Eric - "All cheapskate anarchist paul wants to do is try to destroy the Federal Reserve and allow anarachy to rule the banking industry.  Just Say No to his Unconstitutional Audit! "
--------------------------------------------------------
I find your lack of knowledge regarding Constitutional law to be profoundly disturbing.  Please, point out to me which section of the Constitution even mentions the Federal Reserve, let alone bans full audits of it.

Actually, don't bother, because I can show you exactly where it says that such an action IS constitutional: Article I, Section 8.

At the very least, it's good to see you showing your true colors.  I suspected the whole "government transparency" thing was a scam.  Let's just hope Obama isn't a hypocrite as well.

I am not surprised. The rhetoric and racist rants by their leaders didn't really make sense. It only served to weaken their base. They didn't need to show their asses in the first place because the end results are, they'll vote for her confirmation and they've lost more credibility from past supporters.

Old school politics in the 21st century just doesn't work.

Mel Martinez doesn't have to please the 'crazies' anymore
Leave that to ex-Speaker Rubio


Moderate Dan: '...More export-related? Just what are we going to export. All our manufacturing plants have left because 1) Unions made them too expensive to compete with the rest of the world 2) Government regulated and taxes them out of the country...'


'Moderate' Dan, I think you're 'moderately' informed


From WashingtonMonthly.com:

'...Two-Thirds Of Corporations Did Not Pay Taxes:

According to last month's Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, between 1998 and 2005 "about two-thirds of corporations operating in the United States did not pay taxes" because of a variety of corporate tax loopholes...'


I don’t know if that counts corporations that moved their headquarters ‘off shore’ to COMPLETELY AVOID corporate income taxes
(What’s the famoud tool manufacture with a yellow logo that moved to the Carribean?)


How can you cut taxes ANY MORE for corporations ?
(less than zero?)

And, yes you can blame Clinton, Gore, the DLC  crowd and their Republican allies for this

The rest of your post wasn't much more factual, Dan

At the very least, it's good to see you showing your true colors.  I suspected the whole "government transparency" thing was a scam.  Let's just hope Obama isn't a hypocrite as well.
MO Attorney


Of all things Obama is, one thing he isn't is a hypocrite. He is very transparent in that he thinks the federal government can do a better job then anyone else in most things for America. He thinks he can run banks better, run car makers better, provide insurance better, provide better health care, and provide energy better.

Obama is very transparent, it's just that he's also very wrong.

Sotomayor should be confirmed.  Obama picked her, she is qualified, and she has no ethics problems.

I still wonder about the double standard the Senate Democrats have.  Estrada was qualified for the position for which Bush nominated him.  Roberts and Alito were qualified for the Supreme Court.  Yet, Senate Democrats did everything they could to derail those nominations.

My how their attitude toward Presidential nominations has changed, now that a Democrat is in the White House.

Anita,

Everything you listed would have never happened if the Fed hadn't invested the money to begin with.  None of these wasteful programs would ever have the teeth to take hold in society if the fed wasn't able to print money willy nilly, and fund them.  That is my point.  People from both sides of the aisle get it wrong.  Republicans are trying to blame the poor for being stupid, and the democrats are trying to blame the rich for being evil, and greedy.  Now I'm sure there are grains of truth to both sides but in the end it's THE FED. They are the ones facilitates the idiotic programs that create the fragile bubbles that ruin our econmy every decade or so.  

The CRA may have been started with good intentions, but the simple fact that it was started and funded opened the door for predidtory lending that would not have existed under a free market system.  People don't realize that while a free market can certainly foster some corruption it never grows to the point that it can take down the entire economy because the folks investing in the free market are the citizens who can use their ability.  Not the government with it's unlimited amount of money (again thanks to the fed).

Good for you, Senator Martinez, your vote will be welcome. Too bad your fellow republican senators don't feel the same way - or don't have significant Hispanic voting blocks in their states as you do. However, I question of the word "limited" in the role of the United States Supreme Court in our government. In the system of checks and balances, all three branches of government have equal and intertwining roles in the process of our laws. They are also subject to change in substance according to the will of the people. The Supreme Court just changes more deliberately as the replacement of justices occurs after lifetime appointments.
I wonder how you would have voted on Thurgood Marshall's nomination...

Pure and simple unrepentant social and economic engineering intended to impose their prejudices and values on others.

Eric M., Expat (Sent Friday, July 17, 2009 11:46 AM)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thanks for the history lesson Eric… we ALL just survived 8 years of what you reference above… so we’ll make damn SURE history doesn’t repeat itself!

M’kay?

