Re: POLITICS - Bailout Reader was: Secretary of Treasury becomes financial dictator if we let him

[Guest guest]

Now that the deal has been done, some of you might find the Bailout

Reader of interest: http://mises.org/story/3128

They are brief articles covering all aspects of this bailout of a

bailout of a bailout, ad infinitum ad nauseam.

Topics include:

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

The Housing Bubble

Inflationary Finance

Community Reinvestment Act (you didn't really think banks started

making sub-prime loans initially because they wanted to, did you?)

Short Selling

The Austrian Theory of the Business Cycle

Who Predicted This?

What To Do

Books to Distribute

_________

--

Buffalo too, has beautiful summers but not this year. Cool and rainy.

For the first time in ten years, we never installed the air

conditioners. My line on all this is, somebody better do something

about global warming before I freeze to death. - Ostrowski

" If you're not on somebody's watch list, you're not doing your job " -

Dave Von Kleist

[Guest guest]

Yesterday's Counterpunch (still up first at www.counterpunch.org

until they come out with the new issue) by Mike Whitney is very

relevent to this topic and I hope people get a chance to read it and

call their representatives today.

>

> Now that the deal has been done, some of you might find the Bailout

> Reader of interest: http://mises.org/story/3128

>

> They are brief articles covering all aspects of this bailout of a

> bailout of a bailout, ad infinitum ad nauseam.

>

> Topics include:

>

> Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

>

> The Housing Bubble

>

> Inflationary Finance

>

> Community Reinvestment Act (you didn't really think banks started

> making sub-prime loans initially because they wanted to, did you?)

>

> Short Selling

>

> The Austrian Theory of the Business Cycle

>

> Who Predicted This?

>

> What To Do

>

> Books to Distribute

>

> _________

>

>

>

> --

> Buffalo too, has beautiful summers but not this year. Cool and

rainy.

> For the first time in ten years, we never installed the air

> conditioners. My line on all this is, somebody better do something

> about global warming before I freeze to death. - Ostrowski

>

> " If you're not on somebody's watch list, you're not doing your

job " -

> Dave Von Kleist

>

[Guest guest]

Your rep doesn't give a hoot what you think. If he/she did the bailout

wouldn't have passed. They took a fake credit crisis, combined it with

a genuine housing crisis, and used that as a fearmongering tactic to

enrich their buddies and big bankers on Wall street and further extend

government control over all our lives.

On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:29 AM, haecklers <haecklers@...> wrote:

> Yesterday's Counterpunch (still up first at www.counterpunch.org

> until they come out with the new issue) by Mike Whitney is very

> relevent to this topic and I hope people get a chance to read it and

> call their representatives today.

>

>

>>

>> Now that the deal has been done, some of you might find the Bailout

>> Reader of interest: http://mises.org/story/3128

>>

>> They are brief articles covering all aspects of this bailout of a

>> bailout of a bailout, ad infinitum ad nauseam.

>>

>> Topics include:

>>

>> Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

>>

>> The Housing Bubble

>>

>> Inflationary Finance

>>

>> Community Reinvestment Act (you didn't really think banks started

>> making sub-prime loans initially because they wanted to, did you?)

>>

>> Short Selling

>>

>> The Austrian Theory of the Business Cycle

>>

>> Who Predicted This?

>>

>> What To Do

>>

>> Books to Distribute

>>

>> _________

>>

>>

>>

>> --

>> Buffalo too, has beautiful summers but not this year. Cool and

> rainy.

>> For the first time in ten years, we never installed the air

>> conditioners. My line on all this is, somebody better do something

>> about global warming before I freeze to death. - Ostrowski

>>

>> " If you're not on somebody's watch list, you're not doing your

> job " -

>> Dave Von Kleist

[Guest guest]

On 11/1/08, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote:

> Your rep doesn't give a hoot what you think. If he/she did the bailout

> wouldn't have passed. They took a fake credit crisis, combined it with

> a genuine housing crisis, and used that as a fearmongering tactic to

> enrich their buddies and big bankers on Wall street and further extend

> government control over all our lives.

According to Brad Sherman (D-CA), at least some congressmen were told

in private meetings that martial law would be instituted if they voted

against it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaG9d_4zij8

That was the Monday it didn't pass the first time around, so obviously

it didn't happen. Sounds like he was saying they were told the

martial law would be instituted in response to a 2000-pt drop in the

Dow, and that didn't happen either.

Chris

[Guest guest]

On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 7:24 PM, Masterjohn

<chrismasterjohn@...> wrote:

> According to Brad Sherman (D-CA), at least some congressmen were told

> in private meetings that martial law would be instituted if they voted

> against it.

