Paul Bonnifield: Stimulus plan is good

Advertisement

I support the stimulus legislation. First, I don't see any positive action in the private sector. Individual businesses may be acting, but as a group they are just sitting around waiting for someone to take the risk. I'm very much aware of the concern about future taxes, high cost and billions of dollars being spent on non-stimulus programs. I'm also aware of the standard griping about big government, liberalism and destroying the fiber of America. I've heard that song and dance all my life.

My wife and I are not large investors compared to many of our friends and acquaintances, but what we have, we darn sure earned, and the recent loss in value dramatically alters our retirement plans. If our investments increased from their current value by 10 percent, we could cover any reasonable stimulus cost. An increase in value more than 10 percent will be a return on our stimulus investment. Granted it may not work as I think it will, but capitalism is risktaking. If I don't take the risk and the market drops, say from 8,000 to 7,000, I'll lose more money than it will cost me to take the chance. I'm willing to spend money in order to make money. I would rather make a little than lose a lot.

Granted there are billions of dollars being spent on non-stimulus projects. The majority of those projects are areas the government is expected to improve or maintain. We cannot get infrastructure improvements done at a lower cost than right now. The number of contract bidders is high and the competition keen. They will do the work with a lower markup now than when times are good and bidders are few. Now is the time to invest because we will get the best deal. To me, that is simply good business.

To my good friends who will read this letter and will suddenly have a problem with high blood pressure, I offer my usual plea: my God-given right to be wrong.

Paul Bonnifield

Yampa

Comments

ybul 5 years, 10 months ago

capitalism, is seeing an opportunity and working to CAPITALIZE on that opportunity.

You suggest taking a trillion dollars and using it to prop up the stock market, so that another trillion dollars is not lost? If it takes a trillion dollars, of debt, to avert a trillion dollar loss in the stock market, was not that trillion dollars still lost? It was just shifted to the public sector, but hey that has been what this bailout has been about.

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

Everybody is entitled to their opinion but everybody is not entitled to make up their own facts to support that opinion. Facts are immutable and real. Everybody has to deal with the same facts. The facts damn the Stimulus.

Nobody who voted on the Stimulus even read the bill. The entire Congresss admitted as much but you could have arrived at the same opinion when you observed that the bill was available at 8:00 PM and the vote was the following morning at 9:00 AM.

What does that really say about the quality of the thought process that went into the creation of the Stimulus and the quality of the decision making that supported the plan.

The same thing --- crap!

The Stimulus is simply a laundry list of liberal shibboleths which have been trotted out and funded with enormous amounts of your money with the notion that if you fail to do exactly what Pres Obama, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid have told you the world will end.

Does that not insult your intelligence even a little, tiny bit?

The Stimulus will do absolutely nothing to assist in the recovery of the stock market. Do you think giving more money to a bunch of clowns who wrecked the markets is somoehow going to result in a different outcome?

If a guy broke into your house (401K) and stole your silver (savings) would you just pat him on the head and give him more money?

The economy is not like kindergarten T ball where everybody gets a hit, everybody gets on base, nobody is out, every team wins and then we all go for ice cream!

We cannot have success unless the losers are allowed to fail!

Tell me how buying condoms is going to create jobs in Yampa? But don't let me get in the way of your good feeling cause you are certainly entitled to your opinion dopey or otherwise but you are not entitled to make up your own facts.

Understand this truly, nobody in Washington DC has any idea what they are doing as it relates to the economy but even you know that huge unchecked government spending is not going to solve the problem --- cause if the answer was a huge government spending program we wouldn't be in this fix --- cause Iraq and Afghanistan are huge government spending programs.

0

Alobar 5 years, 10 months ago

JLM, your ignorance baffles me. Did we not recently hold an election? Did Mr. Obama not promise tax breaks to the middle class, a push for a green economy, help with health care to those who need it? The people overwhelmingly voted for Obama and his principles, so why are you so surprised that these are being enacted? I'd imagine you're one of the lucky ones who does not need help, which is lucky for you. But there are millions out there who desperately need help, to which the stimulus bill is a step in the right direction. Sure it's no perfect bill, but there is absolutely no perfect fix for this ransacked economy. Are you suggesting we stick to the principles of the last 8 years, to which got us into this bizarre mess? You truly believe you are more intelligent than the countless economic experts who support this bill, and in large part, believe it should have been bigger than it is? Stop listening to Limbaugh and adopt a little humility.

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

Al ---

The Stimulus was not authored by Pres Obama, it was authored by the House of Representatives in the person of Speaker Pelosi. It is no more the President's bill than the Man in the Moon's.

Nobody, including Obama or you, has read the damn thing. So, how can you be sure it does anything? What are the three (3) most productive elements of the plan, as you see it?

I object to a government which enacts laws without reading them. I object to elected officials who commit public funds without having any freakin' idea what they are funding.

The election is over and Pres Obama won but that doesn't mean we suspend common sense and wisdom, does it?

I don't remember Candidate Obama saying: "When I am your President, I will spend money like a drunken sailor. I will spend $1T without even reading the freakin' thang! Yeah!" Did he say that?

I do remember his saying that the legislation would be on the Internet for 48 hours before Congress voted on it. Didn't happen. I do remember promises of accountability and transparency. Didn't happen.

Would you spend $1T without reading the damn thing? Sheesh!

0

playa46 5 years, 10 months ago

JLM- If you know any facts, you would understand this is much better than the drying tradition you have been clinging to the past eight years. What facts are you trying to prove? Citations please...

0

ybul 5 years, 10 months ago

The stimulus, is simply more of the same government crap. Why don't you google Pelosi and the stimulus plan, same old thing. As opposed to worshiping Obama, maybe we should make sure that what he promised is happening. Oh those appointments can't be lobbyists, out the window already.

JLM, I have read that the Stimulus plan inserted requirements for gun registration. Do you know anything about that.

Fear ran the country for the last eight years, today it is fear the the economy is going to sink without the governments help. Now let us cede our monetary authority to the IMF/World Bank, so they can be the ones who print our money for us.