It ain't over til it's over

From Washington monthly:

'...In New Hampshire, the latest Research 2000 poll for Daily Kos shows a very competitive open-seat Senate context next year. In a match-up pitting Rep. Paul Hodes (D) against former Rep. Charlie Bass (R), Hodes leads by five, 42% to 37%. In a match-up pitting Hodes against state Attorney General Kelly Ayotte (R), Ayotte leads by the slimmest of margins, 39% to 38%...'

a CLOSE RACE !!
Maybe the IQuitArod will sink Kelly Ayotte
Sarah Palins SHOULD CAMPAIGN for Ayotte

MO Attorney: '...I find your lack of knowledge regarding Constitutional law to be profoundly disturbing.  Please, point out to me which section of the Constitution even mentions the Federal Reserve, let alone bans full audits of it...'

Please point out to me which section of the Constitution grants corporations citizenship ?

Any ideas, MO Attorney ??

As far as transparency, audit the Federal Reserve
How about investigating TORTURE and WAR CRIMES ??
Are you for THAT Transparency ???

Hard to make the case that the Republicans didn't completely implode on the Sotomayor nomination. To go from threats of a filibuster to three hard-core Republicans (plus Olympia Snowe...) pledging a "yes" vote on her nomination is a major victory for the president.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

The Republican senators success was in garnering "empathy" for the downtrodden white firefighters and portraying themselves as victims.

congrats   Martinez

Indiana has great Republican leadership!

Indiana Maintains $1.3 Billion Surplus

Indiana State Auditor Tim Berry says Indiana state reserves at the end of the 2009 fiscal year increased by $26 million to more than a $1.32 billion surplus.


Now, does it not make sense that they should be made to share this surplus with a neighbor state going or already broke like Michigan?

Indiana taxpayers say NO! This is our money!

What a difference a state line and state government make.

Anita - "Please point out to me which section of the Constitution grants corporations citizenship ?

Any ideas, MO Attorney ??"
--------------------------------------------------------
I really don't see what this has to do with anything, but that would again be Article I, Section 8.  While the aforementioned section doesn't reference corporations, it does allow Congress to create legislation defining corporations, which Congress has done twice: once in the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and again in Section C of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC).  Technically speaking Congress never voted on the UCC, but every state has and Congress has never intervened, effectively making it the law of the land under Article IV, paragraph 2 of the Constitution.
------------------------------------------------------
Anita - "As far as transparency, audit the Federal Reserve
How about investigating TORTURE and WAR CRIMES ??
Are you for THAT Transparency ??? "

Personally, I would not be opposed to any such investigations.  I do believe that the Fed audit is more important, however; torture and war crimes impact a very small number of Americans, while the Fed's manipulation of the U.S. dollar impacts each of us every day.

Jonathan:

You’ve just made my point, "who" was in office then? Whose cabinet was it?. The preditory lenading  started because John Reich, appointed by George W. Bush changed the regulatory lasw the affected the entire financial market. Had he not done so, we wouldn’t have experienced the Mortgage crisis that was bought on by preditory lending practices. The people that were targeted were those that wanted the American dream of ownership.

Everyone is not ment to own homes but those that were and could afford them became victims of prey as well. (See document facts) We aren’t looking to make-up lies about the past administration when proof is blant. Everyone is living it.

Bush leveled the playing field by destroying the middle class. And putting eveyone on the “Plantation”.

OTS Director at the time, John Reich (appointed by Bush ) announced the final decision to go ahead and implement the proposed revisions in four main areas of its existing Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) regulations to reestablish uniformity between its rules and those of the other federal banking agencies.

Reaffirming the basis for the revised rules as first proposed, Reich stated, "OTS is making these revisions to promote consistency and facilitate objective evaluations of CRA performance across the banking and thrift industries.

Consistent standards will allow the public to make more effective comparisons of bank and thrift CRA performance." He noted that the changes reinforce CRA objectives consistent with thrifts' performance in meeting the financial services needs of their communities. This OTS rule revision aligned with that of the other agencies by:

eliminating the option of alternative weights for lending, investment, and service under the large, retail savings association test.

defining institutions with assets between $250 million and $1 billion as "intermediate small savings associations" subject to a new community development test.

Indexing the asset threshold for "small" and "intermediate small" savings associations annually based on changes to the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

clarifying the adverse impact on a savings association's CRA rating where the OTS finds evidence of discrimination or other illegal credit practices.

I'm appalled as a Woman & Florida Republican that you would vote yes for this nomination.  She has been most recently overturned by the Supreme Court on her most recent ruling against the firefighters.How can you put her on the bench being so racist and judgemental against white people!!!

This will be one of the few victories Obama has in his term.

Everything seems to point to him being a one term and gone President, much like Jimmy Carter and George BushI were.