>

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaG9d_4zij8

>

> That was the Monday it didn't pass the first time around, so obviously

> it didn't happen. Sounds like he was saying they were told the

> martial law would be instituted in response to a 2000-pt drop in the

> Dow, and that didn't happen either.

Yeah I saw that youtube. My understanding of the story was that some

were told the bailout was necessary to prevent a huge drop in the Dow,

and that if they didn't pass it the administration would institute

martial law. Of course they passed it and the Dow still had a huge

drop.

--

Buffalo too, has beautiful summers but not this year. Cool and rainy.

For the first time in ten years, we never installed the air

conditioners. My line on all this is, somebody better do something

about global warming before I freeze to death. - Ostrowski

" If you're not on somebody's watch list, you're not doing your job " -

Dave Von Kleist

[Guest guest]

On 11/1/08, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote:

> Yeah I saw that youtube. My understanding of the story was that some

> were told the bailout was necessary to prevent a huge drop in the Dow,

> and that if they didn't pass it the administration would institute

> martial law. Of course they passed it and the Dow still had a huge

> drop.

It's been all over the place, and up a lot now. Hannity was

salivating over the great performance of the stock market this week.

As North pointed out, among the 20 largest percentage increases

in the Dow over the past century, 17 were during the Great Depression

and two were in the last month. Not sure how good news that is.

Chris

[Guest guest]

*

**On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Masterjohn <

chrismasterjohn@...> wrote:

*

>

> *It's been all over the place, and up a lot now. Hannity was

> salivating over the great performance of the stock market this week.

> As North pointed out, among the 20 largest percentage increases

> in the Dow over the past century, 17 were during the Great Depression

> and two were in the last month. Not sure how good news that is.

>

> Chris*

>

I think comparing the Great Depression to the modern-age stock market beast

is the equivalent of comparing cholesterol knowledge of the 1920's to now.

And they weren't trying to nationalize back in the 20's, either - yet

another differentiator. I don't think we've ever seen or been through what

we're about to go through, especially if Obama is elected. Small business

development will grind to a halt...... OTOH, globalization is a a Christian

concept - the Great Commission. Guess this is a lesson in learning how to

not store up eartly treasures........

Sharon

--

Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according

to conscience, above all liberties. - Milton, Areopagitica

Deut 11:15 He will put grass in the fields for your cattle, and you

will have plenty to eat.

Check out my blog - www.ericsons.net - Food for the Body and Soul

[Guest guest]

Oh, yeah, that's right. Obama is a socialist, who pals around with

terrorists. I keep on forgetting this stuff. Gotta be more vigilant.

> *

>

> **On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Masterjohn <

> chrismasterjohn@...> wrote:

> *

> >

> > *It's been all over the place, and up a lot now. Hannity was

> > salivating over the great performance of the stock market this week.

> > As North pointed out, among the 20 largest percentage increases

> > in the Dow over the past century, 17 were during the Great

> Depression

> > and two were in the last month. Not sure how good news that is.

> >

> > Chris*

> >

>

> I think comparing the Great Depression to the modern-age stock

> market beast

> is the equivalent of comparing cholesterol knowledge of the 1920's

> to now.

> And they weren't trying to nationalize back in the 20's, either - yet

> another differentiator. I don't think we've ever seen or been

> through what

> we're about to go through, especially if Obama is elected. Small

> business

> development will grind to a halt...... OTOH, globalization is a a

> Christian

> concept - the Great Commission. Guess this is a lesson in learning

> how to

> not store up eartly treasures........

> Sharon

>

> --

> Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according

> to conscience, above all liberties. - Milton, Areopagitica

> Deut 11:15 He will put grass in the fields for your cattle, and you

> will have plenty to eat.

> Check out my blog - www.ericsons.net - Food for the Body and Soul

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sharon,

> I think comparing the Great Depression to the modern-age stock market beast

> is the equivalent of comparing cholesterol knowledge of the 1920's to now.

What's the specific difference between now and then?

> And they weren't trying to nationalize back in the 20's, either - yet

> another differentiator.

Yes they were. It is just unlike today their efforts were rebuffed.

> I don't think we've ever seen or been through what

> we're about to go through, especially if Obama is elected.

I don't think it makes one bit of difference who gets elected. Both

those jokers are almost identical on the main issues, in fact McCain

is a little bit scarier in certain areas and vice versa but they are

very very close. It was the same back when Kerry/Bush were running

despite all the rhetoric to the contrary. I wrote about that here:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/miles3.html

They are both warmongers.

