[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What good will it do to call Congress? Probably not much. They already know most of their constituents hate the bailout, and they hate it too. The smarter ones know, however, that as awful as the bailout is, and even though it's not guaranteed to fix things if does pass, the situation *is* guaranteed to be far worse if it doesn't pass, something their constituents--including Michael Moore--haven't figured out. The threat of financial collapse is real, and it's desperately urgent. It would be lovely if it were just the Wall Street fat cats who would suffer, but it's not, it's all of us. And we will suffer significantly more than they will. They can afford to lose some financial weight; the rest of us can't. Moore's rant is ignorant, if not dishonest. snip The problem is, nobody truly knows what this collapse is all about. True strictly speaking, but only in a literal interpretation of the word all, meaning down to the very last detail. Part of the *need* for the bailout is that investor confidence is down the tubes because there's so much uncertainty. The bailout is designed to *reduce* the uncertainty and restore some of the confidence by giving a value to certain assets whose worth isn't currently known. Even Treasury Secretary Paulson admitted he doesn't know the exact amount that is needed (he just picked the $700 billion number out of his head!). As I pointed out in an earlier post, this is a feature, not a bug. It's simply not possible to determine the exact amount--again, that's the basis of the problem in the first place. Paulson didn't pick the $700 billion figure at random, though; he picked a number he felt would be significantly more than would be required, again, to increase confidence that the government will be able to follow through on its plan. The head of the congressional budget office said he can't figure it out nor can he explain it to anyone. I don't know whether the head of the CBO is an expert in financial markets; it's not necessarily the case that a congressional budgeting expert knows much about the kind of investments involved in the current crisis. Also, it would be important to know exactly what he said, which Moore doesn't tell us. Moore's could well be a misleadingly loose paraphrase designed to make his own points. snip Falling for whom? NOTHING in this bailout package will lower the price of the gas you have to put in your car to get to work. NOTHING in this bill will protect you from losing your home. NOTHING in this bill will give you health insurance. All too true, but irrelevant. The issue is whether *not* passing it will *raise* the price of gas, make it *more* likely that you'll lose your home and *less* likely to be able to afford--or even obtain--health insurance, not to mention avoiding bankruptcy if you get sick without insurance. Health insurance? Mike, why are you bringing this up? What's this got to do with the Wall Street collapse? It has everything to do with it. This so-called collapse was triggered by the massive defaulting and foreclosures going on with people's home mortgages. Key word: *triggered*. Not *caused by*. What has caused the collapse is the shaky underpinnings of the entire financial market. That the housing crisis could bring down the markets is a symptom of how bad a shape they're already in. Do you know why so many Americans are losing their homes? To hear the Republicans describe it, it's because too many working class idiots were given mortgages that they really couldn't afford. Here's the truth: The number one cause of people declaring bankruptcy is because of medical bills. This is a very fancy and deliberately misleading switcheroo. Bankruptcies *per se* are a non sequitur. Having one's home go into foreclosure and having to declare bankruptcy are two different things that are not inevitably connected. snip 1. Call or e-mail Senator Obama. Tell him he does not need to be sitting there trying to help prop up Bush and Cheney and the mess they've made. Etc. Actually what you should be doing is *trusting Obama*. I have grave reservations about him on other grounds, but in this case he knows what he's doing. It's ironic that Moore, who has been such a fervent Obama supporter, is now telling us Obama is on the side of the fat cats and the Bush administration. Tell him we know he has the smarts to slow this thing down and figure out what's the best route to take. He already *has* figured it out. He thinks the bill should pass. When you screw up in life, there is hell to pay. Each and every one of you reading this knows that basic lesson and has paid the consequences of your actions at some point. In this great democracy, we cannot let there be one set of rules for the vast majority of hard-working citizens, and another set of rules for the elite, who, when they screw up, are handed one more gift on a silver
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