The real mess will await the next President when he or she is elected as our country will have been steered totally off-course.

Jonathan:

I agree with you in regards to Free Markets. There shouldn't be a"free market" financial system. It is the most irresponsible brand of governing and the crisis that wer are in is a prime example. Nothing is FREE.

Irresponsible leadership can't rely on "wall Stree" C.E.O's and brokers to be honest. Hell, they make their money by being cut throat, proof positive, they cut our throats. Yes, I agree that it's the Federal Government and lawmaker's fault that laws aren't in place to offer better protection for tax paying citizens and world investors conducting business in our country.

Fed's can't act alone, those orders come from higher up.

Smart move for several Republican senators to declare quickly that they will vote for Sotomayor.  It will be interesting to see if it's quick enough to defuse the anger among Hispanic and women voters at how Republican senators were treating her during the hearings.  From the posts I've been seeing, the Ricky Ricardo reference, repeatedly accusing her of bias/racism, and the 'temperament' stereotype all seem to have stirred up a lot of anger at Republicans.

Nashville,

I don't think the government does a good job of protecting us.  Look at their record, it’s awful.   Why should I trust them?  Because some new guy who can deliver a better speech occupies the presidential suit?  No thank you.   Besides there are other factors in play outside of Pres. Obama…

Just look at what happened last year.  The market tried to strip resources from folks who were handling them poorly, but what did the government do?  They enacted Troubled Asset Relief Program (keep in mind both Presidential Candidates supported TARP).  Paulson then went to work helping his crony friends at Goldman Sach's while letting Lehman go under (funny Lehman was Goldman's primary competition) where is the free market in all of this?  On the sacrificial alter like usual.  Maybe my tone would be different if the folks in the government had a decent record at market regulation, but they do not.  And even if I trusted Obama, I don't trust the Fed, and I don't trust Tim G. and I don't trust the House Finance Committee (aside from congressman Ron Paul).  

Paulson was a d-bag, and I don't think Tim G. is any better.  I mean he is a former Fed Governor (the Fed helped get us into this mess with all of their cheap credit).  So where do you think Tim G's loyalty lies.  Obama or Bernanke?  Well it's Bernanke of course!  Even Obama is trying to vest with more power over the Economy in the hands of our mighty Fed Chairman.  

They say they are a private institution, but who selects the Chairman?  The President.  And what do they do?  The dictate interest rates based on their "educated" opinions.  They print Treasury backed money.  No they are not Private they are political.  When they say private they really mean secretive.

Consider this Jim DeMint probably the most conservative member of the Senate and Bernie Sanders the Senate's only avowed socialist co-sponsored a Fed Audit bill S-604 (READ THIS PART SEVERAL TIMES I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND A CONSERVATIVE AND A SOCIALIST AGREE THE FED IS TOO POWERFUL ERIC!!!).  The House has over 270 co-sponsors to its Audit the Fed bill Hr-1207.

The problem we have to overcome is this idea that Free Markets will ruin the little guy.  The reality is we haven't had a modern free market to test this theory.  We just assume because we were taught in 7th grade about the monopolies of the 19th century that this will be the reality now.  We forget that these so called evil businessmen fueled innovation that made us the economic giant we have become.  Yeah some guys made bad choices, and treated people wrong, but you can't apply the bad choices of a few to the entire system.  Also the Wild West wasn't that wild.  Guys like Buffalo Bill sold it as a dog eat dog society to make money off of the romanticized idea.  Most of the West communities found a way to manage themselves without and federal government.

The very fact that our government is positioning itself to control the financial sector should tell who they are interested in protecting.  If they really cared about us they would expose the stupid people that made the stupid mistakes to their stupidity.  By that I mean if you make mistakes you should live with the consequences.  

The fact is folks in either party don't think us peons are smart enough to take care of ourselves.  They create these programs, or enact legislation that makes it easier to live off of the state.  This in turn devalues the idea that educating yourself, in things like the law, political philosophy, and economics is something you should do.  

How often do you hear common folks conversing about monetary policy?  Hardly ever.  Yet back in the mid 19th century it was a topic of heated political discussion.  Now a day’s people care more about if Ross and Rachel will ever get back together than they do about the Fed printing presses running 24/7.

It's a social problem with heavy economic and political consequence.  Call me cold hearted, but perhaps society needs to be put back on the path of self-reliance.  Every time our Government tries to correct some social injustice (regardless of good intention) the nanny state only grows, and more people become dependent on the “charity” of government.  It’s killing liberty, and the sooner we realize that the better.

Dear Right to Life Crowd;

It looks like your conservative republican elected officials are selling you down the river. Oh well, I guess it's back to bombing clinics and mudering doctors.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):