They both *vigorously* supported the bailout.

They are both owned by Wall Street (check out who are the biggest

donors for each candidate).

They both are for the advancing of the security police state and the

continued destruction of our civil liberties.

They both are redistributionists. It is laughable to hear McCain

talk about Barack Obama as a socialist. Taking money from me and

giving it to say...Lockheed is every bit as redistributionist as

anything Obama would do.

They both would do nothing about the Federal Reserve.

They both would continue deficit spending.

One is a red state fascist and the other is a blue state socialist.

Not comforting no matter how you look at it.

A good read on just how similar these two blokes are and how each

would simply continue and extend the Bush policies (who simply

continued and expanded the Clinton polices) you can read here:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory166.html

And for kicks and giggles you might check out this podcast with Naomi

Wolf: http://snipurl.com/4w26y

Unbelievable as it sounds, she is actually starting to see the light.

> Small business

> development will grind to a halt...... OTOH, globalization is a a Christian

> concept - the Great Commission. Guess this is a lesson in learning how to

> not store up eartly treasures........

Voluntary globalization isn't the problem, but arrogant governments

and central banksters is another story.

--

Buffalo too, has beautiful summers but not this year. Cool and rainy.

For the first time in ten years, we never installed the air

conditioners. My line on all this is, somebody better do something

about global warming before I freeze to death. - Ostrowski

" If you're not on somebody's watch list, you're not doing your job " -

Dave Von Kleist

[Guest guest]

-

> They are both owned by Wall Street (check out who are the biggest

> donors for each candidate).

Although we have yet to see whether it'll make a functional

difference, Obama has gotten a phenomenal amount of his campaign money

from small donors, which is a marked contrast to the way things are

usually done.

> They both are redistributionists. It is laughable to hear McCain

> talk about Barack Obama as a socialist. Taking money from me and

> giving it to say...Lockheed is every bit as redistributionist as

> anything Obama would do.

>

> ...

>

>

> One is a red state fascist and the other is a blue state socialist.

> Not comforting no matter how you look at it.

I have to say, it's sort of amusing to see you in one breath talking

about how ridiculous it is for McCain to accuse Obama of being a

socialist, and in the next breath to accuse Obama of being a

socialist. Either they're both socialists or neither one of them is a

socialist.

-

[Guest guest]

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 5:52 AM, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote:

>

> Sharon,

>

> > I think comparing the Great Depression to the modern-age stock market

beast

> > is the equivalent of comparing cholesterol knowledge of the 1920's to

now.

>

> What's the specific difference between now and then?

I see several areas making for greater complexities/difficulties now - hedge

funds (unregulated! who the heck knows them or can explain 'em?), the buying

up of international debt, and international investors not only in our

markets but real estate holdings. And maybe even the idea that we don't

have a manufacturing base, having shipped that all off-shore. There are

limits as to what gov't can actually do to get us back to productivity that

generates jobs. Where is our possibility of manufacturing and industry

(although it took a war to make it happen) - a willing workforce - making

real money (and not just from dot-com bubbles or real estate bubbles)...

And having said all that, analysts have YET to explain the causes and

mechanics of the Great Depression. I like North's article which lays

it out far better than I am able. He doesn't have two hungry children

wanting breakfast.

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_04/north080204.html

But even then, he in his wisdom recommended gold and silver, and I can tell

you from my own portfolio, even he doesn't have the answers.......

*No one knows the limits of the world monetary system. The web of credit and

debt is too complex. Complex systems generally hold together, just as spider

webs hold together. But any system's limits are beyond anyone's ability to

comprehend. This is true of the fractional reserve banking system, in which

money is a form of debt, and the debt is pyramided inversely.

We live in an economic system in which arrogant but politically clever men

believe that they can use political coercion to adjust the economy more

favorably - more favorably for their constituents, whom they equate with The

People. They intervene to make the system better. Problem: you can't change

just one thing.

We see the FED playing the role of the sorcerer's apprentice. To understand

Alan Greenspan and the system he represents, visualize Mickey Mouse in

" Fantasia, " with the sorcerer's pointed cap on his head, and the brooms

hauling water and dumping it. There is lots of liquidity!

Have you ever noticed how much a sorcerer's cap resembles a dunce cap?

*

>

> > And they weren't trying to nationalize back in the 20's, either - yet

> > another differentiator.

>

> Yes they were. It is just unlike today their efforts were rebuffed.

The world doesn't even look the same today as then. I can't wrap my mind

around comparing Now and Then in that fashion. A brain block. The

intent is the same, however - money-grabs, political power, world control

and domination - same old, same old, vanity, vanity........but to point to

specifics and compare what worked or didn't work them to now, seems a

crapshoot.......or to even call their " nationalization " the same thing as

ours today - I'm not able to see common ground.