Two additional points: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip The head of the congressional budget office said he can't figure it out nor can he explain it to anyone. I don't know whether the head of the CBO is an expert in financial markets; it's not necessarily the case that a congressional budgeting expert knows much about the kind of investments involved in the current crisis. Also, it would be important to know exactly what he said, which Moore doesn't tell us. Moore's could well be a misleadingly loose paraphrase designed to make his own points. There are a lot of folks who *are* financial-market experts who are insisting that the bill must be passed, including some who were against it to begin with, such as Paul Krugman of the New York Times. Krugman is a politically very liberal economist and an outspoken critic of the Bush administration; he wouldn't be in favor of the bill if he hadn't come to think it was absolutely, crucially necessary. snip Do you know why so many Americans are losing their homes? To hear the Republicans describe it, it's because too many working class idiots were given mortgages that they really couldn't afford. Here's the truth: The number one cause of people declaring bankruptcy is because of medical bills. This is a very fancy and deliberately misleading switcheroo. Bankruptcies *per se* are a non sequitur. Having one's home go into foreclosure and having to declare bankruptcy are two different things that are not inevitably connected. I failed to make my main point here: Medical bills may be the number-one reason people declare bankruptcy; but they are *not* the number-one reason people can't make their mortgage payments. They can't make their mortgage payments because they aren't making enough money to sustain a mortgage in the first place; or because their payments went way up when interest rates skyrocketed; or because they refinanced thinking the value of their homes would keep going up, and they could sell them at a profit if they couldn't repay their debt. Instead, home prices fell when the housing bubble burst, and now their mortgages are worth more than their equity. Yes, probably some were too strapped by medical bills to make their mortgage payments; but that's a much smaller percentage of people. If Moore doesn't know this, he's abysmally ignorant. If he does, he's being disgracefully dishonest.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- On Mon, 9/29/08, Michael Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Michael Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] They are swiping as much of the silverware as they can on their way out the door And yet, they are screeching about how the end is near! Recession! The Great Depression! Y2K! I am a fan of MM but this is crap. The money is to replace losses associated with street after street of banged out repossessed homes. Am I wrong? As for the Y2K problem, this was not a catastrophe because the industry did the work; remember all those Cobol programmers that came out of retirement? Uns.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
Michael Moore, If your head is up your ass, does it matter if you heart is in the right place. Grassroots activism against the bailout and scaring the crap out Congress could create more wrangling and disastrous no vote gridlock. If Congress doesn't act quickly, we can look forward to harvesting potatoes in the gulag, formerly known as the USA. This is serious folks. Don't take financial advice from a guy who makes movies. http://tinyurl.com/3vr5u9 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan my3paths@ wrote: What good will it do to call Congress? Probably not much. They already know most of their constituents hate the bailout, and they hate it too. The smarter ones know, however, that as awful as the bailout is, and even though it's not guaranteed to fix things if does pass, the situation *is* guaranteed to be far worse if it doesn't pass, something their constituents--including Michael Moore--haven't figured out. The threat of financial collapse is real, and it's desperately urgent. It would be lovely if it were just the Wall Street fat cats who would suffer, but it's not, it's all of us. And we will suffer significantly more than they will. They can afford to lose some financial weight; the rest of us can't. Moore's rant is ignorant, if not dishonest. snip The problem is, nobody truly knows what this collapse is all about. True strictly speaking, but only in a literal interpretation of the word all, meaning down to the very last detail. Part of the *need* for the bailout is that investor confidence is down the tubes because there's so much uncertainty. The bailout is designed to *reduce* the uncertainty and restore some of the confidence by giving a value to certain assets whose worth isn't currently known. Even Treasury Secretary Paulson admitted he doesn't know the exact amount that is needed (he just picked the $700 billion number out of his head!). As I pointed out in an earlier post, this is a feature, not a bug. It's simply not possible to determine the exact amount--again, that's the basis of the problem in the first place. Paulson didn't