banking Act, which demanded that all those who held gold (other than personal jewelry) turn it in to approved banks. Holders were given less than a month to do this. The Government then paid them $20.67 per ounce – the going rate at the time. Following confiscation, the Government declared that the new value of gold was $35.00. In essence, they arbitrarily increased the value of their newly-purchased asset by 69%. (This is enough reason alone to confiscate.)
Today, the US Government is in much worse shape than it was in 1933 and they have much more to lose. The US dollar is the default currency of the world, but it’s one that’s on the ropes, which means the US economic power over the rest of the world is on the ropes.
I think that readers will agree that they will do anything to keep from losing this all-important power.
The US has essentially run out of options. At some point, the fiat currencies of the First World will collapse and some other form of payment will be necessary. Yes, the IMF is hoping to create a new default currency, but that, too, is to be a fiat currency. If any country were to produce a gold-backed currency in sufficient supply, that currency would likely become the desired currency worldwide. Fractional backing would be expected.
As most readers will know, the Chinese, Indians, Russians and others see the opportunity and are building up their gold reserves quickly and substantially. If these countries were to agree to introduce a new gold-backed currency, there can be little doubt that they would succeed in changing the balance of world trade.
That said, the US Government is watching these countries just as we are and they are aware of the threat of gold to them.
The US ostensibly has approximately 8,200 tonnes of gold in Fort Knox, although this may well be partially or completely missing. Additionally, they ostensibly hold a further 5000 tonnes of gold in the cellar of the New York Federal Reserve Building. Again, there is no certainty that it is there. In general, the authorities don’t seem to like independent audits.
In fact, there are rumours that the above vaults are nearly or completely empty and that the above quoted figures exist only on paper rather than in physical form. While there is no way to know this for sure, it’s not out of the question.
Either way, if the US and the EU could come up with a large volume of gold quickly, they could issue a gold-backed currency themselves. It’s a simple equation: The more gold they have = the more backed notes they can produce = the more power they continue to hold. By seizing upon the private supply of their citizens, they would increase their holdings substantially in short order.
Either that or they could just give up their dominance of world trade and power… What would you guess their choice would be?
It is entirely possible that the US Government (and very likely the EU) have already made a decision to confiscate. They may have carefully laid out the plan and have set implementation to coincide with a specific gold price.
So, how would this unfold? Let’s imagine a fairly extreme scenario and ask ourselves if it could be pulled off effectively:
The evening news programmes announce that the economic recovery is being hampered by wealthy private investors who, by hoarding gold, are skewing the value of the dollar and threatening the middle and poorer classes. The little man is being made to suffer while the rich get richer. A press campaign to equate gold ownership with greed ensues.
The Government announces the Second Emergency Banking Act, advising the public that, “the first EBA was instituted by FDR to solve this same problem during the Great Depression. This act was instrumental in helping the little man ‘recover’.” (As the average man on the street doesn’t know his history or how wrong this statement is, he’ll believe it. Besides, the announcement has a “feel good” message and that’s all that matters.)
Possessors of gold, who make up a small minority of the population, would become pariahs. It won’t matter that the guy who owns two gold Maple Leafs is not exactly a greedy, rich man. No one will wish to be seen to resist confiscation. Neither will they wish to go to prison for resisting, no matter how remote the possibility.
The US pays for the gold – in US dollars, which are rapidly headed south. Yes, the Fed will need to print more fiat dollars in order to pay them off but this suits their purpose, as it inflates the dollar even more. Those who have turned in their gold will do whatever they can to unload the US dollars as quickly as possible and will need to find another investment at a time when there are very few trustworthy investments other than gold. The stock market would likely rise, showing the public how the gold confiscation program is “working”.