>

> > I don't think we've ever seen or been through what

> > we're about to go through, especially if Obama is elected.

>

> I don't think it makes one bit of difference who gets elected. Both

> those jokers are almost identical on the main issues, in fact McCain

> is a little bit scarier in certain areas and vice versa but they are

> very very close. It was the same back when Kerry/Bush were running

> despite all the rhetoric to the contrary. I wrote about that here:

> http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/miles3.html

>

Agreed on the joker aspect of both. But I've never assumed, I suppose, that

the President has any real power or is the one in control. What I would

like to think differentiates (and yes, this is totally wishful thinking)

them is that McCain has enough of the old-world Democrat in him - more

Humphrey than Mondale....then again, thinking out loud, Humphrey had the

economist Heller behind him, a silent, behind-the-scenes mover and shaker

other than a few years under Kennedy when he became a public figure. I

don't see any Dr. Heller in either Obama or McCain's life...and

Greenspan.....what was that about. First he knew, now he doesn't. Have any

links explaining that?

> They are both warmongers.

Maybe, but I see one for the purposes of being the Aggressor and the other

as Defender.

>

> They both *vigorously* supported the bailout.

>

> They are both owned by Wall Street (check out who are the biggest

> donors for each candidate).

>

> They both are for the advancing of the security police state and the

> continued destruction of our civil liberties.

>

> They both are redistributionists. It is laughable to hear McCain

> talk about Barack Obama as a socialist. Taking money from me and

> giving it to say...Lockheed is every bit as redistributionist as

> anything Obama would do.

>

> They both would do nothing about the Federal Reserve.

>

> They both would continue deficit spending.

>

> One is a red state fascist and the other is a blue state socialist.

> Not comforting no matter how you look at it.

Agreed to all, but I'm more " familiar " or " comfortable " (neither good words)

with one than the other. Barack is racist. I can't relate to his church,

his pastor, his hatred, his interpretation of the Bible - it's coming down

to an Israel vs. Palestine for me.

>

> A good read on just how similar these two blokes are and how each

> would simply continue and extend the Bush policies (who simply

> continued and expanded the Clinton polices) you can read here:

> http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory166.html

>

> And for kicks and giggles you might check out this podcast with Naomi

> Wolf: http://snipurl.com/4w26y

> Unbelievable as it sounds, she is actually starting to see the light.

Thanks for these....will go check them out......

>

> > Small business

> > development will grind to a halt...... OTOH, globalization is a a

Christian

> > concept - the Great Commission. Guess this is a lesson in learning how

to

> > not store up eartly treasures........

>

> Voluntary globalization isn't the problem, but arrogant governments

> and central banksters is another story.

Do Christians do anything voluntarily? Washer has a good sermon

presented to a youth conference but applicable to all ages:

http://www.heartcrymissionary.com/resources/sermons/paul_washer

And as Piper put it in a sermon last month, in the short run,

Christians will always lose, but eternally, we win.....so vote as if we are

not voting.

http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/TasteAndSee/ByDate/2008/3347_Let_Chri\

stians_Vote_As_Though_They_Were_Not_Voting/

Sharon

>

>

> --

--

Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according

to conscience, above all liberties. - Milton, Areopagitica

Deut 11:15 He will put grass in the fields for your cattle, and you

will have plenty to eat.

Check out my blog - www.ericsons.net - Food for the Body and Soul

[Guest guest]

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 5:52 AM, <slethnobotanist@...> wrote:

>

> *A good read on just how similar these two blokes are and how each

> would simply continue and extend the Bush policies (who simply

> continued and expanded the Clinton polices) you can read here:

> http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory166.html*

>

*

*,

The gregory166 article states that Obama/McCain are the same on energy...and

I've seen that stated other places. What I've seen about McCain's views on

energy, have come from Palin and her desire to be energy-independent, and

can only assume she speaks for McCain. Obama? I see issues like this.....

Hidden Audio: Obama Tells SF Chronicle He Will Bankrupt Coal Industry By

P.J. Gladnick (Bio <http://newsbusters.org/bios/p-j-gladnick.html> |

Archive<http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick>

)

November 2, 2008 - 07:26 ET

Imagine if McCain had whispered somewhere that he was willing to

bankrupt a major industry? Would this declaration not immediately be front

page news? *Well, Barack Obama actually flat out told the San Francisco

Chronicle (SF Gate) that he was willing to see the coal industry go bankrupt

in a January 17, 2008 interview. *The result? Nothing. This* **audio

interview* <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hdi4onAQBWQ>* has been hidden

from the public...until now. Here is the transcript of Obama's statement

about bankrupting the coal industry* (emphasis mine):

Audio

Let me sort of describe my overall policy.