0

seeuski 5 years, 10 months ago

Fear did not run the country the last eight years, action against our attackers did and those who were more worried about our worldwide reputation went after the President. The economy was booming until the Dems took over Congress and failed to heed the warnings from the other side regarding the bad loans going to those who did not have the ability to repay and then were bought up by Fannie/Freddie. We are at this worldwide economic meltdown because of the liberal spending and lending programs not because of silly statements like "the policies of the last eight years". I have never heard anyone cite one policy that can be attributed to the demise of the economy other than the truth, the loans made available by the millions to poor people who never qualified in the first place. The Senate hearings in 2006 are a glaring example of the Liberal Democrats defending those policies and calling those bringing the warnings as racist. I hope this spending bill has some positive results but I am doubtful and verry worried the failure of any such positive success in stopping the economic bleeding will end in further tragedy. We can argue here but we are truly all in this boat together. Also, please tell me you guys are not supportive of the Hugo Chavez style of speech control such as the so called fairness doctrine.

0

Steve Shelesky 5 years, 10 months ago

Firstly, JLM's not ignorant --based on what I've read. Having spent most of my life inside the beltway, he's right on.

As for who, what and where -- the seminal event for the subprime nightmare can be traced to 1999 --the last years of Clinton's disgraced presidency (not sure why that guy is still a rock star). Efforts to regulate were muted --technically by Greenspan's monetary policies which were, essentially influenced by 9/11 fear (who can blame him) and later by the liberal-social agenda of Barney and the boys..... Could GW have done something? -- maybe. But, beyond the regulating the GSE's (which would have harmed their market share and market cap), you had massive Lehman-esque liquidity and demand for all the BS loans --driving the origination. Let's not forget that, except for some isolated predatory lending, the borrowers themselves were greedy, acquisitive and delusional kool-aid sippers.

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

playa ---

What are you talking about? Can you not reason to the conclusion that voting on a $1T 1200 page bill delivered at 9:00 PM and voted on at 9:00 AM is an abject failure of the duty that our elected officials have to carefully consider legislation before enacting it?

One trillion dollars! One trillion dollars! About 7% of the GDP of the United States! This is not like gathering your change to pay the pizza boy!

Does it not offend your sense of fairness when we were promised 48 hour notification and posting on the Internet of all spending bills, transparency and accountability?

Does it not strike you as patently absurd that in spite the tyranny of the unknown "catastrophe" which would await us if we did not act "immediately", President Obama was able to wait three days (more than the time period in which our Congress had to consider the actual legislation) and sign the legislation in a campaign appearance in Denver?

If it were not against the rules of this forum, one would be tempted to further inquire as to whether you are simply a gullible moron, but I shall not do that.

One might give Pres Obama the benefit of the doubt if there were some consistency in his actions or if there was some assurance that this Porkulus would work.

0

trump_suit 5 years, 10 months ago

I would agree with Parttimeboat here. JLM is not ignorant, his opinions are very consistent and well thought out. You may or may not agree with him, but he rarely attacks anyone on a personal level and always tries to present the reasons for his point of view.

I agree with JLM about the rush to get this bill passed. What happened to reading what you sign, and where were the 48 hours we were promised?

Where I disagree is this:

How did a $787 Billion bill become a trillion????? It may be rounding, but that comment is fuzzy math at best.

What is so very different about this bill than the $700 Billion TARP bill passed by Democrats and Republicans alike just a few months ago?

What is so different about this stimulus bill than the one requested by Pres. Bush in 2007 that gave us all $600 each in the mail?

I remain less than convinced that the whole stimulus thing is a good idea. I have not seen any personal benefit from any of them thus far and would rather have money in the bank than whatever has been done with the previous packages. Will this one be any different. Time will tell.

0

playa46 5 years, 10 months ago

Okay JLM- Do you at all realize that Bush has put us in 4 trillion dollar for paying off countries alone? Oh no, that just slipped your mind.

(Note, I am not for Obama's plan, I am not against it. I like to see what will happen before I make blind decisions.)

ybul- Fear will run this country to the ground? Just wait a little bit before accusing someone, I am not saying this won't happen, but don't go blabbing your mouth.

0

ybul 5 years, 10 months ago

When one throws in the interest it will be over a trillion.

The question is who is going to buy the bonds to pay for this spending spree.

0

ybul 5 years, 10 months ago

Playa,

Is it not fear that Obama is playing on fear in stating the system will get worse without the stimulus plan?

Obama is a bright, charismatic, individual, and yet the same mistakes that were made in blindly following Greenspan in lowering interest rates to zero for so long, or in authorizing the war in Iraq, can still happen with Obama.

I am concerned that Obama's cult like status will blind us into passing legislation that may not work. The tax cuts in the stimulus package, $30 million to preserve wetlands near San Francisco, to protect a mouse (washington post).

I like Obama, however, I worry that he will not have much oversight with control of the house and senate.

0

Steve Shelesky 5 years, 10 months ago

When our congress is done, it will be $2 trillion, maybe more. The banks have yet to open their robes and show their junk -- we're just getting started. Mr. G knows this... and doesn't know what to do. Like him or not, at least he did not rush it for the sake of rushing it (like the worthless bill). Obama's big mistake was to NOT take control of the authorship, and too many in his own party stuffed non-stimulative crap in it. This hurt the credibiity, and cost him GOP support. This is what happens when you politically administer an economic remedy. Anyway, we'll borrow from the Chinese-- until their appetite wanes- as they will measure against their own trade interests and the value of the dollar. Ultimately, this will cause the cost of debt to rise -- which will make the current Treasury Bond bubble pop (costing all the currently fearful a ton of dough).. Who pays the debt? Well, either the unborn and their kids, or we print the dollars, increase the money supply, and let hype-inflation take it's toll.... In the near term, Pelosi and Reid will do damage on everyone's wallet --they're simply misguided, and not smart. They may doom Obama --as he's showing signs of moving to the middle, but it's angering them.... Time to pack your own lunch and take cover.

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

Playa, babe ---

WTF does this really mean:

"Do you at all realize that Bush has put us in 4 trillion dollar for paying off countries alone?"

WTF does that mean? I just hope you're stoned cause it is really mystifying. WTF, over?

BTW, the election is over, long over. Pres Bush has moved back to Texas. Pres Obama is in charge. He wanted the job and told us his policies were superior to Pres Bush's policies. Now is the time to prove it. Stop beating that dead horse.

Just for the record, Candidate Obama was not running against Pres Bush, he was running against a guy named McCain. Not to be too cynical, but campaigning and governing are two very different things.

