Hell has frozen over, pigs can now fly and the laws of political gravity no longer apply: liberal SCOTUS Justices Stevens, Ginsberg and Souter were joined by (wait for it) conservatives Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Regardless of political affiliation, Arizona v. Gant was a great decision by SCOTUS and a huge victory for the embattled Fourth Amendment.
With all other immutable laws now in question, does this mean that the Geithner bailout plan will actually work?
More on this after I've had a chance to read the opinion of the court (see Los Angeles Times for the editorial). I admit I'm a little curious as to why Justice Kennedy dissented.
Showing posts with label Timothy Geithner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Timothy Geithner. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Meet the New Boss (Same as the Old Boss): Part II of Ongoing Series
A comic is worth a thousand rants. Suggestion to cartoonist: an ad with Timothy Geithner's picture on the side of the mailbox might have lacked the subtlety that cartoonists aspire to, but it would have also illuminated the continuity inherent in the transition from the corporatist policies from the Bush regime to the same policies, brought to you by the marketing firm of Obama, Goldman and Sachs, makers of Change you Can't Believe in (Since the Democrats are Bought-off Sonsabitches, Just Like Republicans).We have only four years, independents, to pull someone from our own ranks, promote them and make them competetive against the Two-Parties that have sold us out, time and again.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Meet the New Boss (Same as the Old Boss)
Yes, the title of this thread is aimed at President Obama.
Everyone believed he could do it. Even Pete Townshend, after performing "Won't Get Fooled Again" (Who's Next)said that, given Obama's victory over the conservative political machine, he needed to rethink the meaning of the song. One of the most dynamic and revolutionary songs (literally) in all of rock music, "Won't Get Fooled Again" is the quintessential anthem of the skeptic, pointing out that once the revolution ends and the oppressors are overthrown, the new regime changes little or nothing for the better. I agree with Townshend to some degree: Obama has brought about some much needed changes.
The boos from our troops in Iraq as they were told they will be ceding control of Iraq back to the Iraqis isn't something that would have happened under a McCain Administration (I can understand why they booed him: from a soldier's perspective the place is a mess, and none of the machinery is currently in place to keep Iraq from tearing itself to pieces with civil war; but, I digress). It was a good and necessary step, at least for ability of the United States to move forward. Contrary to what the anti-war "progressives" claim, I agree with the President's decision to stay in Afghanistan--not to take it over or to "stabilize" the region--but to finish what Bush II started in 2001: GET BIN LADEN. Just him, and anyone who protects him. It isn't rocket science: if Bush I can bitch slap Manuel Noriega in his own house and drag him back to the States to try him as a drug runner, I think that these high-tech morons in the CIA ought to be able to sort through the latest stack of Quickbird images from the Af-Pak border and find bin Laden. How will they know it's him? Here's a hint: HE'S THE GUY STANDING OUTSIDE A CAVE TALKING TO A VIDEO CAMERA!
There is, of course that patient side to Obama: the one that doesn't bother swatting at Dick Cheney when he flies by on the news. By all signs, the President wants to move forward. And this is where I have to start calling bullshit. Cheney admitted on television that he knew about and approved the use of torture, defined as a war crime under Geneva. I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that a spontaneous admission of guilt--one that was in nowise coaxed (say, by waterboarding, for example)--is generally accepted as being admissable in court. And given that President Obama once held the prestigious position of president of the Harvard Law Review, it would seem a no brainer that this is a fact not lost on him.
It's been clear for some time that Washington, while willing to pay lip service to the general outrage with the auld populist sound bite, has had Wall Street's back from the beginning, and has no intention of throwing them under the bus. When the sheriff robs you, it’s bad enough: you have to convince a judge and a prosecutor to get off their lazy asses and do their jobs; then you have to find someone willing to take on a paramilitary force, known as "The Sheriff's Department," to have him arrested. That normally requires a larger paramilitary force, such as the State Police or the FBI. But at least they exist.