pick the $700 billion figure at random, though; he picked a number he felt would be significantly more than would be required, again, to increase confidence that the government will be able to follow through on its plan. The head of the congressional budget office said he can't figure it out nor can he explain it to anyone. I don't know whether the head of the CBO is an expert in financial markets; it's not necessarily the case that a congressional budgeting expert knows much about the kind of investments involved in the current crisis. Also, it would be important to know exactly what he said, which Moore doesn't tell us. Moore's could well be a misleadingly loose paraphrase designed to make his own points. snip Falling for whom? NOTHING in this bailout package will lower the price of the gas you have to put in your car to get to work. NOTHING in this bill will protect you from losing your home. NOTHING in this bill will give you health insurance. All too true, but irrelevant. The issue is whether *not* passing it will *raise* the price of gas, make it *more* likely that you'll lose your home and *less* likely to be able to afford--or even obtain--health insurance, not to mention avoiding bankruptcy if you get sick without insurance. Health insurance? Mike, why are you bringing this up? What's this got to do with the Wall Street collapse? It has everything to do with it. This so-called collapse was triggered by the massive defaulting and foreclosures going on with people's home mortgages. Key word: *triggered*. Not *caused by*. What has caused the collapse is the shaky underpinnings of the entire financial market. That the housing crisis could bring down the markets is a symptom of how bad a shape they're already in. Do you know why so many Americans are losing their homes? To hear the Republicans describe it, it's because too many working class idiots were given mortgages that they really couldn't afford. Here's the truth: The number one cause of people declaring bankruptcy is because of medical bills. This is a very fancy and deliberately misleading switcheroo. Bankruptcies *per se* are a non sequitur. Having one's home go into foreclosure and having to declare bankruptcy are two different things that are not inevitably connected. snip 1. Call or e-mail Senator Obama. Tell him he does not need to be sitting there trying to help prop up Bush and Cheney and the mess they've made. Etc. Actually what you should be doing is *trusting Obama*. I have grave reservations about him on other grounds, but in this case he knows what he's doing. It's ironic that Moore, who has been such a fervent Obama supporter, is now telling us Obama
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two additional points: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip The head of the congressional budget office said he can't figure it out nor can he explain it to anyone. I don't know whether the head of the CBO is an expert in financial markets; it's not necessarily the case that a congressional budgeting expert knows much about the kind of investments involved in the current crisis. Also, it would be important to know exactly what he said, which Moore doesn't tell us. Moore's could well be a misleadingly loose paraphrase designed to make his own points. There are a lot of folks who *are* financial-market experts who are insisting that the bill must be passed, including some who were against it to begin with, such as Paul Krugman of the New York Times. Krugman is a politically very liberal economist and an outspoken critic of the Bush administration; he wouldn't be in favor of the bill if he hadn't come to think it was absolutely, crucially necessary. snip Do you know why so many Americans are losing their homes? To hear the Republicans describe it, it's because too many working class idiots were given mortgages that they really couldn't afford. Here's the truth: The number one cause of people declaring bankruptcy is because of medical bills. This is a very fancy and deliberately misleading switcheroo. Bankruptcies *per se* are a non sequitur. Having one's home go into foreclosure and having to declare bankruptcy are two different things that are not inevitably connected. I failed to make my main point here: Medical bills may be the number-one reason people declare bankruptcy; but they are *not* the number-one reason people can't make their mortgage payments. snip ++ Did you see the Jon Stewart comparison between the Iraq war and the bailout? Looked like the same boogeyman BS. The bailout looks like another part of an ongoing program that has been going on for a long time. N.