This stimulus bill is the first thing that Pres Obama said he needed and he got it. So, now get out the scorecards and see if he was correct. Today, in the signing ceremony (3 days after the deadline for imminent "catastrophe" BTW), Pres Obama indicated he would likely champion another Stimulus bill.

The ink wasn't even dry!

I wish Pres Obama goodwill, good luck and Godspeed. He is my President and this is my country but I am not prepared to suspend my powers of observation, experience or intelligence. Pres Obama is a clever fellow but the time for baloney is over and the time to get to work is upon us all.

If you think dealing with Acorn is difficult, wait until Speaker Pelosi really loses her mind. Pres Obama's greatest test is from his own party as he already knows what the Republicans want and will support. His future --- and our future --- is in the hands of Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid, you scared yet? I'm terrified.

This is not like kindergarten T ball where everybody gets a hit, gets on base, is never out and both teams "win" and then we go out for ice cream. Pres Obama "guesses" wrong and there will be chaos in the markets and we fall into the abyss. Fasten your seat belts cause the train is leaving the station and this is real life.

You can only bet 7% of GDP on black or red a couple of times then the house owns the house.

Why does anyone think that upgrading the computer system of the HHS Department is going to create "new" jobs or sustainable jobs?

We can all still be intellectually supportive of the President but we don't have to stop using our brains. These bills were written by Speaker Pelosi who is a wild crazy San Francisco liberal who thinks that a quarter billion dollars spent on condoms will spur the economy to create jobs. Do you have to be stupid enough to believe that to be considered "supportive" of the President?

Common sense is unfortunately not that common in Washington.

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

Let's begin to be critically honest on some important touchstones thus far.

The $600 "chicken in every pot" tax rebate idea was a bust. Can you actually account for what you did with it discretely from any other expenditure? Can you identify any micro-economic or macro-economic impact on your life?

The $700B TARP fund has simply shored up the balance sheets of failed banks. It has not removed toxic assets from balance sheets, it has not punished imprudent management, it has not rewarded performance, it has not spurred or restarted lending to individuals and small business --- it is like putting more gasoline in a truck that is on fire and sending them down the road without putting out the fire. It only delays the day of reckoning.

"Hey, buddy, would you give us a fill up so we can get down the road, but, hey, don't put out that fire, we'll deal with it another time."

"Sure, fellows, here's $700,000,000 and y'all have a nice day."

"What do I owe you?"

"Oh, hell, it's on the American taxpayer, don't worry about it."

"Much obliged, you freakin' rubes!"

The TARP has had no positive impact on the economy.

Now we are getting to spend a $1,000,000,000,000 --- look at all those damn zeroes --- ehaaaaaah! and nobody even bothered to read the damn bill. You can't make this stuff up. Nobody, nobody, nobody read the damn bill. LOL

And you think Pres Obama isn't being "supported"? LOL

Would you give a fella $1,000,000,000,000 and not read the documents to find out what he's gonna spend it on? Hahahahaha, well apparently so.

Then when he signs the bill in Denver, he says he might need at least another $1,000,000,000,000!

Last point, the American car companies are already back needing more money $35,000,000,000 to be exact! They need a bit of Darwinian survival of the fittest.

Is this a great country or what?

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

Last point and then I will shut up for the night.

Today, Pres Obama formally authorized an additional 17,000 combat troops for Afghanistan. He had no choice really because they have to get settled in before the snow melts so they can get on with killing Taliban --- a very, very good thang --- come spring and the snowmelt. BTW, can you imagine fighting at 14,000'?

Have you noticed something --- now that Pres Obama has the same intelligence briefings that Pres Bush had for the last 8 years, his policy decisions seem to be so, so, so, -------------------- well, Bush-like.

This is reality. He now feels the burden of what Pres Bush felt in keeping us safe for 8 years and Pres Obama knows how dangerous the world really is. He's a smart guy and he understands this is not some Acorn baloney this is the real world, a very dangerous place.

No precipitous withdrawal from Iraq, no great lessening of the commitment to Afghanistan, no miracle cures of the economy, no great diplomatic breakthroughs, the Russians up to increased mischief, Chavez up to mischief, the N Koreans getting ready to fire a new long range missile while rekindling their nuclear program and good old Hillary is out there shmoozing, the Middle East aflame and the Israelis getting ready to take out Iran's nuclear facilities -------- and the Chinese, keep your eyes on the Chinese because they are using this chaos to get ready to start some real mischief. Don't be surprised if they suddenly decide to invade Taiwan the second we are committed hip deep in Afghanistan.

Reality and governing really suck when compared to campaigning. Hope and change, hope and change --- hell, that was a much, much easier gig.

Good luck, Godspeed to our and my President!

Good night!

0

Jules Palyo 5 years, 10 months ago

A true economic stimulus plan would work to help get the economy going again. The problem with this one is that it is the same old government playing the same old game. There is a lot of money thrown at the problem but not in the right place. It is difficult to know exactly where the money is going and what the stipulations are to access the funds. There are reports of much of it going to special interests which is not a surprise given that nobody even read the bill. I'm disappointed that Obama started off his presidency by being a puppet to the democratic party. He ran on CHANGE yet he did not step up to the plate a cut out the "pork" which we will be paying for in years to come. I'm sure some special interest people will be "stimulated" but I'm worried about throwing money at something that is broken instead of coming up with a clear "business plan" like us in the real world have to do to ensure future success.

0

Alobar 5 years, 10 months ago

JLM- I'm afraid I do not have the time to respond with a 1000 word essay as you have done, however I will contribute a rebuttle. First off, the stimulus bill is not 1 trillion dollars, that's a gross exaggeration. So quit with the "1 Trillion, 1 Trillion!" theatrics.

To say that the politicians didn't read it is an unfair assumption as well. Sure, i'd imagine they didn't have time to read the finalized version cover to cover before voting on it. The point you leave out is that the original bill that passed the house a week or so earlier was in large part the exact same bill. Over the process of revising the bill, in Obama's attempt to include the republicans, alot was taken out. Don't be naive enough to think that Pelosi wrote this bill alone, and that it passed the house and senate without each politician fully understanding it.

288 billion to middle class tax relief, 53 billion to education, 43 billion to green energy, 59 billion to healthcare, 144 billion for state and local fiscal relief - All seem to me like great areas to invest money...