So this time, our cattle are being rustled by Wall Street bankers. You know, those "genteel" folk that everyone used to be so deferential to? And now, from all appearances, the gate is being held open by one of the Commander-in-Chief’s top deputies, Tim Geithner. It’s hard to imagine that someone sharp as President Obama is blind to how Geithner appears to be operating as primary gate-holder for that infamous gang of financial rustlers, chasing borrowed revenues through AIG’s hidden range of complicated credit-default swaps, out to the financial pastures where the dandies and the gamblers (still disguised as bankers) cash out the missing pot of a poker game, which from all accounts, they lost.
As much as I want the efforts by the Obama Administration to work, I can’t see how paying an insurance company to pay off the architects of this recession will lead to improving our economy. Perhaps I can’t see the forest for the trees. But perhaps I was right to begin with, when I suggested, some time ago, that right and left, Democrat and Republican, liberal and conservative, were a false dichotomy with a purpose. I know a lot of “blue dog” Democrats; most of the self-proclaimed “leftists” that I know don’t favor any kind of gun control. A surprising number of the women I know that identify themselves as “feminists” are ambivalent toward Roe v. Wade and wouldn’t consider abortion for themselves or for their daughters; on the other side of the abortion issue, there seems no shortage of self-proclaimed conservatives that wish everyone would just shut up about it. These are but a few minor examples pointing to the paradox in American political identity: how we align ourselves politically doesn’t so much reflect beliefs, but how appealing we tend to find someone else’s. Hence, left/right and liberal/conservative, but most importantly, Democrat/Republican, are not so much dichotomies as two sides of the same coin. And they have us well trained: when one side can’t fix the problem, we flip the coin over and hope that the other side can. But no matter how many times we turn over that nickel, it’s still just a nickel. Don’t get me wrong: a nickel still has its uses, but you only get so much mileage out of it—particularly when it’s minted the same on either side.
And so we come to it: the two-party system is out of gas. Both sides have given the bankers a free hand to shape financial and economic policy. I’ve given my support, not only in money but in hope to the idea that this time, it could be different. But it can’t, because this time, like last time and the time before that, the moneyed and the well-connected did what they do best: they used our hopes and desperation to steal what little we had left.I didn’t come to this conclusion via the endless right-wing or left-wing demagoguery that fouls the airwaves. I just looked outside after hearing there was a new sheriff in town, and saw for myself that America was still a kleptocracy. It was founded by rich men who couldn’t stomach the thought of paying taxes to cover the cost of a war that their greed and speculation started, and the same people who have sunk us, time and again, remain firmly entrenched.
So Townshend got it right the first time: revolution, election, regime change. The same banners flew in the last war and the new boss is the same as the old.
I love my country, but our so-called leaders all suck. And until we get another Jefferson in the office, who's willing to stand up for the rights of the common man, we're still flipping that two-headed coin from right-to-left and back again.
Everyone believed he could do it. Even Pete Townshend, after performing "Won't Get Fooled Again" (Who's Next)said that, given Obama's victory over the conservative political machine, he needed to rethink the meaning of the song. One of the most dynamic and revolutionary songs (literally) in all of rock music, "Won't Get Fooled Again" is the quintessential anthem of the skeptic, pointing out that once the revolution ends and the oppressors are overthrown, the new regime changes little or nothing for the better. I agree with Townshend to some degree: Obama has brought about some much needed changes.