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip ++ Did you see the Jon Stewart comparison between the Iraq war and the bailout? Looked like the same boogeyman BS. I didn't watch it, but any such comparison is BS, and Stewart should be ashamed of himself for furthering it, IMHO. Moore too. The bailout looks like another part of an ongoing program that has been going on for a long time. N. I'll grant you it *does* look like that, but looks can be deceptive, especially to nonexperts. One of the major differences is that there were very few experts on Iraq back in 2002-2003, so we had to take BushCo's word for it on the basis for the war. But there are a whole lot of experts on the financial markets today. I don't know if anybody has taken a poll of these experts, but there sure are a lot of them who are insisting that the bailout must be passed. Another difference is that those who were against the Iraq war were almost frozen out of media coverage, whereas this time around, there's at least equal coverage of those for and against the bailout, so the public can't help but hear the negative case, which reinforces their own preconceptions. And yet another difference is that we had just gone through a catastrophe at the time the Iraq War was being engineered, and people were scared and angry, ready to believe whatever the administration told them to avert an even bigger one. This time, while the run-up to the catastrophe has been evident for some time, it's been in slow motion, and a lot of it has been behind the scenes. Just as most ordinary people had no reason to expect 9/11, most ordinary people today don't see any reason to expect a sudden and catastrophic financial meltdown. One of the most telling points, it seems to me, is that it was the Republicans in Congress who were most vehemently in favor of the Iraq War. Today, it's the Republicans in Congress who are most vehemently opposed to the bailout, while most Democrats are supporting it (albeit reluctantly). In other words, the apparent similarities between the Iraq War and the bailout are just that, apparent, and only superficial. When you look deeper, they're very different situations.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip ++ Did you see the Jon Stewart comparison between the Iraq war and the bailout? Looked like the same boogeyman BS. I didn't watch it, but any such comparison is BS, and Stewart should be ashamed of himself for furthering it, IMHO. Moore too. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/jon-stewart-bush-bailout_n_129588.html or http://tinyurl.com/4pn588 One word: Apocalypto Four words: Mel Gibson, Christian Bigot Two words: Fuckin' idiot Watch the video. See the side-by-side comparison. Think for yourself. Don't allow fuckin' idiots who want to tell you that a video clip she never deigned to watch is bullshit, the way she tried to convince you that Mel Gibson's movie (that she never saw) was Christian bigotry. [ P.S. This is a statement, not a direct reply to the fuckin' idiot in question. :-) ]
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip ++ Did you see the Jon Stewart comparison between the Iraq war and the bailout? Looked like the same boogeyman BS. I didn't watch it, but any such comparison is BS, and Stewart should be ashamed of himself for furthering it, IMHO. Moore too. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/jon-stewart-bush- bailout_n_129588.html or http://tinyurl.com/4pn588 One word: Apocalypto Four words: Mel Gibson, Christian Bigot Two words: Fuckin' idiot Watch the video. See the side-by-side comparison. Think for yourself. Don't allow fuckin' idiots who want to tell you that a video clip she never deigned to watch is bullshit, the way she tried to convince you that Mel Gibson's movie (that she never saw) was Christian bigotry. [ P.S. This is a statement, not a direct reply to the fuckin' idiot in question. :-) ] Thanks, Barry, for responding to my teaser exactly as I figured you would. And thanks for providing the link to the four- minute video. A lot easier and cheaper than it would have been to send me a DVD of Apocalypto, and a lot less time and trouble for me to watch Stewart and confirm my suspicion that he'd be spouting bullshit. It's bullshit. Stewart should be ashamed of himself, as I said before I had seen the clip. Interestingly, in my previous post, without knowing what Stewart had shown and said, I hit several of the points he tried to make. Again, Barry, thanks *very* much for playing. Next time you try to smear me with references to Apocalypto, I'll just pull out this little exchange.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Again, Barry, thanks *very* much for playing. The fuckin' idiot has only two posts left. Say what you will about me, but the bottom line is that without interacting with the loudmouth from New Jersey even once, here it is Monday morning my time, and she now has only six posts left for the week. Do less, accomplish more. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. Dumb fish. RLLY REEELLY dumb fish.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