In regards to your comment about Obama sending troops into Afghanistan, Obama has said publicly he was for this throughout his whole campaign. He supports going after the people who attacked us first, which is why i'm sure we'll see troops being diverted from Iraq. Bush and his cronies got us into quite a mess in the Middle East, and of course we're in too deep to just completly pull out now. The administration of the last 8 years handed Obama a steaming pile of shi_t, to which the American people expect him to easily turn into a delicious cinnamon bun. Mmmmm

We Elected Obama, now we need to support Obama. What is the point of complaining about things before we know if they will work or not?

0

playa46 5 years, 10 months ago

CenterRight-

"This spending plan has no chance of helping the economy recover or help any of us individually. For those of you who say that we needed to do something other than return to the failed policies of the last 8 years - I say that Bush in the White House did not get us into this problem and Obama in the White House will not get us out of it."

What makes you say Bush did not get us into this mess. Or Obama won't get us out. People need to wait before they go running their mouths.

0

CenterRight 5 years, 10 months ago

This spending plan has no chance of helping the economy recover or help any of us individually. For those of you who say that we needed to do something other than return to the failed policies of the last 8 years -- I say that Bush in the White House did not get us into this problem and Obama in the White House will not get us out of it.

The issue is CONGRESS and has always been Congress! If you can not see that from this Bill you are blind. The Government has little impact on how the economy runs.

Barney Frank, Chris Dodd - Both Democrats caused this housing market issue by using Government Agencies to force banks to make bad loans to people that should have never been given loans. Now they are bailing out Companies that should not be bailed out because they are failing.

History has proved that spending will never solve anything. When you have an issue - Do you spend or Save. They gave money to the banks and now the banks are saving it and not lending it.

Tax cuts, either in the form of payroll taxes or a tax holiday would have been a better solution. Once the Government increases in size it will never decrease.

We now have to support a bigger government for ever. Just want the Democrats always wanted.

0

playa46 5 years, 10 months ago

JLM- Ahahahahaha, WTF do you think it means?

You said: "Playa, babe

WTF does this really mean:

'Do you at all realize that Bush has put us in 4 trillion dollar for paying off countries alone?'

WTF does that mean? I just hope you're stoned cause it is really mystifying. WTF, over?"

Ah, I love it when you get backed into a corner. You simply imply that I am stoner and start calling me names. Lemme help you with what I meant.

A long time ago..... In the year of 2000, a man known as George W. Bush was elected president of the United States. Years later, he declares war on Iraq, and soon, "Mission Accomplished" took place as we won the war. But that wasn't good enough for him, he goes ahead to keep fighting in Iraq, getting us into foreign affairs, which all sums up to.....um TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS!!

I don't know if you noticed, but name calling is a lame way to put up a fight.

"BTW, the election is over, long over. Pres Bush has moved back to Texas. Pres Obama is in charge. He wanted the job and told us his policies were superior to Pres Bush's policies. Now is the time to prove it. Stop beating that dead horse.

Just for the record, Candidate Obama was not running against Pres Bush, he was running against a guy named McCain. Not to be too cynical, but campaigning and governing are two very different things."

Now, that guy named McCain actually supported Bush 90% of the time. (Yes, we can keep saying this.) You wanted a man who supported Bush on the two wars we are in, which costs us billions, no, Trillions of dollars which we can no longer use, now we are in a recession and you thought "Ya, lets keep spending in this war!" Now, you think "Obama wants to get us out of this war and sign a plan that would help stimulate our economy which stops us loosing money, McCain was better, Obama is an idiot!!" Call me crazy, but do people actually think before opening their mouths?

I can do what I want to that dead horse. I can keep beating it, laugh at it, and show others why it is now dead. Cuz' its the truth!

"This is not like kindergarten T ball where everybody gets a hit, gets on base, is never out and both teams "win" and then we go out for ice cream. Pres Obama "guesses" wrong and there will be chaos in the markets and we fall into the abyss. Fasten your seat belts cause the train is leaving the station and this is real life."

Again, see my paragraph above.

0

playa46 5 years, 10 months ago

Cont.

"Hey, buddy, would you give us a fill up so we can get down the road, but, hey, don't put out that fire, we'll deal with it another time."

"Sure, fellows, here's $700,000,000 and y'all have a nice day."

"What do I owe you?"

"Oh, hell, it's on the American taxpayer, don't worry about it."

"Much obliged, you freakin' rubes!"

The TARP has had no positive impact on the economy.

Now we are getting to spend a $1,000,000,000,000 look at all those damn zeroes ehaaaaaah! and nobody even bothered to read the damn bill. You can't make this stuff up. Nobody, nobody, nobody read the damn bill. LOL"

Ok, I dunno how 700,000,000 equals a billion dollars, but ok, if that's what you believe go right ahead.

Then for your last post went on saying Obama has the I.Q. of a Bush, yaddah yaddah.

It's not at all worshiping Obama, it is politics brought down to Earth, I hope one day, you understand that.

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

How does the $797,000,000,000 Porkulus get to $1,000,000,000? Good question.

Easy answer.

It is going to be paid for by the issuance of Treasury securities. You have to pay interest on Treasuries and it will likely take 30 years to repay this debt.

If the 30-year Treasury is priced at 3.5% and the balance subject to interest is $797,000,000,000 then the first year interest is going to be $27,900,000,000 alone. If no principal is retired for just the first ten (10) years (highly likely scenario), then the interest alone will be $279,000,000,000 during that time period (which disregards interest on interest, which is an unfortunate reality because we are going to have to pay interest on this interest also).

$797,000,000,000 + $297,000,000,000 = $1,094,000,000,000

Remember this is just the first 10 years.

So, this is why I call the "$797,000,000,000" Porkulus at least $1,000,000,000 and recognize I am being very, very charitable because if no principal is retired for the entire 30 year period (again, a very, very likely concept since the National Debt continues to increase), then the aggregate cost will be $2,161,366,746,520.

Do the math, use Excel and let me know if I am wrong.

So the truth is that the Porkulus will ultimately cost over $2 trillion. This is a bad truth and nobody really wants to talk about it cause we are into "hope" and we damn sure hope is it not this bad.

That's today's lesson in the "time value of money" boys and girls.