One last scary possibility: The Government demands that gold is turned immediately and that settlement will occur following confiscation. After confiscation, they announce that, as there have been such a large number of cases of rich people ripping off the little man, processing them all could take months, possibly even a year or more. A further announcement states that some investors have made an unreasonable profit on the backs of the poor and that they should not be granted this profit. This profit must be returned to the people. (You can almost hear the cheers of the people.) Then they set about making assessments. They find that most investors do not have formal, acceptable receipts for every coin in their possession. So, if you paid $1200 for a Krugerrand a couple of years ago, you get paid $1200. If you bought it at $250 in 1999, you get paid $250. But if you have no receipt in an acceptable form, you get a “fair” median payment, say, $500, regardless of when you bought it.
Appeals: Each investor will be allowed up to one year to appeal the decision of the Treasury as to what is owed him. Of course, the investor knows that the dollar is sinking rapidly and he would be wise to shut up and take what he is being offered.
Again, this hypothetical scenario is an extreme one. The reader is left to consider just how likely or unlikely this scenario is and what that would mean to his wealth.
But bear this in mind: If the above scenario were to take place soon, the average citizen would have mixed feelings. They would be glad that the evil rich had been taken down a peg, but they would worry about the idea of Government taking things by force because they might be next. It would therefore be in the Government’s interests to implement confiscation only after the coming panic sets in – after the next crash in the market, after it becomes plain to the average citizen that this really is a depression and he really is in big trouble. Then he will be only too glad to see the “greedy rich” go down, and he won’t care about the details.
As terrible as the thought is, it seems unlikely to me that the government will not confiscate gold, as they have little to lose and so much to gain.
Those who own gold would prefer to think that this cannot happen, but they have quite a lot riding on that hope and precious little evidence to support it.
To my knowledge, this is the first article that directly outlines the worst case scenario. It is entirely possible that this scenario will not take place, just as it is possible that confiscation will not take place. The purpose of this article is to hopefully spark some serious discussion – both for and against the possibility.
Investors are, by their very nature, planners. It may take a community of investors to develop a legal plan to deal with the above eventuality. Time to get started.
Greyerz - High Net Worth Investors Pouring Money Into Gold
http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2012/9/28_Greyerz_-_High_Net_Worth_Investors_Pouring_Money_Into_Gold.html
gon von Greyerz continues:
“Sure we can always have a correction, but that’s not what I see right now. The fact that we are at a weekly closing high, if we close at these levels, is also bullish. So I don’t see the short-term being bearish, Eric. As a matter of fact, I see major upside moves in gold and silver over the next few weeks.
Interestingly, Deutsche Bank recently said their high net worth clients are buying physical gold. Barclays is now finishing one of the biggest vaults in Europe, which will be used to house physical gold and other metals....
“But most investors don’t understand they are at massive risk by storing gold in the banks because many times the gold isn’t there. We’ve seen examples of this ourselves, firsthand. Also, even if the gold is there it could be encumbered. So by having it in the banking system, people are exposing themselves to massive counterparty risk.
This is why we are continuing to see major investors moving physical gold out of the banking system, and into private vaults. So the fear is increasing. But still, by far, the largest amount of gold is stored at the banks. But people must realize they aren’t safe in the banks.
It’s one of the easiest decisions for investors to make, to eliminate counterparty risk. And when it comes to major currencies, the government issuing the currency is the counterparty risk. Since we know that most governments are bust, and can only continue to operate by printing unlimited amounts of money, holding currencies now involves counterpary risk.
So the investment decision is so clear, hold physical gold and physical silver. We should also note that 40% of the gold production in South Africa is shut down right now. AngloGold is totally shut down in South Africa. But even without that, gold is looking extremely bullish.
We have most likely finished this small correction, and I believe gold will hit $2,000, and silver $50, this year.”
Greyerz also warned: “The next stage in this crisis is for currencies to start collapsing, and the dollar will be the next one to collapse. As the dollar collapses, gold will obviously reflect that. We are very near a situation where there will be a major premium for physical gold. There will be a big difference in price between paper gold and physical gold.