As for the Y2K problem, this was not a catastrophe because the industry did the work; remember all those Cobol programmers that came out of retirement? No, they were already working because the rates were so good in the mid-90s. It was the cheap foreign labor that upped the work force in time, a courtesy to the US congress stabbing the American workforce in the back in exchange for campaign contributions (bribes) to both parties from companies that had never given any money to either party before. Unfortunately, most of the foreign workers are still here and more have come over, so many COBOL programmers of all ages have had to leave the business. Love will swallow you, eat you up completely until there is no `you,' only love. - Amma --- On Mon, 9/29/08, uns_tressor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: uns_tressor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, September 29, 2008, 9:28 AM --- On Mon, 9/29/08, Michael Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Michael Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] They are swiping as much of the silverware as they can on their way out the door And yet, they are screeching about how the end is near! Recession! The Great Depression! Y2K! I am a fan of MM but this is crap. The money is to replace losses associated with street after street of banged out repossessed homes. Am I wrong? As for the Y2K problem, this was not a catastrophe because the industry did the work; remember all those Cobol programmers that came out of retirement? Uns. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
Judy, Here's an article below by Jim Jubak on the 700 billion bailout. He writes a regular column for MSN Money. This level of finance is over my head, so I can't make a judgement, but I think he makes some interesting arguments. I think maybe, that as we are changing from an old kali yuga age to a new age of sat yuga this may be a shake up, a cleansing, a purification that is happening, a wake up call. Suzi Orman says that how we handle our money reflects where we are spiritualy. I think this is true for individuals, households, and nations. She says people first, money second, and things third. I agree. http://tiny.cc/dsWhh --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Nelson nelsonriddle2001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip ++ Did you see the Jon Stewart comparison between the Iraq war and the bailout? Looked like the same boogeyman BS. I didn't watch it, but any such comparison is BS, and Stewart should be ashamed of himself for furthering it, IMHO. Moore too. The bailout looks like another part of an ongoing program that has been going on for a long time. N. I'll grant you it *does* look like that, but looks can be deceptive, especially to nonexperts. One of the major differences is that there were very few experts on Iraq back in 2002-2003, so we had to take BushCo's word for it on the basis for the war. But there are a whole lot of experts on the financial markets today. I don't know if anybody has taken a poll of these experts, but there sure are a lot of them who are insisting that the bailout must be passed. Another difference is that those who were against the Iraq war were almost frozen out of media coverage, whereas this time around, there's at least equal coverage of those for and against the bailout, so the public can't help but hear the negative case, which reinforces their own preconceptions. And yet another difference is that we had just gone through a catastrophe at the time the Iraq War was being engineered, and people were scared and angry, ready to believe whatever the administration told them to avert an even bigger one. This time, while the run-up to the catastrophe has been evident for some time, it's been in slow motion, and a lot of it has been behind the scenes. Just as most ordinary people had no reason to expect 9/11, most ordinary people today don't see any reason to expect a sudden and catastrophic financial meltdown. One of the most telling points, it seems to me, is that it was the Republicans in Congress who were most vehemently in favor of the Iraq War. Today, it's the Republicans in Congress who are most vehemently opposed to the bailout, while most Democrats are supporting it (albeit reluctantly). In other words, the apparent similarities between the Iraq War and the bailout are just that, apparent, and only superficial. When you look deeper, they're very different situations.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nope, it failed 205-228! Good work congress! Let the rich eat cake. Get your video cameras ready as they jump from their skyscrapers. The people rule!!! Viva la revolution! I am very pleased with this also. And I have just read that another amazing thing has happened-- As a result of Congress refusing payment of this ransom, the government is actually working as it should-- The Federal Reserve and Treasury have combined to make over $620B available to the banks in the form of long- term (84 day) and short-term (28 day) loans. When we the people don't blink, the hostage crisis evaporates. May God Bless Nancy Pelosi, who many are saying sealed the vote on the House floor with a closing speech on the debate.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] May God Bless Nancy Pelosi, who many are saying sealed the vote on the House floor with a closing speech on the debate. Are you insane? Nancy Pelosi voted FOR the bill!
