Friday, April 23, 2010

Barker's Newsbites: Friday, April 23, 2010


Just because...
Posted by at

9 comments:

William R. Barker said...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_michael_barone/gangster_government_becomes_a_long_running_series

Almost a year ago, in a Washington Examiner column on the Chrysler bailout, [Michael Barone] reflected on the Obama administration's decision to force bondholders to accept 33 cents on the dollar on secured debts while giving United Auto Worker retirees 50 cents on the dollar on unsecured debts.

This was a clear violation of the ordinary bankruptcy rule that secured creditors are fully paid off before unsecured creditors get anything. The politically connected UAW folk got preference over politically unconnected bondholders. "We have just seen an episode of Gangster Government," [Barone] wrote. "It is likely to be a continuing series."

* YOU GUYS REMEMBER THIS, RIGHT - THE RULE OF LAW SUBVERTED BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION FOR POLITICAL ENDS...???

* FLASH FORWARD TO THE PRESENT... ENTER "THE DODD BILL."

[The Dodd bill's] provisions promise to give us one episode of Gangster Government after another. At the top of the list is the $50 billion fund that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp could use to pay off creditors of firms identified as systemically risky - i.e., "too big to fail."

"The Dodd bill," writes Democratic Rep. Brad Sherman, "has unlimited executive bailout authority. That's something Wall Street desperately wants but doesn't dare ask for."

Politically connected creditors would have every reason to assume they'd get favorable treatment. The Dodd bill specifically authorizes the FDIC to treat "creditors similarly situated" differently. [T]he Dodd bill gives the Treasury and the FDIC authority to grant an unlimited number of loan guarantees to "too big to fail" firms.

CEOs might want to have receipts for their contributions to Sen. Charles Schumer and the Obama campaign in hand when they apply.

Labor gets 'proxy access' to bring its agenda items before shareholders as well as annual 'say on pay' for executives. Consumer activists get a brand new agency funded directly out of the seniorage the Fed earns. No oversight by the Federal Reserve Board or by Congress on how the money is spent."

Then there are carve-out provisions provided for particular interests. "Obtaining a carve-out isn't rocket science," one Republican K Street lobbyist told the Huffington Post. "Just give Chairman Dodd and Chuck Schumer a s---load of money."

* TO BE FAIR, DODD WILL BE GONE COME JANUARY 2010; THAT NOTED, THE BROADER POINT REMAINS.

April 23, 2010 at 9:59 AM
William R. Barker said...

Yeah, yeah... I know... repetitive.

"When am I gonna get off this Dodd bill kick," right?

(*SMIRK*)

Last night I was watching O'Reilly and the idiot "addressed" the Dodd bill and said he "reluctantly supports it."

What's he support - what exactly...???

Apparently he supports... er... "reform."

The word that is!

Yep. O'Reilly clearly doesn't know and apparently couldn't care less what's actually in the bill... (*SIGH*)... but because the word "reform" is in the title that's good enough for him.

So... based upon the fact that while there's no doubt Bill O'Reilly is an idiot he does have an entire research staff at his beck and call and does indeed have a masters in public policy from Harvard...

(*MASSIVE MIGRAINE HEADACHE*)

Anyway... the long and short of it is... like O'Reilly, most folks instinctively seem to respond positively to just the word "reform."

So... (*SIGH*)... the repetition from yours truly concerning what this so-called "reform" bill actually does.

God help this once great nation...

BILL

April 23, 2010 at 10:05 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Is-Goldman-Obamas-Enron-No-its-worse-91613449.html

Campaign contributions from Goldman Sachs employees to President Obama are nearly seven times as much as President Bush received from Enron workers, according to numbers on OpenSecrets.org.

President Bush's connections to Enron were well-hyped during the company's accounting debacle that rippled through the economy. Time magazine even had an article called, "Bush's Enron Problem." The Associated Press ran with the headline, "Bush-backing Enron makes big money off crisis." David Callaway wrote that Enron for Bush was worse than Whitewater for Clinton.

In 2002, the New York Times wrote: "President Bush is seeking to play down his relationship with Enron's embattled chairman, Kenneth L. Lay. But their ties are broad and deep and go back many years, and the relationship has been beneficial to both." (h/t Lachlan Markey)

But the mere $151,722.42 (inflation adjusted) in contributions from Enron-affiliated executives, employees, and PACs to Bush hardly add up to Obama's $1,007,370.85 (inflation adjusted) from Goldman-affiliated executives and employees. That's also not taking into account how much Goldman contributed to Obama cabinet member Hillary Clinton ($415,595.63 inflation adjusted), which was itself almost three times as much as Bush received as well.

It would be fair to say that the total amount the Obama administration has received from those affiliated with Goldman Sachs is ten times that of what Bush received from Enron.

* JUST PUTTING THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE, FOLKS... (*SHRUG*)

April 23, 2010 at 11:05 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-04-20-goldman-sachs-donations_N.htm

As Democrats attempt to bring President Obama's massive financial regulation bill to the Senate floor this week - relying on Goldman as one example of why change is needed - Republicans are pointing out that most of the firm's money goes to Democrats.

"I don't think the irony should be lost on anyone that while Democrats are making these attacks they've accepted twice as much money from Wall Street as Republicans," said Brian Walsh, a spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Goldman Sachs, which is battling fraud charges levied last week by the Securities and Exchange Commission, is one of the financial industry's most generous political givers. Together, its employees and political action committee gave nearly $900,000 since January 2009, according to a USA TODAY review of campaign finance data. The non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics reports that 69% of the firm's contributions to candidates went to Democrats...

