Greenspan & Endless Government Bailouts

[WhiskeyGirl]

Former US Fed Chief Somber on Economic Prospects

Amid continued upheaval among America's biggest financial firms, a former head of the U.S. Federal Reserve says even more institutions could face insolvency, and that the United States appears unlikely to avoid an economic recession. From Washington, VOA's Michael Bowman reports.

(snip)

Greenspan says America's current financial climate, in which the Federal government has felt compelled to seize control of two mortgage giants and engineer the takeover of a major investment firm, is unlike anything he has ever seen before.

Appearing on ABC's This Week program, Greenspan said the near-collapse of another well-known investment firm, Lehman Brothers, only adds to his consternation.

"This is a once in a half century, probably once in a century, type of event. There is no question that this is in the process of outstripping anything I have seen. And it still is not resolved and it still has a way to go," he said.

Greenspan tied the upheaval in financial firms to turmoil in America's housing market, saying the current picture will not improve until falling home prices stabilize in the United States.

Earlier this year, the Federal government provided an emergency loan to investment giant Bear Stearns, and helped engineer the selling of the firm to a rival corporation. Last week, the Bush administration took over two government-sponsored private mortgage firms, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to rescue them from insolvency.

Greenspan said endless government rescues are not a good idea.

"We should not try to protect every single institution. The ordinary cost of financial change has winners and losers, to the extent that bailouts are draws on our scarce savings supply, you undermine the growth of the economy, and ultimately you get stagnation," said Greenspan.

But the former fed chief did say that some firms and institutions warrant assistance.

"There are certain types of institutions which are so fundamental to the functioning of the movement of savings into the real investment in an economy that on very rare occasions - and this is one of them - it is desirable to prevent them from liquidating in a sharply disruptive manner," continued Greenspan.

(snip)

Greenspan noted some economic positives: recent declines in oil prices and as well as in U.S inflation. He said he would be delighted if the United States managed to stave off a recession, but added he would not bet on such an outcome. 

http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-09-14-voa17.cfm

[WhiskeyGirl]

Gloom deepens as America’s debt piles up

The great clunking fist has struck again, or almost. This time it was aimed at the chin of John McCain, who just might be the next president of America. Fortunately, McCain has proved he can take such a blow, so his staff confined its reaction to polite enquiries of Britain’s ambassador, Sir Nigel Sheinwald, asking: “What the devil is the British prime minister doing endorsing the economic programme of Barack Obama?”

Not that it much matters. The McCain team knows that Brown is largely responsible for the mess in which the British economy finds itself. That makes his support for Obama’s economic plans about as useful as feathers on a fish, to borrow a phrase coined by congressman John Dingell in another connection.

The differences between Obama-Brown and McCain are far from trivial. Obama wants to raise taxes on families earning more than $250,000 a year, and on their dividends and capital gains, to support a redistributionist cheque of $1,000 to each of the 95% of Americans not in the top bracket. He would take the tax rate on high earners to about the UK level of 40%. Brown naturally leans more towards Obama than a tax-cutter like McCain.

Otherwise, it is difficult to understand the attractiveness of Obama’s economic programme to the prime minister, with the possible exception of the Illinois senator’s proposal — since withdrawn — to provide relief for some hard-pressed homeowners. Brown famously stole the Tories’ clothes by proposing reductions in inheritance tax; Obama proposes to raise it. Brown believes union members should be protected from their leaders by being entitled to a secret ballot; Obama favours stripping America’s union members of that protection. Brown has remained true to his free-trade beliefs; Obama is wooing trade-union support by promising a variety of protectionist measures, including the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) and an end to further such trade-opening agreements. Brown has realised that it would be bad policy to impose another windfall profits tax on energy companies; Obama favours just such a tax on oil companies.

So it must be that for Brown higher taxes and redistribution trump all other policy differences.