As the currencies fall, and gold goes higher, people will eventually realize that paper gold has no value because there’s no backing. Why should a market that is absolutely paper, with no backing, cost about the same as the physical?
I would add that the printing we have seen, and the printing which has been recently announced, will be dwarfed by what we will see in the next few months and years. We are talking about tens of trillions of dollars of money printing, at least.
When we get into the hyperinflationary situation, it could be hundreds of trillions of dollars being printed. It is crystal clear that the only way for investors to protect themselves from the total destruction of paper wealth, will be through the ownership of physical gold and silver.
The ECB now has a balance sheet of four trillion euros, but they have lent or guaranteed twelve trillion euros. So it’s a twelve trillion euro balance sheet, and it’s all rubbish what they have on their balance sheet. They are bust.
It’s the same thing with the UK banking system. The UK banking system is one of the most highly leveraged banking systems in the world. The Bank of England’s balance sheet has increased five fold over the last five years.
The same is true for Switzerland. The Swiss Central Bank’s balance sheet has expanded almost five fold over the last five years, and the top two Swiss banks represent 700% of Swiss GDP. This means that Switzerland is in real danger of getting into a hyperinflationary situation. I don’t think the Swiss franc is better than any other currency. So there is tremendous danger around the world as we head into the next stage of this crisis.
The bottom line is as this global financial collapse accelerates, more and more investors will seek the shelter of physical gold and silver. This will cause a massive spike in the price of these metals as investors flood into these tiny markets. And I say these markets are tiny because the amount of ‘available’ physical metal is very tiny indeed.”
Post Correction, The Upside For Gold & Silver Is Enormous
http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2012/9/26_Post_Correction,_The_Upside_For_Gold_%26_Silver_Are_Enormous.html
Today acclaimed money manager Stephen Leeb told King World News that “... once gold gets past this reaction, the upside is enormous and the same is true for silver.” Leeb also spoke about the dire situation in Europe and the US. Here is what Leeb had to say: “The story in Europe has really taken a dramatic turn for the worse. You now have Germany, the Netherlands, and Finland signing pacts opposing what the ECB wants to do. They are arguing for austerity.”
Stephen Leeb continues:
“They are basically saying we will give Spain a loan if Spain gives up its sovereignty. That’s what it amounts to, they want to extract very strict conditions. You’ve got riots in Spain and you’ve got riots in Greece.
The riots in Spain are really serious....
“Spain is divided into three different provinces, and now you’ve got one of the provinces wanting to declare independence. Spain, the country, it could just breakup. Many adults and children are starving.
In the midst of this you have other countries telling Spain it has to become more austere. They are arguing for things that would be even more punitive to the people. So it’s not surprising that you could be seeing a country on the verge of splintering.
In Greece you could have a takeover of the government. It’s happened before in Greece where the generals took over. This is why Draghi is desperate to buy the European debt of these crumbling nations. Until this situation is resolved, people may have periods where they get scared to death because the eurozone breaking up is going to create a short-term panic.
No one is going to be able to value assets properly. It will be hard to know who’s solvent and who’s not. The end result will be tremendous money printing. This needs to be resolved, and as human beings we all want to resolve this in a way where kids are not starving and people are not starving. Even in the US, 50 million Americans are now underfed. How do you come to grips with that?
The inflation we will have to endure to get out of this situation will cause a lot of chaos, but I think that’s where we are headed. But whether we have inflation or deflation, gold is going to be the currency of choice. So far we have not seen much of a setback in gold, even if gold went down to $1,700. But we have to recognize that the selling (of any physical gold) right now are those looking for liquidity, maybe to buy food, who knows?
But the bottom line is we are going to inflate the world out of this debt crisis. All of these central banks stand ready to create more money. So I expect this pull back in gold to be short-lived. Draghi is pushing so hard for money printing because he doesn’t want to see the Europe descend into utter turmoil. That’s why gold will stay strong.
