True and yet show me an economy which does not use deficit spending to exit or mitigate a recession. Fiscal prudence is paying off debt and even fostering surpluses when times are good. That did not happen.

Where are the Republicans on this? Where’s the outrage?

Knucklehead on June 5, 2009 at 12:37 PM

Republicans? Hell, where are the DEMOCRATS on this? They’re just willing to give all of their power away because they like the guy that’s taking it?

the Republican brand is in the toilet is because they completely mismanaged the economy and are as fiscally incontinent as the Democrats. Do a little research on recessions and see which party has more or fewer.

I can accept the blame people instinctively place on the R’s after seeing this start on Bush’s watch. But if that is obvious to the nation, then why are the D’s ramping up the same bad policies and running the economy into a wall? If D’s are so much smarter, then what the Hell are they doing about it? STOP DIGGING already!

I seem to recall your suggesting that the US economy was sound around August of last year. Think of the money that taxpayers could have saved if practicality ruled over ideology and the fed bought shares rather than handing over balance sheet cash or if the governement would have intervened more heavily when relatively small Wall St failures became apparent.

Hening on June 5, 2009 at 3:54 PM

Give examples if you are going to make sweeping statements like ‘good for finance.’ Are recessions ‘good for finance.’ Part of the reason why the Republican brand is in the toilet is because they completely mismanaged the economy and are as fiscally incontinent as the Democrats. Do a little research on recessions and see which party has more or fewer.

Well she is a spend and tax Democrat who has voted for all of the spending proposed in congress. Now will she vote for the federal VAT (sales) tax if it comes to the floor of the senate, the cap and trade bill HR-2454 or the proposal to tax IRA’s and 401k’s yearly gains. This week I am picketing her Annapolis office for her tax and spend policies in my civil grass roots war effort and urge you to do the same if you have tax and spend congresspeople representing you. They are ignoring our letters and the TEA Party rallies by folks like you and me, so time for more direct but peaceful action as MLK did!

Most in our government have probably forgotten that in 1786 under the weak Articles of Confederation, the corrupt government in Massachusetts ignored the non-violent attempts to stop their corrupt actions and the seizing of farmers’ land; that led to Shay’s Rebellion and our present constitution. Those who forget the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them, but in this case they just may have the lesson of rebellion repeated on them.

Good thing the American people have elected the greatest collection of stooges in US history to manage things.

1. The TARP money was sold as a mechanism for buying the toxic assets of the financial companies to give us a healthier financial sector that could lend money to keep business and industry functioning. Instead, these funds have been used to purchase controlling equity positions in a de facto nationalization. So the program was “sold” to Congress and the people as one thing and been used for something else. So you still have the companies holding these toxic assets but have had capital injections from the government to stay solvent. The symptom has been treated but the underlying cause is still there.

2. Interest rates will HAVE to rise with this level of deficit spending. When those rates do rise, those toxic assets will begin to default again. People with marginal means to pay their mortgage will default when rates rise and their payment goes up. So we are at risk of seeing a repeat of exactly the same scenario that got us into this mess in the first place … rising interest rates and a large amount of “marginal” loans.

There will not be a TARPII because the treasury is broke. Obama has cleaned it out. It’s gone. It is in the pockets of the people who donated the most to his campaign and those companies still hold all those toxic assets. NOW we have the Treasury talking about maybe buying some of those toxic assets … what they SAID they were going to do from the beginning and a plan I supported to improve the health of PRIVATE financial companies instead of using capital infusion as a mechanism for control over the companies and appointing pay czars, etc.

When rates go up and loans begin to default again, there will be no saving it because they squandered their chance. And Obama will get his crisis that allows him to take control of the entire financial system.

Banks retreating from partnership with Obama administration

Ed, apparently it’s a no-vault divorce.

Obama has implimented an enron business plan and if he left office, it would take years to unravel Geithner cunder ground transactions.
seven on June 5, 2009 at 2:37 PM

Let try to make sure this four years is all he gets!!

Buy Danish on June 5, 2009 at 2:02 PM

If they had bothered to ask I am sure any one of us could have filled them in.

I heard V.P. Cheney say that W didn’t want to leave office with companies failing and wanted the new administration to have time to get a handle on the situation and act accordingly. In retrospect I wonder if he would still agree…
Cindy Munford on June 5, 2009 at 12:50 PM

Not being fascists or Marxists, I don’t think they imagined in their wildest dreams that it could or would be perverted this way. They should have realized the Dems are masters of changing rules in the middle of the game and cannot be trusted to act in the best interest of this country.

maverick muse

I’m sure you’re just daydreaming here. Since the Dems hold both houses of congress and since they are gathered in a circle around Ogabe and since they would never vote to lose their pivot man, it will never happen.

Can these czars have any real legal power? If so, where do they get it from?

From various penumbras and emanations of the Messiah’s assumed Powers. They are as bogus as 0bama is.

Yes, trolls, I know 0bama won the election but that does not diminish his bogusness.

Organize Impeachment
Christmas 2009

maverick muse on June 5, 2009 at 12:29 PM

Doesn’t Congress have to impeach?

Do I have to tell you what the chances are of that happening?

rockmom on June 5, 2009 at 1:15 PM

If anyone actually admits that all of this happened to save ONE stupid bank, I will throw myself off my roof. Not to worry, one story built on a slab, injuries at a minimum.

Chris Dodd in particular lied about his involvement

Ed,

Chris Dodd in particular lied misspoke about his involvement.

There I fixed it so it was more politically palatable.

How would they be threatened into submission? There are conservatives that are speaking out about this… even some in congress. It appears that the GOPers with the most clout are perfectly fine with some of this though.

Upstater85 on June 5, 2009 at 12:51 PM

I’ve no idea, but it was made very public, the Obama administration likes to use it’s muscle, to get their way. However, I see more of my first thought, being more viable. They don’t mind our country going in the direction it’s being forced into.

Here in my part of the world, New Hampshire, many of the toxic REO assets had already been sold before O’bama was even elected by the media. A fact that they kept to themselves.

Say, with all this talk of czars, who’s Rasputin in all of this?

Axelrod? Valerie Jarret (who’s gradually been getting more airtime)?

BuckeyeSam on June 5, 2009 at 1:19 PM

Not to mention Barack Blagojevich Lenin.