We have this kind of thing going on because we keep sending the Reps and Senators back to D.C. for the long term..
We get what we voted for..
So we should be up set with our selfs and not the ones that we have voted for.. WE are the ones to blame.

__________________
Fear the Government

Federal Reserve Act
Dispersed throughout 12 USC; ch. 6, 38 Stat. 251 (December 23, 1913)

To provide for the establishment of Federal reserve banks, to furnish an elastic currency, to afford means of rediscounting commercial paper, to establish a more effective supervision of banking in the United States, and for other purposes.

Federal Reserve Act

I suppose this falls under "and for other purposes"?

By "Reps" do you mean Republicans?

You need to read a little more about what happened and changed in the markets and the Fed while Clinton was Prez.

Everybody is dirty on this one Ak...Dems and Reps

Oh and while your thinking..take a look at Hillary's and Obama's top contributors...see any connection?...I thought so.

By Reps I mean the House ........ Both dems and republicans....... as there has become NO difference between the two parties.
I know that there are people that feel that the person that they elected is doing such a great job that they need to vote them back, but look at what happens....... elected people taking money and changing the laws to the better for the ones giving the money.

People say that it is time for a change...... but sadly they will vote the same political machine back in power just under a different name.

For true change put another party in that is not or has not had any power..... be it green, lib , indep...... or frak the socialist party ,,,,,,, any one BUT the Dems or Reps.

__________________
Fear the Government

Ya know, the problem is not Bear Stearns, it is how this shit never ends.

From the S&L bailout, to Enron and Global crossing, to the big drug companies loaning private jets to Congressmen, it is all efed up.

When do the people finally say...............

ENOUGH!

I couldn't agree more, except for the socialist part........

The SYSTEM has become so corrupt, so entrenched, it can no longer be fixed from within. We need to fix the system and the ONLY WAY to do that is to stop electing people from the two ruling parties. In order to promote change it would be important to stop voting for any party that becomes too powerful. Always looking for independents. Always looking for people who do NOT WANT THE JOB, but we force them to do it by begging. Some men are born to greatness, some seek greatness and some have greatness THRUST UPON THEM.

It has been said the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. I have always wondered how many Americans actually believe that and what most Americans believe "eternal vigilance" actually means.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

When cable/satellite TV goes down for a couple days and they have to actually read a newspaper.

Whether it is cable news, satellite news, or a newspaper, it is all the same bloody thing. People will believe anything no matter what they read, don't read, etc. There is so much data out there, each with their own objective and bias, that it is better to always be pessimistic from any news source than to believe one that is totally in your own political idealogy.

Amen to that.
It is time for a change, and not the one Obama peaks of.

__________________
Anyone who thinks freedom comes cheap, please put the blindfold on and stand against the wall.

Many times I believe Americans will have to take back the country and start a new government.

I know of two unbiased papers but can't say for sure how many are out there.
I know of many left-winged one-sided ones though.

__________________
Anyone who thinks freedom comes cheap, please put the blindfold on and stand against the wall.

Many times I believe Americans will have to take back the country and start a new government.

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

Well don't keep us in suspense, which two papers are unbiased?

?

This is terrible. Why should taxpayers be made to suffer like this? What can we do about it?

The thing is these banks made very risky loans - some even to homeless people.

Only 15% of Americans Support Government Bailout of Banks « Battlefield Of A Peaceful Warrior

They need to suffer the consequences of their "investment" decisions. If they are wiped out - fine - that is what the market is about. We will have only those banks left that do not encourage scams like the sub prime mortgage. Why don't the CEOs of the banks who made the loans bail them out - they can afford to - they made billions in salary, options and bonuses last year and it was their bank - not mine.

The people who borrowed more than they could afford should never have done so. It wasn't the fine print they they missed, because the loans are very clear that you WILL have to pay back the loan; interest and principal.

These homeowners do not deserve a bailout either! They need to sell their homes and rent or find a smaller home they can afford just like the rest of the people in America do. This is what the country has been doing before the "sub prime" mortgage.

It is unfair for these irresponsible people who borrowed more than they could afford to ask for a bailout at the expense of those who exercised financial and personal responsibility.

Or is America is becoming a communist country?

Have you seen the 3-31-08 cover of Businessweek? It shows Ben Bernanke in profile against a bright red and orange backdrop, pensively stroking his grey beard and looking remarkably like Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.

Comrade Ben Shalom Bernanke:

bernanke-revolutionary.png (image)

The imagery is not a coincidence.

Beware America - be very aware!

81% of Americans say country headed in the wrong direction.

__________________
"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
~Thomas Jefferson

"There is Still No Such Thing As a Fair Tax"

recipe for disaster.....yes by god lets raise taxes


Hoover's Heirs
April 3, 2008; Page A14
Democrats may not be able to agree on a Presidential nominee, but at least they're united on one thing: The ghost of Herbert Hoover now stalks the land.

Senator Chuck Schumer – you had already guessed that – kicked off the revival last month on the Senate floor, claiming that the Bush Administration's policy was "Let the economy sink" and "We heard that from Herbert Hoover."


A week later, Mr. Schumer returned to his history lesson in a press release claiming that "this President is beginning to resemble Herbert Hoover in his hands-off approach."

Hillary Clinton joined the seance next, tentatively at first. On March 18, she said that "nobody likes to make comparisons" to the Great Depression, while noting that her colleague Mr. Schumer was doing it anyway. Five days later, Mr. Schumer was back at it on the Sunday talk circuit, echoing Representative Marcy Kaptur's (D., Ohio) claim that "we have the most anemic job growth since Herbert Hoover."

By last week, Mrs. Clinton was in full Ghostbusters mode, claiming that John McCain's speech on the housing problem "sounds remarkably like Herbert Hoover, and I don't think that's good economic policy."

No, Senator, it surely isn't. Around our offices, we're still recovering from the fact that Hoover was the last Presidential candidate we've endorsed. We've been trashing Hoovernomics ever since. The issue this year, however, is who is really pursuing the Hoover model.

To hear Mr. Schumer and his fellow-traveling columnists tell it, Hoover's great policy blunder was to do nothing, all the while insisting that everything was fine. But the problem with Hoover's economic policy isn't that it was passive but that it was actively destructive.

In 1930, he signed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, setting off a wave of protectionist retaliation that undid the globalization of the preceding decades and did far more harm to the world economy than the stock-market crash ever did. Two years later, amid a bad recession, he undid the Calvin Coolidge-Andrew Mellon tax cuts, raising the top marginal income-tax rate to 63% from 25%. The recession became a Depression.


Now, since we're talking Hoover, which Presidential candidate has a similar agenda of protectionism and tax increases? Hmmm.

Oh, that's right. Just the other day, one of the candidates for President was saying she'd withdraw from Nafta if the Mexicans didn't do what she demanded, and she wants "a pause" in free trade. She also wants to repeal the Bush tax cuts, more than doubling the rate on dividends back to 39.6% from 15%.

Her Democratic opponent agrees with her, except that he'd raise taxes even more, including by eliminating the $102,000 cap on income subject to the 6.2% payroll tax (12.4% when you include employers), and raising the capital gains tax to at least 25%, and maybe even 28%, from 15%. Add up all of Barack Obama's tax increases and his proposals would get entirely too close to Hoover's top marginal rate of 63%.

Maybe we should be afraid of Hoover's ghost.

Hoover's Heirs - WSJ.com

__________________
Obama-e fungis nati homines....

Yes, the Dems will always believe that they can spend our money smarter than we can. There is something inherent in their persona to make them always want more tax money, no matter the effect on the economy.