Could gold go down to $1,700? Maybe, but even if it does, I don’t think it will go much lower than that. We’re talking about being 6% off the highs at that point, and that’s a shallow pull back. But once gold gets past this reaction, the upside is enormous and the same is true for silver.”
The not so Secret Sell Off…. Do the Super Rich Know that the Economy is about to Tank?
http://offgridsurvival.com/notsosecretselloff/
Despite government assurances that the economy is on the mend, a number of the world’s richest people have been quietly dumping their American Stocks.
Billionaires who are dumping their stocks:
Warren Buffett, who has been the current administrations top ally when it comes to propping up the markets, might not be as optimistic as he pretends to be in public. In fact, Buffet has recently begun to dramatically reduce his exposure to stocks that depend on consumer purchasing. He has reduced his stock exposure in these companies by over 21% and has even sold of his entire stake in the computer parts company Intel (7,745,000 shares).
The controversial billionaire George Soros, has also been moving at a frenzied pace to sell off his stocks in all financial companies. According to his SEC filings, Soros dumped his entire stake in all major financial stocks. He completely dumped Citigroup (420,000 shares), JP Morgan (701,400 shares) and Goldman Sachs (120,000 shares), leaving himself with no exposure to the American financial markets.
Interestingly, at the same time Soros started dumping these financial stocks, he started pumping major money into the Gold markets. During that same period, Soros more than doubled his investment in the SPDR gold trust ETF.
History is filled with examples of why we need to take notice….
It’s really not a secret that these billionaires can literally manipulate the markets into doing their bidding. When the average two-bit thief does it, they call it the pump and dump. This is when a scam artist buys a number of shares at a low price and then starts spreading rumors about how that stock will hit new highs.
As the price of the stock goes up, the scammer sells his stocks, leaving the investors who got caught up in the scam holding the worthless stocks as the company tanks. When these billionaire investors do it, well the powers that be consider it standard operating procedures.
When these people start making moves, you really need to take notice. I’m not saying you need to panic, after all and as noted in the example above, that may be exactly what they want you to do. But one thing is for sure, when these people act, they do so for a reason. In fact, many say the 1929 stock market crash could have been predicted by watching what the insiders at the time were doing. Probably one of the most famous examples of this is the Kennedy family.
Joseph Kennedy, father of the late John. F. Kennedy, made the family’s fortune by selling off all his stocks right before the 1929 crash. The carefully crafted media tale, says that Kennedy decided to sell his stocks after overhearing shoeshine boys speculating on the stock market. But if you believe that then I’ve got a bridge to sell ya!
The fact is, the people in power know what’s coming well before the suckers, who follow their every move, ever have the chance to make their own moves.
Do these Billionaires know something that the Government isn’t telling us?
In my opinion, the writing is on the wall. As we have pointed out on many occasions in the past, this deck of cards is just waiting to come crashing down.
16 trillion in debt, 46.7 million on food stamps, 49 percent of Americans who receive at least one government benefit, and a real unemployment rate that is closer to 22%; the real economic numbers show that not much has changed since the 2008 financial crisis. In fact, things seem to be getting worse as our country falls even deeper into the financial abyss.
basserdan, good article. People need to wake up and see what's happening to them. Obamney or Rombama, it makes no difference. They both bow to the same masters. Corporate and personal greed are destabilizing our once great economy. The US is fastly becoming a banana republic.
.........al
Bill Black:
Obama administration clueless on Mideast turmoil
By William J. Bennett, CNN Contributor
updated 10:03 AM EDT, Thu September 20, 2012
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/20/opinion/bennett-middle-east-violence/index.html?hpt=hp_bn7
Editor's note: William J. Bennett, a CNN contributor, is the author of "The Book of Man: Readings on the Path to Manhood." He was U.S. secretary of education from 1985 to 1988 and director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President George H.W. Bush.