Now all you whiz kid Wall Street types resist the temptation to tell me that we will finance it with shorter term T notes and T bills because they have lower interest rates, cause nobody with a brain finances a long term obligation with a short term maturity when you know interest rates are going up over the long term and when the Treasury auctions might just dry the hell up. But even then, it will still be over $1.5 trillion, now won't it?

0

sickofitall 5 years, 10 months ago

And who was whining about borrowing money to invade Iraq?? Guess we did not read the facts on that one either!

0

seeuski 5 years, 10 months ago

For Playa and the other Saddam Hussein oppoligists a brief summary of the history of his state sponsored terrorism is in order.

http://www.husseinandterror.com/

Smart people ask themselves questions like, why have we not been attacked here since 9/11(the 2003 Iraq war)? Or, if Saddam Hussein was openly paying the Palestinian suicide bombers to kill Jews and Americans in Isreal would he possibly have sponsored Al Q'uaida to do the same here(in a second)? Did Saddam have a reason to start attacking the USA after the 1991 Gulf war(revenge)? Or, if Saddam and Al Q'uaida hate each other then why do they share the same enemies like the Saudi leadership the Jews and all other Infidels and of course the USA(both are of the Sunni faith and the 1991 gulf war involved a coalition that included the USA, Israel and Suadi Arabia amongst others to oust Iraq from Kuwait)?

You can ignore the facts and reality but you do it at your own peril. Saying that George Bush attacked Iraq for no good reason is just asenine when every lying liberal at one time or another blamed the same Saddam Hussein for most of the ills of the middle east and voted for the use of power against Iraq after 9/11, they are recorded saying that Hussein is a threat. If Congress gave Obama the same green light to act against a known terrorist threat and failed to do so he would be breaking his Presidential oath of office to serve and protect this nation. The bottom line is that there is evidence both public and ,as I have been informed by those with clearences, secret that the late great Saddam Hussein was involved with terrorist acts both here and abroad that killed Americans.

Thank you George W. Bush for ignoring the whiners and doing what was required to protect this Country.

0

nikobesti 5 years, 10 months ago

seeuski and our Republican congressionals thinking:

Spending billions of dollars on roads, bridges, and schools in Iraq = GOOD Spending billions of dollars on roads, bridges, and schools in America = BAD

Bush tax cuts, McCain proposed tax cuts = GOOD Obama/Dem tax cuts = BAD

When did Republican hypocrites, who drove a budget surplus into a record deficit, gain the moral high ground on government spending?

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

niko ---

I almost never find myself agreeing with you but I must agree totally with your observations as it relates to spending on infrastructure (roads, bridges, schools) in Iraq v in the United States. You are right on this score!

I have often thought that if I were the Mayor of Newark, NJ, I would declare war on the US, fire a couple of shots, surrender and then wait for the rebuilding teams to come.

I think there is a very different perspective on the issue of tax cuts. The Republicans want to the cut the taxes of folks who actually PAY taxes while the Democrats want to redistribute tax revenue to folks who DONT pay taxes. Big difference. You are way wrong on this one.

The Republicans were simply wrong in their spending levels and priorities during the Bush years. It was the Republican Congress and President Bush failed to control them. He should have vetoed about 75% of the legislation which ended up on his desk. You are right on that score.

But now the Republicans are back.

Who was the leader who brought the Republicans back to their fundamental values, who reunited them when they had been defeated convincingly at the polls, who breathed life back into their souls when they were cast out by the American electorate, who redeemed their manhood from the pawn shop, who offered them political Viagra?

Nancy Pelosi! LOL

Speaker Pelosi has made the Republicans back into well....................Republicans! You go, girl!

0

nikobesti 5 years, 10 months ago

JLM: folks like you who equally condemned the neocons and Bush for record spending have the right to complain about Obama and the Dems. I think you understand I'm not leveling the charge of hypocrisy on you or other "conservatives" who were none too happy with Bush's spending.

But then there's those who were lock-step in agreement with Bush and company, including some of the very same Republicans Representatives and Senators who spent and spent and spent under Bush. These folks have ZERO right to talk about spending, and I'll call them everytime on that BS. Thus, I called out a poster who defended spending in Iraq but complains about building our own infrastructure.

0

seeuski 5 years, 10 months ago

niko wrote: "seeuski and our Republican congressionals thinking:

Spending billions of dollars on roads, bridges, and schools in Iraq = GOOD Spending billions of dollars on roads, bridges, and schools in America = BAD

Bush tax cuts, McCain proposed tax cuts = GOOD Obama/Dem tax cuts = BAD

When did Republican hypocrites, who drove a budget surplus into a record deficit, gain the moral high ground on government spending?"

What in my previous response had anything to do with the Obama spending bill? I am in agreement as far as who should pay the bills in Iraq. They have a resource to cover their infrastructure costs, oil.

As far as taxes I echo what JLM wrote. I do have a big problem with the obvious redistribution of wealth programs to groups that are greatly responsible for the mess we are in, namely ACORN, who are now on the news for their plans to violently protest foreclosure processes for those who are failing on the famous gov't loans that were doled out to the unqualified. They want the American taxpayers to pay off the loans and leave the offenders in those homes. Rediculous. This is a new way for ACORN to gain reperations for the poor. It was ACORN that pressured Dem leaders to soften the lending standards at Fannie/Freddie. We have allready partially bailed out the Banks that doled out that money and lost and now ACORN also wants to keep the defaulters in the homes without paying. Enough.

0

seeuski 5 years, 10 months ago

One question, where would the economy be today if it had not been for the housing debacle?

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

niko ---

Actually, I do not condemn the Democrats. I think today we are locked in a common struggle not WITH each other but AGAINST the economy and a history of actions which are absolutely indefensible. The more I see of Pres Obama, the more I like him but not necessarily his policies.

I wonder what it must be like to go to bed every night with the world on fire and you are supposed to be the fireman --- and you truly have no clue as to what you are doing. This is not a pejorative offensive comment --- hell, nobody really knows what they are doing any more.

I truly believe that the Democrats believe in their actions, are just as patriotic (well except for Joe Biden who confuses patriotism and taxes --- lol, but he's just an idiot and even Obama laughs at him --- which just makes me like Obama more) but it worries me that they would champion something so idiotic as "condoms" in a jobs stimulus bill. You can be sincere and stupid at the same time.