(snip)

Meanwhile, the important question of the nation’s finances goes unremarked upon by both Obama and McCain. Treasury secretary Hank Paulson’s decision to have the government take over the mortgage banks Freddie Mac (a consulting client of mine) and Fannie Mae was aimed at reassuring foreigners who hold billions in those agencies’ IOUs that their investments are explicitly backed by the American government. Paulson, a successful private-sector investment banker, thus ends his career presiding over a de facto nationalisation so large — the two enterprises have $5.4 trillion in liabilities, equal to the entire debt of the American government — that even Lenin might have hesitated to make such a move.

The alternative would have been to let these government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs as they are called, become unable to borrow to continue to fund about 80% of all the mortgages written in America. So Paulson was probably — not certainly, but probably — right to do what he did. But the Congressional Budget Office has ruled that the GSEs’ liabilities must now go on to the federal government’s books.

Those are already bedecked with ample quantities of red ink. With receipts from corporate taxes down, expenses up as a result of the recent stimulus package, and Freddie and Fannie likely to impose further costs on the government, more red ink is on the way. (snip)

Although the deficit is headed up, in relation to the size of the economy it will be manageable for a few years. But in the longer term the entitlements programmes, mostly Medicare and Medicaid, if unchanged will drive the deficit to levels that will make Italy look like a fiscally prudent country.

We know, too, that several of the foreigners who have been financing our deficit by buying American government bonds are so unsure about the ability of Uncle Sam to take more debt on his broad shoulders that they are paying more and more for insurance against a default by our government.

Finally, we know that neither presidential candidate has the vaguest idea how to get the budget under control. Obama’s taxes on wealthier families will surely discourage the investment we need to get the economy rolling again. McCain says he will cut ineffective programmes, but he won’t identify the programmes he would axe.

Ronald Reagan solved that problem by putting in a figure for such cuts, followed by an asterisk, guiding the budget reader to a footnote advising that the programmes to be cut would be named at an unspecified future date. McCain might have to dust off that old dodge, while Obama would have to persuade his Democratic colleagues to reduce entitlement spending. Neither prospect is sufficiently bright to relieve the budgetary gloom that has been deepened by the Freddie and Fannie takeovers.

Nothing in sight is likely to offset the downdraught that is ripping through the economy right now. But if the housing market bottoms out at the end of the year or early in 2009, as Alan Greenspan says he expects and as falling mortgage rates suggest is possible; if the easing of commodity prices enables the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates stimulatingly low; if exports continue to boom despite the strengthening dollar; and if productivity keeps rising, we should see a recovery sometime next year. Then, tax receipts would rise, and the flood of red ink might slow to a trickle.

(snip)

- Irwin Stelzer is a business adviser and director of economic policy studies at the Hudson Institute

stelzer@aol.com

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article4747939.ece?openComment=true

 

[Tylergal]

It was Greenspan who spun his sorry tale of lies on TV, blaming this on Bernake, who is not without fault, but for him to blatantly lie, when it was he who (according to Robert Reich, Clinton's Treasury Secretary) who convinced Clinton to repeal the Stegall Act of 1930 which followed the Great Depression, that allowed this to take place.  The Stegall Act was put in place to prevent such as this but Mr. Greenspan and Clinton thought it would suffice to draw voters who could not afford homes to vote for Democrat, and it was Mr. Johnson, who is Obama's senior economic advisor, who took $100 million in bonuses from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, appointed by Bill Clinton who later resigned in shame, who is responsible for this but then he is advising the messiah to "blame it on Bush." 

[WhiskeyGirl]

Another view I found -

Who owns America's Loans and if they recall them in this crisis, what will we do?

Diary Entry by abuelitaromo

(snip)
Let me repeat that, foreign nations hold our loans, can call them any day and we cannot repay the loans as we have no economy, no money, nada, Bush spent it all. So, if they wanted to, they could turn us into a Third World Power and their broken puppet IF they wanted to and worked together to make it happen.
 
We forget these things when strutting around bossing people like, well, I won’t say it.
 
Eden, a man of class, resigned. Bush never will. The next president of this nation of ours will have hell to repay and only us to help him. Vote Democrat, they repay loans.
 