What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is

as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there.

I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system,

which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be

charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever

technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants

that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market

and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.

*So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just

that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum

for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.*

That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar,

wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches.

The only thing I've said with respect to coal, I haven't been some coal

booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a

(sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use

coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.

*So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can.*

*It's just that it will bankrupt them.*

Amazing that this statement by Obama about bankrupting the coal industry

has been kept under wraps until this time.

*—P.J. Gladnick is a freelance writer and creator of the DUmmie

FUnnies<http://dummiefunnies.blogspot.com/>blog.

*

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf\

-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

--

Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according

to conscience, above all liberties. - Milton, Areopagitica

Deut 11:15 He will put grass in the fields for your cattle, and you

will have plenty to eat.

Check out my blog - www.ericsons.net - Food for the Body and Soul

[Guest guest]

> .......

> Agreed to all, but I'm more " familiar " or " comfortable " (neither

> good words)

> with one than the other. Barack is racist. I can't relate to his

> church,

> his pastor, his hatred, his interpretation of the Bible - it's

> coming down

> to an Israel vs. Palestine for me.

>

>

Obama is a racist? This is irresponsible bull. What in the world are

you talking about? And, if you're into this guilt by association

thing, personally, I prefer his pastor's politics. He had it right

about America.

[Guest guest]

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Gene Schwartz <implode7@...> wrote:

>> .......

>

>> Agreed to all, but I'm more " familiar " or " comfortable " (neither

>> good words)

>> with one than the other. Barack is racist. I can't relate to his

>> church,

>> his pastor, his hatred, his interpretation of the Bible - it's

>> coming down

>> to an Israel vs. Palestine for me.

>>

>>

> Obama is a racist? This is irresponsible bull. What in the world are

> you talking about? And, if you're into this guilt by association

> thing, personally, I prefer his pastor's politics. He had it right

> about America.

If I attended a church that had the following priorities:

1. Commitment to the White Community

2. Commitment to the White Family

3. Adherence to the White Work Ethic

4. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills

available to the White Community .

5. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for

Strengthening and Supporting White Institutions

6. Pledge allegiance to all White leadership who espouse and embrace

the White Value System

7. Personal commitment to embracement of the White Value System.

......I can tell you my backside would not have been in a pew for 20

years. Change " white " to black " and I call that a racist view.

That's what I'm talking about........

Sharon

--

Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according

to conscience, above all liberties. - Milton, Areopagitica

Deut 11:15 He will put grass in the fields for your cattle, and you

will have plenty to eat.

Check out my blog - www.ericsons.net - Food for the Body and Soul

[Guest guest]

Having never been a minority we can't speak to what is racist and

what is them trying to get equality very well. There are many in

this country who feel that enough members of the majority are racist

that it is a struggle for minorities to get by and achieve the same

standard of living as the rest of us. Living here in Southeastern PA

I know minority people in the suburbs and rural areas who tell of

being beaten up in school and suffering threats - and the Northeast

is not even an area that is in the heart of racist America.

I won't start throwing stones at a minority person's involvement in

something like that which I can't understand because of not having

the same experience of my country as they did.

There are some ridiculous claims being passed around the internet as

fear-mongering efforts to save McCain's failing run for presidency.

My Republican brother-in-law said he won't vote for McCain partly

because of the irresponsible depths of lying and such that he and his

campaign have sunk to.

> >> .......

> >

> >> Agreed to all, but I'm more " familiar " or " comfortable " (neither

> >> good words)

> >> with one than the other. Barack is racist. I can't relate to his

> >> church,

> >> his pastor, his hatred, his interpretation of the Bible - it's

> >> coming down

> >> to an Israel vs. Palestine for me.

> >>

> >>

> > Obama is a racist? This is irresponsible bull. What in the world

are

> > you talking about? And, if you're into this guilt by association

> > thing, personally, I prefer his pastor's politics. He had it right

> > about America.

>

> If I attended a church that had the following priorities:

> 1. Commitment to the White Community

> 2. Commitment to the White Family

> 3. Adherence to the White Work Ethic

> 4. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills

> available to the White Community .

> 5. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for

> Strengthening and Supporting White Institutions

> 6. Pledge allegiance to all White leadership who espouse and embrace

> the White Value System

> 7. Personal commitment to embracement of the White Value System.