The boos from our troops in Iraq as they were told they will be ceding control of Iraq back to the Iraqis isn't something that would have happened under a McCain Administration (I can understand why they booed him: from a soldier's perspective the place is a mess, and none of the machinery is currently in place to keep Iraq from tearing itself to pieces with civil war; but, I digress). It was a good and necessary step, at least for ability of the United States to move forward. Contrary to what the anti-war "progressives" claim, I agree with the President's decision to stay in Afghanistan--not to take it over or to "stabilize" the region--but to finish what Bush II started in 2001: GET BIN LADEN. Just him, and anyone who protects him. It isn't rocket science: if Bush I can bitch slap Manuel Noriega in his own house and drag him back to the States to try him as a drug runner, I think that these high-tech morons in the CIA ought to be able to sort through the latest stack of Quickbird images from the Af-Pak border and find bin Laden. How will they know it's him? Here's a hint: HE'S THE GUY STANDING OUTSIDE A CAVE TALKING TO A VIDEO CAMERA!
There is, of course that patient side to Obama: the one that doesn't bother swatting at Dick Cheney when he flies by on the news. By all signs, the President wants to move forward. And this is where I have to start calling bullshit. Cheney admitted on television that he knew about and approved the use of torture, defined as a war crime under Geneva. I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that a spontaneous admission of guilt--one that was in nowise coaxed (say, by waterboarding, for example)--is generally accepted as being admissable in court. And given that President Obama once held the prestigious position of president of the Harvard Law Review, it would seem a no brainer that this is a fact not lost on him.
It's been clear for some time that Washington, while willing to pay lip service to the general outrage with the auld populist sound bite, has had Wall Street's back from the beginning, and has no intention of throwing them under the bus. When the sheriff robs you, it’s bad enough: you have to convince a judge and a prosecutor to get off their lazy asses and do their jobs; then you have to find someone willing to take on a paramilitary force, known as "The Sheriff's Department," to have him arrested. That normally requires a larger paramilitary force, such as the State Police or the FBI. But at least they exist.
So this time, our cattle are being rustled by Wall Street bankers. You know, those "genteel" folk that everyone used to be so deferential to? And now, from all appearances, the gate is being held open by one of the Commander-in-Chief’s top deputies, Tim Geithner. It’s hard to imagine that someone sharp as President Obama is blind to how Geithner appears to be operating as primary gate-holder for that infamous gang of financial rustlers, chasing borrowed revenues through AIG’s hidden range of complicated credit-default swaps, out to the financial pastures where the dandies and the gamblers (still disguised as bankers) cash out the missing pot of a poker game, which from all accounts, they lost.
As much as I want the efforts by the Obama Administration to work, I can’t see how paying an insurance company to pay off the architects of this recession will lead to improving our economy. Perhaps I can’t see the forest for the trees. But perhaps I was right to begin with, when I suggested, some time ago, that right and left, Democrat and Republican, liberal and conservative, were a false dichotomy with a purpose. I know a lot of “blue dog” Democrats; most of the self-proclaimed “leftists” that I know don’t favor any kind of gun control. A surprising number of the women I know that identify themselves as “feminists” are ambivalent toward Roe v. Wade and wouldn’t consider abortion for themselves or for their daughters; on the other side of the abortion issue, there seems no shortage of self-proclaimed conservatives that wish everyone would just shut up about it. These are but a few minor examples pointing to the paradox in American political identity: how we align ourselves politically doesn’t so much reflect beliefs, but how appealing we tend to find someone else’s. Hence, left/right and liberal/conservative, but most importantly, Democrat/Republican, are not so much dichotomies as two sides of the same coin. And they have us well trained: when one side can’t fix the problem, we flip the coin over and hope that the other side can. But no matter how many times we turn over that nickel, it’s still just a nickel. Don’t get me wrong: a nickel still has its uses, but you only get so much mileage out of it—particularly when it’s minted the same on either side.
And so we come to it: the two-party system is out of gas. Both sides have given the bankers a free hand to shape financial and economic policy. I’ve given my support, not only in money but in hope to the idea that this time, it could be different. But it can’t, because this time, like last time and the time before that, the moneyed and the well-connected did what they do best: they used our hopes and desperation to steal what little we had left.I didn’t come to this conclusion via the endless right-wing or left-wing demagoguery that fouls the airwaves. I just looked outside after hearing there was a new sheriff in town, and saw for myself that America was still a kleptocracy. It was founded by rich men who couldn’t stomach the thought of paying taxes to cover the cost of a war that their greed and speculation started, and the same people who have sunk us, time and again, remain firmly entrenched.