Otherwise, we’ll take out more Republican loans and be some other country’s boytoy oh so very soon.

I am an opinionated older woman, not always right, but always researching to find out more.

read more here -

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=9400

Where is the Democratic and Republican plan to repay our national loans, reduce the deficit ,and ensure that the economy is put back on track?

[Tylergal]

Please note that JOHN MCCAIN TOOK NO FANNIE MAE OR FREDDIE MAC PAC MONEY.  The #1 taker from 2000-2008 was Christopher Dodd, the second highest was Barack Obama, who in 3 years, took more than others took in 8 years.  Obama is a glutton of taxpayer money.

Last night, while he was spinning his tales about what he would do for the little man, he was enjoying a $29,000 per plate dinner in Hollywood, courtesy of Barbara Streissand where he collected $9 million and then he goes out and whines about what he is doing for the "little man."  If the economy is so bad, how come he has collected more money in this campaign than all the other campaigns put together this year?  That is strange.  'Where is that money coming from?  Bundlers?  Who are those bundlers taking money from?  Saudi Arabia, China, Europe?  It would be interesting to know since it cannot be tracked according to their methodology.

[WhiskeyGirl]

Pols duck the truth on crisis

Updated Wednesday, September 17th 2008, 12:45 PM
 
Stapleton/Pool
 
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate John McCain.

The days of easy money have ended the way they always do - with a financial crash. With warnings we could be headed for another Great Depression, the presidential campaign's holiday from facts must come to a screeching halt.

It's time for truth telling. John McCain and Barack Obama need to come clean about the causes and consequences of Wall Street's meltdown. Neither has because it would require them to admit there are no quick fixes and that most of us are part of the problem.

(snip)

Obama rightly sees an ideological bias against even reasonable regulation by the Bush administration, but does he really intend to mount a campaign based on a demand for more regulation? There's a winning slogan: I promise more red tape!

McCain initially said there are enormous strengths in our economy, but attacks over that politically incorrect truth turned him stupid. He, too, talks as though we're a nation of innocent victims blindsided by crooks who sold us houses we didn't want and couldn't afford.

(snip)

We forgot that a successful con game involves two greedy people, one preying on the other. And if something seems too good to be true, it usually is.

Both political parties aided and abetted the crime against the law of economics, with the skids greased by support from advocates and the dollars of lobbyists.

Look at how the patterns repeated. Wall Street banks borrowed as much as $40 for every dollar they invested, just as homeowners saw no problem in getting a house without a down payment and a mortgage they couldn't afford.

They were called "liar loans" and everybody, from borrowers to banks, signed on. And now that it's all going bad, everybody is a victim deserving a bailout.

Washington did a similar thing, borrowing from cash-rich foreign governments to fund everything from the Iraq war to the rebate checks sent out last summer. In a generation, we became the greatest debtor nation in history.

(snip)

It's a Ponzi scheme that worked only as long as the next sucker bought in. Many of those suckers turned out to have been in Asia and Europe, which is why this is a global crisis.

(snip)...If the next President doesn't level with the American people, he will take office under the fraudulent idea that we can just muddle through without painful sacrifices. That's a formula for a failed presidency.

Obama and McCain need to tell the truth and lay out comprehensive plans for getting us out of this unholy mess. Real solutions won't be pretty or have the snap, crackle and pop of lipstick-on-a-pig ads or accusing someone of being senile. But they might save the country from a ruinous course.

Our best hope is for joint appearances...these appearances would be an extraordinary symbol of the nation's bipartisan determination to tackle this crisis. And they would pave the way for the next President to actually deliver on his promises.

read the rest of the story here -
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/09/16/2008-09-16_pols_duck_the_truth_on_crisis.html

[caesu]

de-regulation gone too far. both parties to blame.
mccain, biden - both voted for the gramm-leach-bliley act 1999.

now banks are nationalized, socialist style. the irony...
as if the government now all of a sudden knows how to run these banks.

gramm was mccain's campaign co-chair until july, and is still his economic advisor.