(CNN) -- Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans are dead. Protests are roiling Arab nations, threatening U.S. embassies and diplomats from Egypt to Sudan to Indonesia. The Middle East is on fire, in more ways than one. For more than a week the Obama administration insisted that this was solely a response to the work of an obscure, asinine filmmaker. Now that story is beginning to unravel.
Last Friday, White House press secretary Jay Carney explained the violence in the Middle East: "It is in response to a video -- a film -- that we have judged to be reprehensible and disgusting. That in no way justifies any violent reaction to it. But this is not a case of protests directed at the United States, writ large, or at U.S. policy."
The administration walked out Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, on the Sunday talk shows to offer the administration's view. "What sparked the recent violence was the airing on the Internet of a very hateful, very offensive video that has offended many people around the world," Rice said.
William Bennett
William Bennett
A group of Muslim extremists kills an American ambassador, in a country this president aided militarily, and our government reacts by utterly failing to defend the protections of our First Amendment.
The reaction of our leadership, including the president, to the bleeding and the slaughter of Americans was not anger, not fury, not a terrible swift sword of justice, but a sheepish response condemning the exercise of our own freedom of speech.
There is a near invincible unwillingness on the part of the Obama administration to acknowledge the presence of radical Islamic jihadists. The video may have had some impact on the protests and violence, but are we to believe our embassy was attacked on the anniversary of September 11, not because of the significance of that day, but solely because of an obscure film released on YouTube? I think not.
Radical Islam is antithetical to the American values of freedom of speech, religion, conscience, and equality, and will use any excuse to provoke attacks against us. In fact, its proponents don't even need an excuse, as the USS Cole bombing and attacks on September 11, 2001, proved. By blaming the recent attacks on a movie, the Obama administration refuses to acknowledge this serious danger, while at the same time blaming our own First Amendment.
Now their explanation is crumbling. On CBS's "Face the Nation" on Sunday, Mohamed al-Magariaf, president of Libya's parliament, was one of the first to pronounce the attacks premeditated. He said, "The way these perpetrators acted, and moved, and their choosing the specific date for this so-called demonstration, I think we have no, this leaves us with no doubt that this was preplanned, determined."
During a Senate hearing Wednesday, Matt Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, was the first administration official to admit we were purposely attacked. "Yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy," Olsen said. He also repeated the administration's insistence that the attacks weren't planned, but said it "appears that individuals who were certainly well armed seized on the opportunity presented as the events unfolded that evening and into the morning of September 12."
Stevens worried about al Qaeda hit list
Concern over Libya ambassador's security
Why the film upset so many Muslims
Marc Ginsberg on Islamic extremists
Anti-Islamic filmmaker exposed
Will the rest of the administration now stand by its original story?
If a small, obscure, tasteless film is solely responsible for the anti-American sentiment in the Middle East, then American foreign policy is at the mercy of any provocateur with a pen or a camera. Rice went so far as to say Sunday, "As we've seen in the past with things like 'Satanic Verses,' with the cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed, there have been such things that have sparked outrage and anger, and this has been the proximate cause of what we've seen last week."
Let's suppose for argument's sake that the movie is solely to blame. Why then is the Obama administration cooperating with Hollywood for the soon-to-be blockbuster flick about the killing of Osama bin Laden, "Zero Dark Thirty," which will have exponentially more exposure and publicity than the paltry YouTube video in question? Undoubtedly this film will anger many Muslims, like those who shouted, "Obama, Obama, we are all Osama" outside the embassy in Cairo on September 11.
The Obama administration's foreign policy in the Middle East is one of appeasement, contradictions, and fecklessness. Or is this what "leading from behind" looks like?
Is Egypt, once a most vital ally in the region, still an ally or not? The President doesn't know. Why did the U.S. intervene in Egypt and Libya but not in Syria or Iran, where the threat to U.S. security is much graver? We don't know.
Why was there not heightened security at our embassies on the anniversary of September 11? Will there be retribution for the death of an American ambassador? It seems that the only retribution leveled will be against filmmakers and cartoonists, not jihadists.