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shempmcgurk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: [snip] May God Bless Nancy Pelosi, who many are saying sealed the vote on the House floor with a closing speech on the debate. Are you insane? good question... Nancy Pelosi voted FOR the bill! Darn! I haven't read the roll call yet...I am really pleased that the Republicans rediscovered the principle of free party economics and/or were too scared to vote for the bill given the close election. I am unhappy that the Democrats proved themselves deeply in the pockets of the wealthy.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] May God Bless Nancy Pelosi, who many are saying sealed the vote on the House floor with a closing speech on the debate. Are you insane? Nancy Pelosi voted FOR the bill! According to fair and balanced CNN it was her speech this morning where she accused the failed Bush policies but then I think the anchors were pissed because their 401Ks which are probably far fatter than any of ours were going into the toilet. Barney Frank said it was a block of free market Republicans who were responsible. I didn't know that Dennis Kucinich was a free market Republican. And we have some Republicans (but not all) blaming the Dems. To me it looks like the establishment representatives against the people's representatives. The people spoke that they wanted no bailout for the rich and the modified bill still let the rich make out like bandits. It's been fun watching those so attached to money panic on TV.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: [snip] May God Bless Nancy Pelosi, who many are saying sealed the vote on the House floor with a closing speech on the debate. Are you insane? Nancy Pelosi voted FOR the bill! According to fair and balanced CNN it was her speech this morning where she accused the failed Bush policies but then I think the anchors were pissed because their 401Ks which are probably far fatter than any of ours were going into the toilet. Barney Frank said it was a block of free market Republicans who were responsible. I didn't know that Dennis Kucinich was a free market Republican. And we have some Republicans (but not all) blaming the Dems. To me it looks like the establishment representatives against the people's representatives. The people spoke that they wanted no bailout for the rich and the modified bill still let the rich make out like bandits. It's been fun watching those so attached to money panic on TV. Give credit where credit is due, Bhairitu: Republicans defeated this thing; Democrats wanted it passed.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
Hi, clucere-- Thanks for the cite. Unfortunately, it's academic now. I don't have the knowledge to evaluate his suggestions either, but I sure don't find his contention that not passing the bill won't knock the economy into a tailspin very convincing. He certainly doesn't provide much in the way of support for it. We just have to pray he's right. BTW, his objection that there won't be any oversight is outdated. The column was written five days ago; since then, a bunch of congressional oversight measures were added to the bill. But good for you for seeking out expert opinion on this. I just wish more of our congresscritters had done so rather than voting their gut because they were afraid they'd lose their seats if they didn't bow to their constituents' ill-informed opposition. This is my 50th for the week, so I'll see y'all later, assuming we're still all here! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, clucere [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Judy, Here's an article below by Jim Jubak on the 700 billion bailout. He writes a regular column for MSN Money. This level of finance is over my head, so I can't make a judgement, but I think he makes some interesting arguments. I think maybe, that as we are changing from an old kali yuga age to a new age of sat yuga this may be a shake up, a cleansing, a purification that is happening, a wake up call. Suzi Orman says that how we handle our money reflects where we are spiritualy. I think this is true for individuals, households, and nations. She says people first, money second, and things third. I agree. http://tiny.cc/dsWhh
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, gullible fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: � The Republicans are saying the partisan speech by House�speaker Pelosi KO'ed the bill. The infamous speech and their response: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/220712.php L.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11 no_reply@ wrote: [snip] May God Bless Nancy Pelosi, who many are saying sealed the vote on the House floor with a closing speech on the debate. Are you insane? Nancy Pelosi voted FOR the bill! According to fair and balanced CNN it was her speech this morning where she accused the failed Bush policies but then I think the anchors were pissed because their 401Ks which are probably far fatter than any of ours were going into the toilet. Barney Frank said it was a block of free market Republicans who were responsible. I didn't know that Dennis Kucinich was a free market Republican. And we have some Republicans (but not all) blaming the Dems. To me it looks like the establishment representatives against the people's representatives. The people spoke that they wanted no bailout for the rich and the modified bill still let the rich make out like bandits. The rewritten bill was the same $700B, only with a timeline associated with it-- Bush still held all of the power. And the closer to the election we come, the less likely the Republicans are to vote for something that is very unpopular and places the immediate burden squarely on our shoulders. The vote today was a very positive development: You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time. -- Abraham Lincoln