I cannot fathom what the Congressional Republicans and Pres Bush were doing as it relates to spending. It is the intellectual equivalent of finding out your sister is a guy. Huh? Who are these folks? There is absolutely no explanation!

The funny thing is that GW Bush was a fabulous Governor of Texas and was able to build a true bi-partisan coalition. He was damn good and he was very, very popular. Somehow, Washington changed him. He should have smacked those Republicans and told them he was for reduced spending.

It is such a mystery to me that I sometimes wonder if I am just an idiot and am somehow missing the very, very obvious. Oh, well!

One of the things I like about Obama at this instant is that he has championed the HASP legislation himself rather than letting the Congress and Speaker Pelosi fashion it. That was smart. He's learning.

0

Fred Duckels 5 years, 10 months ago

Centerright, To add to your blog, it was Chris Dodd's filabuster that prevented oversight on the Freddie-Fannie fiasco. A good example of knee jerk liberalism at it's best.

0

nikobesti 5 years, 10 months ago

Seeuski: you said you didn't support the stimulus in your first post, and supported the war in Iraq your second post. But, to answer your question about the housing crisis, yes, it's definitely the root of the problems we're having now.

It's ludicrous to blame only the Dems. Give me a break with the BS about how this coincided with the Dems taking power in Congress. This problem has been MANY years in the making, more than just Bush and even farther back than Clinton. Clinton and Newt Gingrich and company pushed through a lot of deregulation that got us into this mess. I put most of the blame on the companies themselves. They knew they were pushing their luck with foolish mortgages. Just as I think it's unfair for liberals to put the blame fully on Bush, it's ridiculous to put the blame fully on the Dems, many of whom weren't even around to sow the seeds of destruction. Both parties are responsible in my book, but the industry is the most to blame. They made their bed, now they have to lie in it (or maybe they'll get bailed out. LOL!)

I also agree with JLM that even the best and brightest financial minds in the world today don't have much of a clue what to do here. I try to lean on these guys since my strong suit is not the economy, but when they can't even agree on a course of action, we know we're in quite the pickle. As much as a Japan-like recession really scares me, I wonder if we're propping up failed institutions and should just let them fall and build new, sound ones.

0

seeuski 5 years, 10 months ago

niko, I don't mean to be demeaning but it seems you don't understand what you read in my first post and are confused about the Banks that loaned those mortgages. The Banks had to make those loans or they would be breaking anti redlining laws. I also don't understand the constant denial of what occured starting in 1999 when first Clinton warned his Dem colleagues about the lax Freddie/Fannie guidelines and then new President Bush in 2001 followed by others including McCain in 2003 and again in 2006. The Congressional hearings regarding those loans are available on youtube or c-span. The election is long over and I am hoping for the best from the new administration because I don't have enough time on this planet if things continue down this garden path to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

Your last statemant is how I am feeling. So what if a Bank goes under, someone will hang a new sign out front and do it right, without stimulus (free tax) money that is ours and then charge us to borrow it. The automakers are hamstrung by terrible union(organized crime) contracts. They will never be able to put a competitive product out there so our stimulus dollars is good money after bad. So many in Congress are beholden to the Unions that they are now going to pass a bill to force non secret voting in non union shops. Anti-American.

Anyway I did say I hope for positive results in my first post.

0

ybul 5 years, 10 months ago

Seeuski. It is not just the housing debacle. It is bubble after bubble being fueled by lax credit fueling the dot com bubble.

Go look up elliot wave and the k-cycle winter. Many people have forecast this mess. In addition an investment advisor stated that the stock market peaks with population spikes and forecast a top in 2006-2007 when I spoke with him in the late 90's.

The economy, needs a recess and people need to reassess what is important, in life and an economy not structured on debt and pre-instant gratification will form, different from today. Travel will still be a part, those traveling may be coming from a different region and may not be buying condos. But, there will be an economy. Maybe as opposed to consolidation of industry, we will see fragmentation which began to occur in the early nineties and then the stock market bubble really took off with all the funds pouring in as more and more companies began offering 401ks and people thought it wise to take on debt to invest in the stock market, forgetting about risk. Reality struck and the economy is restructuring as we speak, but the government is intervening in subtle ways to protect corporate interests (bailouts, more red tape to run your business, etc.)

0

oldskoolstmbt 5 years, 10 months ago

if OBAMA was handed the same country as any of our past presidents....well, what a great f'in job this would have been...it's too late however to hold our other pres's under the same scrutiny as some will continue to hold OBAMA under...it's been what?...a month?...BREATH, again...

0

nikobesti 5 years, 10 months ago

seeuski, what are you "redlining laws" are you referring to that forced banks to make marginal loans? Are you referring to the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) passed under Carter and amended in the 90s that required some banks to loan to minorities? Although this might have been a contributing factor, it was in no way a major factor in the bank collapse.

The CRA applies to depository banks. But many of the institutions that spurred the massive growth of the subprime market weren't regulated banks. They were outfits such as Argent and American Home Mortgage, which were generally not regulated by the Federal Reserve or other entities that monitored compliance with CRA. These institutions worked hand in glove with Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, entities to which the CRA likewise didn't apply.

Plus, the CRA didn't force mortgage companies to offer loans for no money down, or to throw underwriting standards out the window, or to encourage mortgage brokers to aggressively seek out new markets. Nor did the CRA force the credit-rating agencies to slap high-grade ratings on packages of subprime debt.

Additionally, lending money to poor people and minorities isn't inherently risky. There's plenty of evidence that in fact it's not that risky at all. That's what we've learned from several decades of microlending programs, at home and abroad, with their very high repayment rates. And as the New York Times recently reported, Nehemiah Homes, a long-running initiative to build homes and sell them to the working poor in subprime areas of New York's outer boroughs, has a repayment rate that lenders in Greenwich, Conn., would envy. In 27 years, there have been fewer than 10 defaults on the project's 3,900 homes. That's a rate of 0.25 percent.

Dumb lending originated in Greenwich, Conn., midtown Manhattan, and Southern California, not Eastchester, Brownsville, and Washington, D.C. Investment banks created a demand for subprime loans because they saw it as a new asset class that they could dominate. They made subprime loans for the same reason they made other loans: They could get paid for making the loans, for turning them into securities, and for trading them-frequently using borrowed capital.