>

> .....I can tell you my backside would not have been in a pew for 20

> years. Change " white " to black " and I call that a racist view.

> That's what I'm talking about........

>

> Sharon

>

>

>

>

> --

> Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according

> to conscience, above all liberties. - Milton, Areopagitica

> Deut 11:15 He will put grass in the fields for your cattle, and you

> will have plenty to eat.

> Check out my blog - www.ericsons.net - Food for the Body and Soul

>

[Guest guest]

On Nov 2, 2008, at 8:02 AM, Sharon son wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Gene Schwartz

> <implode7@...> wrote:

> >> .......

> >

> >> Agreed to all, but I'm more " familiar " or " comfortable " (neither

> >> good words)

> >> with one than the other. Barack is racist. I can't relate to his

> >> church,

> >> his pastor, his hatred, his interpretation of the Bible - it's

> >> coming down

> >> to an Israel vs. Palestine for me.

> >>

> >>

> > Obama is a racist? This is irresponsible bull. What in the world are

> > you talking about? And, if you're into this guilt by association

> > thing, personally, I prefer his pastor's politics. He had it right

> > about America.

>

> If I attended a church that had the following priorities:

> 1. Commitment to the White Community

> 2. Commitment to the White Family

> 3. Adherence to the White Work Ethic

> 4. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills

> available to the White Community .

> 5. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for

> Strengthening and Supporting White Institutions

> 6. Pledge allegiance to all White leadership who espouse and embrace

> the White Value System

> 7. Personal commitment to embracement of the White Value System.

>

I think that there should be (and is among enlightened folks) huge

differences in the interpretation of 'pride' when it refers to a

minority that has been historically discriminated against, and 'pride'

when it refers to those who have done the discriminating. For gay

people to express gay pride, or native americans to express native

american pride, or black people to express black pride is not

inherently bigoted, and does not imply that others are inferior, or

should be discriminated against in some way. However, when you start

talking about 'white pride', this assumes a different cultural

meaning. If I were gay, and expressed solidarity with the gay

community, this should be understood in the context of some very

legitimate cultural reasons, and in the context of justice

overall....when you start talking about solidarity with the white

community, etc, suddenly this takes a very different, kind of ugly

meaning. Some of the logic is indeed cultural, but indeed - white

pride movements do have a rather racist tinge. For people who have

historically been treated as lesser, expressing pride in who they are

seems logical, and an important step in taking rights that have been

denied them.

The notion that because he attended his community church (primarily, I

would imagine) for spiritual reasons, and did not disassociate himself

with politics expressed by the pastor is something that you can

criticize (I don't agree with the criticism), but that is a huge leap

from concluding that Obama is therefore racist. This level of guilt by

association is so much more severe, applied to Obama, than people

generally apply to other candidates, that I really have to wonder

(along with your inability to understand the difference between whites/

blacks/gays/native americans/women (some by implication), where in the

world you are coming from.

I find your comments rather distasteful.

>

>

> .....I can tell you my backside would not have been in a pew for 20

> years. Change " white " to black " and I call that a racist view.

> That's what I'm talking about........

>

>

I'm not entirely sure what your backside has to do with any of this.

> Sharon

>

> --

> Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according

> to conscience, above all liberties. - Milton, Areopagitica

> Deut 11:15 He will put grass in the fields for your cattle, and you

> will have plenty to eat.

> Check out my blog - www.ericsons.net - Food for the Body and Soul

>

>

[Guest guest]

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:17 PM, haecklers <haecklers@...> wrote:

>

> Having never been a minority we can't speak to what is racist and

> what is them trying to get equality very well. There are many in

> this country who feel that enough members of the majority are racist

> that it is a struggle for minorities to get by and achieve the same

> standard of living as the rest of us. Living here in Southeastern PA

> I know minority people in the suburbs and rural areas who tell of

> being beaten up in school and suffering threats - and the Northeast

> is not even an area that is in the heart of racist America.

Sadly, it is human nature to attempt to feel superior over another human.

If we were all the same skin color, human nature is such there'd still be

those who have to mock, belittle, or threaten others, just to make

themselves feel superior..........

> I won't start throwing stones at a minority person's involvement in

> something like that which I can't understand because of not having

> the same experience of my country as they did.

>

And their experience in America compared to what they could have had in

Africa is......so much worse? It's time for everyone to grow up and start

being thankful for what they've had......