After all, Obama promised a new dawn of U.S.-Arab relations, culminating in his much ballyhooed Cairo speech in 2009: "I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect." We have, today, not a new beginning, but flashes of an ugly past, a past reminiscent of the Carter years. Here is Mitt Romney's Reagan moment if he can seize it.
American Capitalism Gone With A Whimper
The irony of this article appearing in the English edition of Pravda (Russian on-line newspaper) defies description. Why can a Russian newspaper print the following yet the American media can't/won't see it?
It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American descent into Marxism is happening with breathtaking speed, against the backdrop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.
True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.
Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.
First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas than the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a Burger King burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish.
Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.
The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Weimar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.
These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, losses, and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?
These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties, and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more than a whimper to their masters.
Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motors) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now has the power, the self-given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions.
So it should be no surprise that the American president has followed this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, and so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride.
Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but a "free man" whimper.
So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance, and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Frank, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive.
The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.
The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest, and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker.
Stanislav Mishin© 1999-2009... PRAVDA.Ru . When reproducing our materials in whole or in part, hyperlink to PRAVDA.Ru should be made. The opinions and views of the authors do not always coincide with the point of view of PRAVDA.Ru 's editors.
Oh Look -- A Pigman Movement!
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?blog=Market-Ticker
You can't write scripts like this for Romney detonations....
WASHINGTON (AP) — Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty is resigning as a national co-chairman of Republican Mitt Romney's presidential campaign to lobby for the financial services industry.
The Financial Services Roundtable announced Thursday that Pawlenty will become its new president and chief executive officer on November 1.
Well now, if you're a Wall Streeter or want to support them you now know who to vote for, right?
If, on the other hand, you think Wall Street has been robbing people blind for 20 years, well....
(Mittens couldn't make this look worse by anything short of getting caught with a goat.)
And Now, Documentation (Alleged Rigging Against Investors)
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?blog=Market-Ticker
by Karl Denninger
If this surprises you then you need to have a brain transplant to replace the drug-addled one you've been attempting to "use" for the last several years.
Mr. Bodek approached the Securities and Exchange Commission last year alleging that stock exchanges, in a race for more revenue, had worked with rapid-fire trading firms to give them an unfair edge over everyday investors.
He became convinced exchanges were providing such an edge after he says he was offered one himself when he ran a high-speed trading firm—a way to place orders that can be filled ahead of others placed earlier. The key: a kind of order called "Hide Not Slide."
Got it?
The allegation raised is that the exchanges created and offered to this guy, running a HFT shop, an order type that could be used to jump the line and get orders executed preferentially.
That's broadly against regulatory rules that allegedly require that all participants be treated equally, incidentally, and what's worse is that the SEC approved these order types -- the exchanges didn't do this in a vacuum, they did it with full government approval.
So the question, as usual, comes back to the porn-loving SEC folks who are more-interested in making sure that they can feather their nests in the private sector after the revolving door turns once more when their "tenure" at the SEC has expired.
This, of course, wouldn't have anything to do with a less-than-diligent inquiry into exactly how proposed new order types interact with the rest of the trading world and whether certain people get privileged information and access that others do not.... would it?
It wouldn't also revolve around why there has been zero investigation and enforcement aimed at firms that are pretty-clearly exploiting data feed delays between different venues and whether they might be intentionally creating the arbitrage opportunities they then exploit, right?
After all if you're a retail trader or ordinary investor then bilking you is, as we've seen, perfectly ok according to the SEC provided the HFT firms "provide their liquidity" and "contribute to the orderly market" -- right?
As I said in the opening line of this piece, if you're one of those who believes this is all a coincidence I will reserve a place for you in the brain transplant line so you can have a working model installed in the space between your ears.
Peter Schiff-Dollar Vulnerable to a Massive Collapse, Buy Gold and Silver
Peter Schiff-Dollar Vulnerable to a Massive Collapse, Buy Gold and Silver