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/jul/09/mccain-adviser-addresses-mental-recession/
"we have sort of become a nation of whiners"

[WhiskeyGirl]

de-regulation gone too far. both parties to blame.
mccain, biden - both voted for the gramm-leach-bliley act 1999.

now banks are nationalized, socialist style. the irony...
as if the government now all of a sudden knows how to run these banks.

gramm was mccain's campaign co-chair until july, and is still his economic advisor.

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/jul/09/mccain-adviser-addresses-mental-recession/
"we have sort of become a nation of whiners"

IIRC, from my reading about the great U.S. depression of the last century, bankers and investors lost money.  Some people killed themselves, many became homeless, and others lost their lives (families, friends, jobs).

Is it possible that all of those that promoted these unsound ideas had no clue about future consequences?  Or, are they just wondering why all the little people are complaining?  What exactly did they do wrong?  Did they play by the rules, or bend the rules? 

[Tylergal]

Let's help people remember that five years ago President Bush proposed an overhaul of the housing finance industry, including a plan to oversee Fannie and Fred, but according to the NYT, the Democrats --- led by Barney Frank ---- blocked it.

‘These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.

And let's not let people forget that two years ago, John McCain tried to fix Fannie and Freddie: blocked again!.

[Tylergal]

de-regulation gone too far. both parties to blame.
mccain, biden - both voted for the gramm-leach-bliley act 1999.

now banks are nationalized, socialist style. the irony...
as if the government now all of a sudden knows how to run these banks.

gramm was mccain's campaign co-chair until july, and is still his economic advisor.

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/jul/09/mccain-adviser-addresses-mental-recession/
"we have sort of become a nation of whiners"

What peckerhead told you that!  There are 30-40 regulatory agencies and the problem is that the Democrats were in charge of all of them. YOu need to quit drinking the communist kool-aid and that date-rape drug Obama is offering up.

[Tylergal]

And furthermore, Mr. Knowitall Caseu, you are lying about the regulation.  It was Bill Clinton that repealed the STegall aCt.  You know ignorance and believing everything the kos Kids tell you is pure laziness on your part.  You do not possess enough knowledge to present a good debate.  Good day.

I realize that politics is a hot topic and brings out the best and worst in many of us.  Even though you may have strong beliefs, please restrain from name calling and attacking posters with opposing views.

TIA

[caesu]

i wasn't lying. i even said both parties are to blame.
but maybe while you were getting upset after seeing a Republican government going Socialist you missed that.

and yes, clinton signed the gramm-leach-bliley act into law.
repealing part of the glass-steagall act 1933.

you say the democrats were in charge of the regulatory agencies.
is that again that lame excuse that the democrats control the congress now for just 1.5 years?
after the republicans controlled it for 12 years and messed up big time.

shifting the blame, that's all the GOP has been doing since they lost the congress.
and now they're about to lose the presidency too.

[crazybabyborg]

Let's help people remember that five years ago President Bush proposed an overhaul of the housing finance industry, including a plan to oversee Fannie and Fred, but according to the NYT, the Democrats --- led by Barney Frank ---- blocked it.

‘These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.

And let's not let people forget that two years ago, John McCain tried to fix Fannie and Freddie: blocked again!.

I came to the thread to say exactly what Tyler said in this post. She said it better than I could, so I will just quote it and add my "DITTO".

Your facts are straight, Tyler, and suddenly this election has taken on even more importance. If we have Obama in the White House, and Pelosi in the Congress, in the absence of any checks and balances, we have only seen the beginning of a long descent that will happen quickly. I wonder how excited the rest of the world will be to have Obama in the White House when they see the power for good we have held so long be diminished and those countries who are more secure because of it are more vulnerable because of it. This financial crisis has long arms that extend way beyond the checkbooks of Americans. Unaddressed properly, this financial crisis will grow and weaken our foundation as a country. It's a domino effect that began with Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae, but the topple has not stopped. The choice made in this election will direct the next path we embark. One path leads to recovery and the other to a weakening of all that holds back tyranny of all kinds in this world. Sounds dramatic, but I do believe that.