So Townshend got it right the first time: revolution, election, regime change. The same banners flew in the last war and the new boss is the same as the old.
I love my country, but our so-called leaders all suck. And until we get another Jefferson in the office, who's willing to stand up for the rights of the common man, we're still flipping that two-headed coin from right-to-left and back again.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
The Dog and Pony Show: Washington Goes WWF on AIG Largess
In this corner, weighing in at $170 billion in taxpayer revenue, reporting a 3rd quarter profit of $6 million in 2008 (just before the market meltdown) and $1.6 trillion in losses : the Master of Disaster, the Don of Derivatives, the Jihad on Jobs, the Harbinger of Recession, the Bonus Bitch, and the Credit-default Swap felt 'round the World, American Insurance Group!
AND IN THIS CORNER, weighing in with an annual taxpayer budget of $2.7 billion with pay increases on the way, with wins for multinational corporations, foreign countries, the executive branch and, of course, themselves, having been hoodwinked by Hank Paulson, punked by Karl Rove and made into George Bush's bitch: the Counterfeit Chorus, the Feckless Faction, the Guardian of the Greedy, the Corporate Courtesan, the Strumpet of the Stinking-rich and the Rubberiest of all Rubber Stamps, the United States Congress!
Let the WWF Smackdown begin.
Not. Ed Liddy refused to reveal the names of the employees who took bonuses, due to some threatening mail, including a piece he read aloud, indicating that the writer wanted to garrote bonus recipients with a piano string. I could try to explain to Mr. Liddy and his kind, that the reason horse thieves were hanged, rather than simply receiving long sentences, was because horses in the old West, weren't simply draft/transportation animals, they were livelihood; if your horse was stolen or damaged, you might not be able to provide for your family. That didn't mean selling one of a dozen houses or missing an annual trip to Europe, it meant starvation. He, the members of Congress and the media probably wouldn't know what it means to live paycheck to paycheck (in Liddy's case, another year, another dollar), then to get the news that the cycle you depended on has been broken. Your expenses will continue, but your paychecks will not.
The media has started making fun of the outrage shown by Congress to the insurance giant. Funny that they never mention the reason that it all sounds so disingenuous: Congress will be getting yet another raise this year while the taxpayers that support them continue to lose their jobs and homes.
Bernanke knew about the bonuses, but did nothing to block them. Geithner shrugged his shoulders, accepting the argument that the contracts that agreed to the bonuses--under the auspices that 2007's profits were something other than creative accounting--could in no wise be abrogated.
I'm sure this comes as disappointing news to the UAW.
But the hearing was nothing more than a dog and pony show. As with the situation that led to the financial meltdown, it doesn't take a genius to sniff this one out. Anyone who could look at the price of homes in poor and/or working class neighborhoods could see that we were in for trouble: it simply didn't add up. Here are the facts"
GEITHNER: "A contract? Gawrsh! Did they pinky swear on it and everything?" (shrugging) "Well, shucks. It looks like there isn't nothin' we can do, then." (turning to AIG) "Would you super-nice fellers who were so greedy a year ago that you didn't give a crap one way or 'nother that you might destroy the world economy, mind giving them there retention bonuses back? No?" (turning to audience) "Gawrsh. Guess there's nothin' we can do, then."
We needed Elliot Ness and we got Frank Nitti. Obama made a mistake by tapping yet another Goldman Sachs alum to run the Treasury. He walked into a wall, dislodged the scaffolding above him and wound up covered in paint with a bucket over his head. Once makes for good theater. But there reaches a point, after a dozen or so prat falls that you shut it off, because it's obvious they're mugging for the cameras.