What I find troubling is the argument being used in this election that if

you're white, and don't vote for Obama, you're a racist, as in Ogletree's

comments:

http://www.openmarket.org/2008/10/31/charles-ogletree-declared-dim-bulb-for-call\

ing-america-racist/

Sharon

> >

> > --

> > Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according

> > to conscience, above all liberties. - Milton, Areopagitica

> > Deut 11:15 He will put grass in the fields for your cattle, and you

> > will have plenty to eat.

> > Check out my blog - www.ericsons.net - Food for the Body and Soul

> >

>

>

--

Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according

to conscience, above all liberties. - Milton, Areopagitica

Deut 11:15 He will put grass in the fields for your cattle, and you

will have plenty to eat.

Check out my blog - www.ericsons.net - Food for the Body and Soul

[Guest guest]

On Nov 2, 2008, at 8:55 AM, Sharon son wrote:

>

>

> And their experience in America compared to what they could have had

> in

> Africa is......so much worse? It's time for everyone to grow up and

> start

> being thankful for what they've had......

>

> What I find troubling is the argument being used in this election

> that if

> you're white, and don't vote for Obama, you're a racist, as in

> Ogletree's

> comments:

>

http://www.openmarket.org/2008/10/31/charles-ogletree-declared-dim-bulb-for-call\

ing-america-racist/

>

> Sharon

>

>

No - it's time for you to 'grow up' and stop using any argument and

crazy stuff you find on the internet to justify your own intolerance.

[Guest guest]

Sharon,

> I think comparing the Great Depression to the modern-age stock market beast

> is the equivalent of comparing cholesterol knowledge of the 1920's to now.

It depends exactly how you want to draw the analogy. If you want to

say that it is equivalent in that knowledge has progressed but the

establishment theories and practices have stayed the same, I'd agree,

but you don't seem to mean that.

> And they weren't trying to nationalize back in the 20's, either - yet

> another differentiator.

I think the reaction is pretty similar. The Great Depression did not

start in the 20s. The 20s were the inflationary boom that led to the

crash. The 1929 crash did not produce the Great Depression. The Fed

reacted by massive monetary inflation to try to prop it up. Hoover

reacted by creating voluntary cartels that FDR later put into force of

law. FDR created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as federal institutions.

Nixon privatized them in the 1970s, and Bush re-nationalized them.

Bush=FDR. Fed is inflating at an unprecedented rate. There are many

similarities.

I'm not saying this is an exact recapitulation. My point was that the

jumps in the stock market are not good news. They are examples of

massive volatility, which is a bad sign, and it is volatility we last

saw in the Great Depression, which was not a good time.

> I don't think we've ever seen or been through what

> we're about to go through, especially if Obama is elected. Small business

> development will grind to a halt...... OTOH, globalization is a a Christian

> concept - the Great Commission. Guess this is a lesson in learning how to

> not store up eartly treasures........

I don't see how it will make much of a difference. McCain bashes

Obama for wanting to give $500/yr in tax credits to people who don't

pay income tax, while McCain wants to give $5000 for health insurance

to the same people. Both support nationalization of the financial

sector. Both support the $700 billion bailout. McCain says we can't

have unfettered capitalism. Obama says deregulation got us here.

Obama wants to raise capital gains to the level it was under Clinton,

while McCain wants to cut it more. That's the main difference, but

not a huge one. Small business didn't grind to a halt under Clinton.

We will see a dramatic decrease in free markets no matter who is

elected. I think the real question is what will happen to the

progress towards totalitarian dictatorship. Will either of them

repeal last year's act giving the president the right to declare

emergency himself? Will either of them repeal the continuity of

government program, allowing the president to dissolve congress in an

emergency? Will either of them repeal Bush's executive order from

this year allowing him to take over every private enterprise in the

country in the case of an emergency?

Chris

[Guest guest]

,

> I have to say, it's sort of amusing to see you in one breath talking

> about how ridiculous it is for McCain to accuse Obama of being a

> socialist, and in the next breath to accuse Obama of being a

> socialist. Either they're both socialists or neither one of them is a

> socialist.

My understanding of the word " socialism " is state ownership of the

means of production and exchange. I think the nationalization of

FM/FM was socialism. I don't think wealth redistribution is socialism

in a strict sense. However, what is particularly laughable about

McCain calling Obama socialist because of his redistriubtionist

policies is not so much the fact that McCain considers redistribution

to be socialism, but the fact that McCain is just as much if not more

redistributionist than Obama.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Sharon,

> But even then, he in his wisdom recommended gold and silver, and I can tell

> you from my own portfolio, even he doesn't have the answers.......

I don't think you have been following his advice very closely then.