[WhiskeyGirl]

i wasn't lying. i even said both parties are to blame.
but maybe while you were getting upset after seeing a Republican government going Socialist you missed that.

and yes, clinton signed the gramm-leach-bliley act into law.
repealing part of the glass-steagall act 1933.

you say the democrats were in charge of the regulatory agencies.
is that again that lame excuse that the democrats control the congress now for just 1.5 years?
after the republicans controlled it for 12 years and messed up big time.

shifting the blame, that's all the GOP has been doing since they lost the congress.
and now they're about to lose the presidency too.

_{start rant}

I think the American people have lost control of their government/country to politicians, capitalists, and special interest groups.

I remember in the old days, prior to the 1980's, when credit needed to be established. 

Are you trustworthy to hold this credit card or mortgage?  Who are you?  Do you have a real job?

In the past twenty years, there have been all kinds of crazy stories in the news. 

Credit cards being given to illegal aliens, dogs, and children.  WTF!  Are you trustworthy to hold this credit card or mortgage?  Who are you?  Do you have a real job?  Are you a legal resident or citizen?  A human being?  Credit limits above and beyond annual income? 

I receive 'courtesy' checks from my credit card that encourage me to take advantage of an ever increasing credit limit.  This week, instead of just four, I think the offer included at least six.  WTF!  Do you want people to go into greater debt?  Do you want your bank/institution to fail?  Maybe it's a plan for people at some big banks to just walk away from their messes?  Maybe cover their paper trail so that they will never be held responsible?

What ever happened to expecting banks to police themselves and ensure their own financial stability? 

Mortages being given to people without reference checks, job and income verification, reasonable/conservative qualifications...  What happened to setting standards for borrowers? 

I think there are many abuses that may be attributed to both Democrats and Republicans.  It's just plain greed.  No worry about who is going to pay the bills when they are dead.  No worry about the children or grandchildren. 

I think the problems were well known to politicians and insiders for over ten years.  Smart conservative people knew all these practices/deregulations would be a problem from the get-go, but politicians didn't want to do unpopular things. 

It boils down to greed and extreme capitalism.  I would conclude that no world market/trade is 'free'.  "Free Market" is just an illusion, a lie, promoted by those that take all the profits and carry little risk.  The risk to the small American has been loss of jobs, increasing taxes and national debt, and no upside. 

It's just a matter of greed by some, and in the U.S., a failure by politicians to look out for ALL the people.  An opportunity to line the pockets of many with material goods, money, and squash any tiny remorse or conscience with campaign contributions that ensured that nothing they did was against the law. 

Why are their so many lawyers in political office?

Americans need a political party to get the country on the right track.  I don't think they need more of the same - Democrat or Republican.

Stop spending money, make business leaders/politicians accountable for their actions.  How many from Freddie/Fannie have been fined?  Sent to jail for their actions/coverups/misdeeds?  How many have even been investigated?

I would have to agree with an opinion I read a while ago...

John McCain in the White House will bring the U.S. crashing down later, give the proverbial 'rats' time to jump ship, but the crisis for the U.S. is coming.

Barack Obama in the White House will bring the U.S. crashing down sooner, the crisis is coming.

I think there is plenty of finger pointing to go around.  From what I've read, responsibility for the failure of Freddie/Fannie belong to the Democrats - those that enabled and failed to promote reform.

The Republicans own the insurance and Wall St. failures.   

Banks are probably the responsibility of both.  No one wanted to say no to voters, keep good control on borrowing, raise the cost of money to all these institutions.

Once the country reaches bottom, I think the real repair work will begin.  I don't see it starting with either McCain or Obama in the White House.

I keep thinking about some dates 2005 & 2006, many years during which the government could have stepped up and turned the tide.  Maybe there needs to be walls/fences/protections between countries and the global community.  Fences make good neighbors. 