CRA and loaning to minorities are not responsible for the supremely poor decision-making seen in the financial system. Much of this crisis lies directly on the banks and their risky behavior.

0

Fred Duckels 5 years, 10 months ago

The basic problem is banks loaning money that could not be repaid. They were forced by social engineers to give the undeserving another chance. The doubters tried to gain oversight, but were filabustered out. This created a bloated economy that created chaos. Sound business practices work but they are not designed to compensate for faulty input.

0

ybul 5 years, 10 months ago

nikobesti,

The Federal Reserve did such a good job of regulating Citibank and the rest of the banks that have failed or been bailed out right?

Who regulates the Federal Reserve, eh, a quasi private company that the government has not been able to audit.

0

seeuski 5 years, 10 months ago

Niko, You write very nicely and can be very convincing of your knowledge but, you are spinning yarn. Enough has been said here and on other posts about the Fannie/Freddie programs which you ignore so eloquently.

"The GSE business model faces inherent conflicts due its combination of government mission and private ownership. According to the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think-tank: "The government mission required them to keep mortgage interest rates low and to increase their support for affordable housing. Their shareholder ownership, however, required them to fight increases in their capital requirements and regulation that would raise their costs and reduce their risk-taking and profitability. But there were two other parties--Congress and the taxpayers--that also had a stake in the choices that Fannie and Freddie made. Congress got some benefits in the form of political support from the GSEs' ability to hold down mortgage rates, but it garnered even more political benefits from GSE support for affordable housing."[15]

In 2003, the Bush Administration sought to create an agency to oversee Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.[16] While Senate and House leaders voiced their intention to bring about the needed legislation, no reform bills materialized. A Senate reform bill introduced by Senator John Corzine (D-NJ) (S.1656) never made it out of the 21-member (10D/11R) Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.[17]. At the time members of the 108th congress expressed faith in the solvency of Fannie and Freddie. Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA), for example, described them as "not facing any kind of financial crisis." [18]

In 2005, the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act, sponsored by Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and co-sponsored by Senators Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), John McCain (R-AZ) and John Sununu (R-NH)[2], would have increased government oversight of loans given by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Like the 2003 bill, it also died in the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, this time in the 109th Congress. A full and accurate record of the congressional attempts to regulate the housing GSEs is given in the Congressional record prepared in 2005. [19][20]

Gerald P. O'Driscoll, the former vice president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, stated that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had become classic examples of crony capitalism. Government backing let Fannie and Freddie dominate the mortgage-underwriting. They returned some of the profits to the politicians, sometimes directly, as campaign funds, and sometimes as "contributions to favored constituents." [21]

Just some truth. There's more if you need it. 46% of the national debt is associated to these 2 institutions.

0

playa46 5 years, 10 months ago

Niko- Don't listen to the righties. You are spot on.

JLM- "I truly believe that the Democrats believe in their actions, are just as patriotic (well except for Joe Biden who confuses patriotism and taxes lol, but he's just an idiot and even Obama laughs at him which just makes me like Obama more) but it worries me that they would champion something so idiotic as "condoms" in a jobs stimulus bill. You can be sincere and stupid at the same time."

Joe Biden may not be the smartest, but he would do a better job than Sarah Palin. I don't think Joe Biden is the idiot here...

Sorry, I have ben in Denver for a while.

0

nikobesti 5 years, 10 months ago

seeyski, you are quoting conservative think tanks. Of course they're going to blame the Dems and poor minorities. Your points only show that ALL politicians were involved in deregulation. Nice plug for McCain. What to take a look at all the deregulation he supported? Care to talk about all the deregulation supported by the GOP?

By the way, I'm glad I got a conservative to admit deregulation and lack of oversight was a major factor in this crisis.

As we've said before, there are/were many to blame for this crisis, and almost everyone disagrees who owns the most blame. But absolving the companies themselves, and/or trying to pin all this on the Dems is rediculous. And you know it.

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

uhhh, playa, babe, news flash --- the election is over and Pres Obama won and Joe Biden is his VP --- take a deep breath and drink it in, hell, enjoy it!

Nonetheless, Joe Biden was an idiot before the election, he was an idiot during the campaign, and he is an idiot as VP. He is not as smart as the average 5th grader. He is a clown. He is an MBNA a$$ clown. He is a tool of the credit card industry.

Joe Biden being an idiot has nothing to do w/ Sarah Palin. He is simply an idiot regardless of what other name one might attept to work into the same sentence.

Pres Obama had no idea what Joe Biden was talking about when he said that "...even if we do everything right, there is still a 30% chance we will get it wrong..."

Pres Obama laughed and said, well, ya know....Joe Biden! This was at his first national press conference. Even the press knows that Joe Biden is a buffoon.

That says it all. Even Pres Obama knows that Joe Biden is an idiot. And, hey, it's OK cause Joe Biden even knows he's an idiot.

And, now, playa, even you know that Joe Biden is an idiot. Roll around in it, get it under your fingernails, let it knot up your hair but just don't deny it. Joe Biden is an idiot.

0

playa46 5 years, 10 months ago

uhhh, JLM, babe, news-flash-

You wanted someone with absolutely no experience or smarts as a V.P., I can get proof too. No, you just sat there and gave your opinions on why he is an idiot.

"Nonetheless, Joe Biden was an idiot before the election, he was an idiot during the campaign, and he is an idiot as VP. He is not as smart as the average 5th grader. He is a clown. He is an MBNA a$$ clown. He is a tool of the credit card industry.

Joe Biden being an idiot has nothing to do w/ Sarah Palin. He is simply an idiot regardless of what other name one might attempt to work into the same sentence."

Okaaay, two things. How do you know? You simply are using words with no factual information at all and trying to convince me. Second thing, we see someone with a lot more experience than Sarah Palin, for one thing, but you can see past that. You can still call him an idiot. See, yes, Joe Biden being an "idiot" has something to do with Sarah Palin.

Up next: "Pres Obama had no idea what Joe Biden was talking about when he said that ":even if we do everything right, there is still a 30% chance we will get it wrong:"

Pres Obama laughed and said, well, ya know:.Joe Biden! This was at his first national press conference. Even the press knows that Joe Biden is a buffoon."

Okaay, two things. Obama knows Biden is smarter than that, so he simply cracks a joke. What, something wrong with that in politics? Second, Joe might have accidentally said something wrong once. Let's look at Palin again, many, many problems there. No, the press doesn't know that Biden is a buffoon, in fact, they know he is not. And I would like to see something saying the press does.