He called the gold peak and recommended getting out of gold basically

the day before gold peaked, and has been recommending 10-15% precious

metals at an 80/20 gold/silver ratio between then and now. Only in

the last few days has he been recommending a higher ratio of precious

metals to cash based on massive Fed inflation and the fact that India

has resumed purchasing of gold on the same day it's price went back

up, suggestive of a price floor. He has been recommending for quite

some time to stay out of gold but be on the fence waiting to purchase

it if the prospects for war or hyperinflation increase.

So, as far as I can tell, North has been spot on with his recommendations.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Sharon,

> What I find troubling is the argument being used in this election that if

> you're white, and don't vote for Obama, you're a racist, as in Ogletree's

> comments:

I find it troubling too, but for all I know Obama might find it

troubling as well. I don't know if anyone has challenged him to

repudiate those comments. The most you can say is that Obama *might*

be racist since he attended this church. That is not evidence that

Obama *is* racist.

Chris

[Guest guest]

On Nov 2, 2008, at 10:32 AM, Masterjohn wrote:

> Sharon,

>

> > What I find troubling is the argument being used in this election

> that if

> > you're white, and don't vote for Obama, you're a racist, as in

> Ogletree's

> > comments:

>

> I find it troubling too, but for all I know Obama might find it

> troubling as well. I don't know if anyone has challenged him to

> repudiate those comments. The most you can say is that Obama *might*

> be racist since he attended this church. That is not evidence that

> Obama *is* racist.

>

Well, saying that he 'might be racist' because he attended the church

is a ridiculous statement. Anyone, logically, 'might be racist'. The

point is that in the context of Obama's entire life and political

career, there is absolutely no evidence, as far as I know, that he is

racist. The most that you can really say, is that Obama attended a

church for years in which the pastor has made some statements that

some sensitive white people have interpreted as racist.

I'm not sure that I would even characterize his pastor as racist -

he's coming from a very different place than you and I. I haven't seen

anything from him that I'd call racist, but then again, I'm not as

obsessed with the relationship as some.

>

>

> Chris

>

>

[Guest guest]

Gene,

> Well, saying that he 'might be racist' because he attended the church

> is a ridiculous statement. Anyone, logically, 'might be racist'. The

> point is that in the context of Obama's entire life and political

> career, there is absolutely no evidence, as far as I know, that he is

> racist. The most that you can really say, is that Obama attended a

> church for years in which the pastor has made some statements that

> some sensitive white people have interpreted as racist.

He attended about 500 times according to his own account, so his claim

to never have heard the radical sermons is unlikely. So I think one

can make the argument that this *suggests* Obama *might* be a

supporter of black liberation theology, and then one can debate

whether that theology is " racist, " which I think is much more

subjective. I'm fairly sympathetic to black

nationalist/separatist/power type causes, like the Black Panthers, so

I'm less inclined to consider some of this stuff racist, but it

becomes somewhat more of a concern for the president to be a supporter

of it.

Chris

[Guest guest]

On Nov 2, 2008, at 10:52 AM, Masterjohn wrote:

> Gene,

>

> > Well, saying that he 'might be racist' because he attended the

> church

> > is a ridiculous statement. Anyone, logically, 'might be racist'. The

> > point is that in the context of Obama's entire life and political

> > career, there is absolutely no evidence, as far as I know, that he

> is

> > racist. The most that you can really say, is that Obama attended a

> > church for years in which the pastor has made some statements that

> > some sensitive white people have interpreted as racist.

>

> He attended about 500 times according to his own account, so his claim

> to never have heard the radical sermons is unlikely.

>

And this implies that he is a racist? Unbelievable.

> So I think one

> can make the argument that this *suggests* Obama *might* be a

> supporter of black liberation theology, and then one can debate

> whether that theology is " racist, " which I think is much more

> subjective. I'm fairly sympathetic to black

> nationalist/separatist/power type causes, like the Black Panthers, so

> I'm less inclined to consider some of this stuff racist, but it

> becomes somewhat more of a concern for the president to be a supporter

> of it.

>

As usual you will go to ANY length to support your original

contention. In the absence of ANY corroborative evidence from the rest

of Obama's life that he is a racist, simply citing his Church

attendance does not support that there is therefore a contention

between his attendance and the vague notion that he " MIGHT " be racist.

All I see here is the attempt to take some very sloppy logic and smear

the guy - who to my mind deserves smearing but only for his policies.

And, in addition - you admit (kind of ) that the pastor's views aren't

racist in your view, and that therefore, by implication, his

attendance wouldn't add ANY weight to him being racist. Whether you

think that it's a " concern " for a president to have sympathetic views

towards views similar to the pastor's is an issue of public relations,

not racism.

>

>

> Chris

>

>