We need FDR, not Charlie Chaplin, and for Obama to be taken seriously, he's going to have to fire Geithner before another series of prat falls obviates what we already suspect. We need a Congress that walks the walk instead of just talking the talk. And we need a media that follows evidence instead of trying to quell public outrage with eye-rolling and cynicism. But that's not going to happen as long as we wait around for someone else to do our work.
Obama was right about one thing: we are the change we've been waiting for.
AND IN THIS CORNER, weighing in with an annual taxpayer budget of $2.7 billion with pay increases on the way, with wins for multinational corporations, foreign countries, the executive branch and, of course, themselves, having been hoodwinked by Hank Paulson, punked by Karl Rove and made into George Bush's bitch: the Counterfeit Chorus, the Feckless Faction, the Guardian of the Greedy, the Corporate Courtesan, the Strumpet of the Stinking-rich and the Rubberiest of all Rubber Stamps, the United States Congress!
Let the WWF Smackdown begin.
Not. Ed Liddy refused to reveal the names of the employees who took bonuses, due to some threatening mail, including a piece he read aloud, indicating that the writer wanted to garrote bonus recipients with a piano string. I could try to explain to Mr. Liddy and his kind, that the reason horse thieves were hanged, rather than simply receiving long sentences, was because horses in the old West, weren't simply draft/transportation animals, they were livelihood; if your horse was stolen or damaged, you might not be able to provide for your family. That didn't mean selling one of a dozen houses or missing an annual trip to Europe, it meant starvation. He, the members of Congress and the media probably wouldn't know what it means to live paycheck to paycheck (in Liddy's case, another year, another dollar), then to get the news that the cycle you depended on has been broken. Your expenses will continue, but your paychecks will not.
The media has started making fun of the outrage shown by Congress to the insurance giant. Funny that they never mention the reason that it all sounds so disingenuous: Congress will be getting yet another raise this year while the taxpayers that support them continue to lose their jobs and homes.
Bernanke knew about the bonuses, but did nothing to block them. Geithner shrugged his shoulders, accepting the argument that the contracts that agreed to the bonuses--under the auspices that 2007's profits were something other than creative accounting--could in no wise be abrogated.
I'm sure this comes as disappointing news to the UAW.
But the hearing was nothing more than a dog and pony show. As with the situation that led to the financial meltdown, it doesn't take a genius to sniff this one out. Anyone who could look at the price of homes in poor and/or working class neighborhoods could see that we were in for trouble: it simply didn't add up. Here are the facts"
- AIG has funneled tens of billions of taxpayer dollars to Goldman Sachs, Deutche Bank, others
- Former Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson and current Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner were both once employed by Goldman Sachs
- Goldman Sachs and AIG were substantial contributors to Barack Obama's presidential campaign.
GEITHNER: "A contract? Gawrsh! Did they pinky swear on it and everything?" (shrugging) "Well, shucks. It looks like there isn't nothin' we can do, then." (turning to AIG) "Would you super-nice fellers who were so greedy a year ago that you didn't give a crap one way or 'nother that you might destroy the world economy, mind giving them there retention bonuses back? No?" (turning to audience) "Gawrsh. Guess there's nothin' we can do, then."
We needed Elliot Ness and we got Frank Nitti. Obama made a mistake by tapping yet another Goldman Sachs alum to run the Treasury. He walked into a wall, dislodged the scaffolding above him and wound up covered in paint with a bucket over his head. Once makes for good theater. But there reaches a point, after a dozen or so prat falls that you shut it off, because it's obvious they're mugging for the cameras.
We need FDR, not Charlie Chaplin, and for Obama to be taken seriously, he's going to have to fire Geithner before another series of prat falls obviates what we already suspect. We need a Congress that walks the walk instead of just talking the talk. And we need a media that follows evidence instead of trying to quell public outrage with eye-rolling and cynicism. But that's not going to happen as long as we wait around for someone else to do our work.
Obama was right about one thing: we are the change we've been waiting for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