One pro-slavery argument I remember from years ago went something like this -

Slaves do not have the capacity to manage their day to day lives, finances, or other activities.  That's why they need slave masters.

just my humble opinions

_{rant over}

[WhiskeyGirl]

Let's help people remember that five years ago President Bush proposed an overhaul of the housing finance industry, including a plan to oversee Fannie and Fred, but according to the NYT, the Democrats --- led by Barney Frank ---- blocked it.

‘These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.

And let's not let people forget that two years ago, John McCain tried to fix Fannie and Freddie: blocked again!.

I came to the thread to say exactly what Tyler said in this post. She said it better than I could, so I will just quote it and add my "DITTO".

Your facts are straight, Tyler, and suddenly this election has taken on even more importance. If we have Obama in the White House, and Pelosi in the Congress, in the absence of any checks and balances, we have only seen the beginning of a long descent that will happen quickly. I wonder how excited the rest of the world will be to have Obama in the White House when they see the power for good we have held so long be diminished and those countries who are more secure because of it are more vulnerable because of it. This financial crisis has long arms that extend way beyond the checkbooks of Americans. Unaddressed properly, this financial crisis will grow and weaken our foundation as a country. It's a domino effect that began with Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae, but the topple has not stopped. The choice made in this election will direct the next path we embark. One path leads to recovery and the other to a weakening of all that holds back tyranny of all kinds in this world. Sounds dramatic, but I do believe that.

Checks & Balances - I think the worst thing that could happen is to have either party, Democrats or Republicans control the Congress, Presidency, and Supreme Court.


                                  

To much opportunity to cover things up...

blame someone else...

continue with 'business' as usual, and

fail to put the American people first.

[WhiskeyGirl]

GrannyToad posted this in the NH thread and I believe it may have an application here~

Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

In this thread, "Greenspan & Endless Government Bailouts", the turd is the current financial disaster/depression/crisis.

Go Granny!

[crazybabyborg]

GrannyToad posted this in the NH thread and I believe it may have an application here~

Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

In this thread, "Greenspan & Endless Government Bailouts", the turd is the current financial disaster/depression/crisis.

Go Granny!

What a great quote! Thanks Whiskeygirl for bringing it here! I'm just reeling from the financial news. This has been a week, for sure!

I keep mulling this over in my mind and it sets my teeth on edge. Congress passed a drilling bill. We can drill offshore as long as it's no closer than 50 miles from shore. Great, right? WRONG! We KNOW that 90% of the oil is within the 50 miles from shore on the continental shelf. With what Congress, led by Ms. Pelosi, passed, states cannot recieve revenues from the offshore drilling, America barely limps toward oil independence, and Pelosi's Congress pats itself on the back for facing upcoming elections while being able to say, "I voted for drilling". Americans should be insulted that within the same week as the bill for each American has skyrocketted for huge corporation bailouts, the democratic congress has been huddled together to take care of their own ass.

WHO will go to Washington for the people of this country? I don't make a wage that qualifies as the "rich" but my taxes are killing me. When was the last time you looked at your paycheck and even bothered to look at what you actually made verses what you are taking home? I really don't care what party a candidate belongs to as long as I have some assurance that he/she won't make policies and decisions based purely on party lines! I want SOMEBODY to make policy and decisions based on the people in this country who go to work each day to support everybody else who does not!! We don't make or risk millions on Wall Street, or endevor to purchase homes beyond our means to pay for them, and I have enough on my back without being required to pay for those who made those choices. When my own small business is subjected to strict regulations and personal oversight from the government because I serve some patients recieving Medicare, I can't help but wonder why the Government Employees who come to pour over my books, charts, and records under penalty of prosecution, aren't better directed to the Investment Banking industry where Billions are at risk to the taxpayer instead of thousands.

But, who are we? We couldn't possibly understand the intricate workings of those lofty halls of Washington! No, we just can't grip the concept that developing our own resources to supply our own energy needs, creates jobs, fosters National Security, depletes the coffers of Arab countries that would like to see us utterly defeated, and protects investments crucial to our economy. Obviously we just can't grasp that there's an election to win which is far more important! God Forbid a democratic congress could get past party politics to do what's best for the American people!