Last thing: "That says it all. Even Pres Obama knows that Joe Biden is an idiot. And, hey, it's OK cause Joe Biden even knows he's an idiot.

And, now, playa, even you know that Joe Biden is an idiot. Roll around in it, get it under your fingernails, let it knot up your hair but just don't deny it. Joe Biden is an idiot."

.........................two things. Because Joe said one slip-up, he is therefore an idiot? If Obama knew he was in idiot, don'cha think he would have not picked him??? Common Sense??? And last thing, you tried to convince me with you non-factual self-based information. See, you can't say Biden is an idiot, your just trying to steal the fire Dems used for Palin. Perhaps the only time anyone has heard Obama call Biden an idiot was during SNL...as a joke.

Nice try though. Have a nice day.

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

"Because Joe said one slip-up, he is therefore an idiot?"

Hahahahahahaha, are you serious? The guy is a one man gaffe riot. Go look up the Newsweek Gaff O Matic for goodness sake. Where have you been for the last 6 months? LOL

One slip up? Hmmmm, I don't know about that playa --- your nose is lengthening. You going Pinocchio on us, playa? LOL

How about the FDR (who wasn't the Pres) got on the TV (which hadn't been invented yet) and spoke to the American people about the Great Depression (which hadn't started yet or been named that)? Hmmmm

How about telling the guy in the wheel chair to "stand up"? Hmmmm

How about saying that Hillary Clinton might have been a better choice for VP? Hmmmm

How about opposing clean coal when Candidate Obama was supporting clean coal technology? Hmmmm

How about saying paying high taxes is "patriotic"? Hmmmm

Look, Joe Biden is an idiot. A world class knucklehead, a gargantuan idiot. Not even a close call. LOL

But, hey, he's your homie and I respect that, playa. I dig that you are still supporting him --- an idiot or otherwise. Idiots need love too. LOL

0

seeuski 5 years, 10 months ago

nikno, The reality of the facts are too recent and too easily available for you and the left to rewrite and propagandize. Yes there are plenty who will beat the drums with you but there are the rest of us who are willing to just take in the facts maam, just the facts. Think tank or not the info is a matter of record. Sorry. Oh, and now ACORN is getting their payback and trying to give away homes with our tax money.

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

The Acorn business is institutionalized corruption at the highest level. It is criminal activity and the Democratic party should be ashamed of themselves.

Acorn receiving one dime from the Porkulus is an indictment of the honesty of the Democratic party.

Luckily, apparently the only "honest" politician in Illinois got elected President. It would really be a mess if Illinois politics was corrupt, wouldn't it?

0

freerider 5 years, 10 months ago

RON PAUL is the only guy in Washington that has this right...he says let the banks fail ...no bailout money what-so-ever ...if your biz fails then tough luck..that's the nature of capitolism..dog eat dog...let GM and all the other dated car company's fail...get out of IRAQ and Afganistan...there both no win situations...get rid of the IRS as it's a failed federal mafia extortion institution...legalize drugs ...basically Ron Paul is saying " STOP WASTING MONEY " and stop all the wars ...all of them including the billion dollar drug war farce ...Ron Paul is the only true conservative out there...the Feds just mess everything up cuz they no nothing about running a business...they only know how to take your money and waste it...billions more on the AIDS SCAM ..check out Peter Duesburg sometime ...noted microbiolist says HIV was never isolated and doesn't exist...the people that say he a quack are making billions off this SCAM ...the list goes on and on ...health care..insurance company's ripping you off ...STOP WASTING MONEY....PORK PORK PORK AND MORE PORK ....I also remember Ron Paul saying " NO MORE LOBBYIST'S " I hear people say you can't get rid of the IRS ..How are the feds going to rip us off..?? well that's easy ... a national lottery will pay off the debt. and balance the budget ...with plenty of money left over to build more WMD'S

0

JLM 5 years, 10 months ago

You make a great argument for Ron Paul. I am starting to be a convert to Ron Paul simply on the basis that he is usually right.

It just takes everybody else a long time to get to his views.

I cannot agree on the legalization of drugs.

0

seeuski 5 years, 10 months ago

Definately not a Ron Paul fan. Whacky stuff this notion of no HIV and just ignore the terrorists and dump our friends like Israel. No, I agree more with the likes of Huckaby.

0

ybul 5 years, 10 months ago

Yep your right we'll just go so far in hawk policing the world that the terrorists, soviets, socialists will have won, and the once great United States will cease to be. We will fall like the Soviets did financially.

I was writing a long diatribe on financial history, germany prior to WWII and the results of their mess. But you will probably not listen so god speed and good luck with Huckabee, most of his ideas that he picked up steam with came from Ron Paul.

0

ybul 5 years, 10 months ago

Unfortunately, RP got some bad exposure last year as he did not conform to the status quo.

On terrorists and ignoring them, maybe you should read an article of his about suicide bombings www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=6712

On Israel, maybe read his thoughts... http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul335.html

I do not want to touch HIV, but I agree based on empirical evidence I see on how nutrition effects ones heath.

Like Obama, many people crossed party lines to support him. Actual investigation of his thoughts as opposed to taking sound bites to formulate ones opinion might be good.

He has by far the best policy thoughts on the environment.

Was the only candidate who addressed the issue of the looming problems and gave a real solution on how to fix it.

0

seeuski 5 years, 10 months ago

ybul, I have heard verbatem Ron Paul state his views on several occasions. I read both of his statements from your links, nothing new. I don't agree with this theory of his that the terrorists would stop killing innocents if we leave whatever supposed Islamic lands we are in. His belief is that terrorism has no Islamic state sponsor and I have seen evidence to the contrary, namely against Saddam Hussein, Iran, Libya, Syria etc. The Soviet Union has supported the Arab states surrounding Israel for decades which almost resulted in the mass murder of the Jews on several occasions and the U.S has done the right thing by not allowing a second, or completion of the 1st, Holocaust in aiding the Jewish state. History is a guide against the ideas of those that believe in Ron Pauls theory. WWII comes to mind. Everyone is antiwar but most won't stand by as innocent people are wiped out. Hence the words: NEVER AGAIN!

Ron Paul has no chance now or tommorow.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.