April 23, 2010 at 11:06 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36118.html

President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats are promising a climactic clash with Wall Street, but there’s a complication in their battle plan: The Democratic Party is closer to corporate America - and to Wall Street in particular - than many Democrats would care to admit.

Former White House counsel Greg Craig has just signed on as an institutional Sherpa for Goldman Sachs, the iconic financial firm facing fraud charges from the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Former House Democratic leader Dick Gephardt lobbies for Goldman Sachs, Visa and the coal industry.

Former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle - Obama’s first choice to head Health and Human Services - is an adviser for a lobbying firm that represents Charles Schwab, Comcast, Lockheed Martin, Verizon and a host of other corporate interests.

Attorney General Eric Holder once lobbied for Global Crossing - sometimes described as the Democratic Enron - and White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel made eight figures in a little more than two years as the Chicago-based managing director at Wasserstein Perella & Co. between jobs as a senior aide in President Bill Clinton’s White House and as the congressman representing Illinois’s 5th District.

And the Democrats rode to their majorities in the House and the Senate on a wave of cash Emanuel and New York Sen. Chuck Schumer helped them raise from Wall Street.

(Earlier this month, a hedge fund manager at the center of the Goldman Sachs fraud case held a fundraiser for Schumer in New York.)

April 23, 2010 at 11:06 AM
William R. Barker said...

I know... I know... repetition again!

Think of it this way: Yes... the info is there; my newsbites demonstrate this by their very existence!

BUT...

Do you folks realize what a small "universe" it is of our fellow citizens who regularly read (and are thus exposed to!) the source material my newsbites come from?

Yes... I know... you guys - my "regulars" - either read the WSJ or the New York Times (perhaps both) or the Boston Globe and no doubt a host of other newspapers.

But I also know that you guys don't have the time to read anything close to the sheer volume of news I read daily from the number of sources I run through daily... and thus... NEWSBITES.

And thus... REPETITION.

No doubt some of you get bored reading multiple "bites" on the same topic... (*SHRUG*)... but seriously... think about this: Millions and millions (tens of millions... God know... MANY tens of millions) of our fellow citizens simply won't cross paths with the sort of facts, figures, and stats my various newsbites provide.

So call it repetition if you must... but I'll continue to hammer home the points I feel folks need to be aware of.

What you make of the info... (*SHRUG*)... that's up to you.

BILL

April 23, 2010 at 11:18 AM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=531171

Are the Democrats who want to place price controls on premiums trying to destroy the health insurance business?

* WHY, YES... YES THEY ARE! (SORRY... COULDN'T HELP MYSELF!) (*GRIN*)

It was just a month ago that the Democrats passed and signed a radical overhaul of the country's health care sector. But 3,000 pages of new law apparently are not enough for lawmakers who don't read the bills they vote on.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat, says there's "an enormous loophole" in her party's reform effort that must be closed. So she's introduced a bill that would give the secretary of health and human services the authority to review health plan premiums and block "any rate increase found to be unreasonable."

(This, after the public was told many times over that the Democrats' health care legislation would bring down costs and rein in those troublesome health insurance companies that are making so much money.)

It doesn't take a Ph.D. in economics to see where the Democrats are going with this. Their regulators will establish price controls, which will drive health plan providers out of business as the restrictions make it impossible or unreasonable for them to make profits. To deal with the shortage of health plans, Democrats will then complete the government takeover of medicine by placing Washington in the position of being the sole provider of health care.

Cynics would say that the Democrats understand markets and profits quite clearly and are laying out conditions under which businesses will fail so that they can respond with ever more government. Actually, one doesn't have to be cynical to believe this. The Democrats have been telegraphing their punches for years. President Obama, for instance, told AFL-CIO members in 2003 that he was a "proponent of a single-payer, universal health care coverage." In 2007 he spoke at another union event - cosponsored by the SEIU and the Center for American Progress - this time talking about eliminating employer coverage, in the context of not being able to do it immediately. More recently, Democrats were openly admitting that the public option for health insurance, which was in an early version of the Democrats' reform but not in the final bill, provided a path to a single-payer system.

April 23, 2010 at 5:34 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=531170

* BEATING A DEAD HORSE... SO BE IT!

Yes, Wall Street needs regulation - but regulation that will work without turning one of our most sophisticated industries into a wholly owned subsidiary of the U.S. government.

Sen. Chris Dodd's reform bill, gives the federal government unprecedented control over Wall Street without changing any of the perverse incentives that created our financial mess.

To take just one example, the president said the proposed overhaul legislation would "put a stop to taxpayer-funded bailouts." That's simply not true. In fact, Dodd's bill specifically creates a $50 billion bailout fund. Though the fund is supposedly paid for by Wall Street itself, it still bails out those who screw up.

Moreover, the bill keeps government in the bailout game by letting the FDIC borrow as much as it needs to bail out failing financial firms if they "pose a threat to (U.S.) financial security."

What it won't do is address the central issue - the role the government played in nearly bringing down the system. Specifically, what about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which have already cost us $400 billion?

As American Enterprise Institute scholar Peter Wallison has noted, our financial nightmare in 2007 was due largely to the fact that nearly half of all loans in the U.S. were subprime or Alt-A loans - junk, really.

Once the housing bubble burst, these loans went bad in bunches - leaving banks with huge losses and, often, insolvent. Two-thirds of these loans were either held or guaranteed by the government, particularly Fannie and Freddie.

That was the reason for the meltdown. Yet the president barely mentioned Fannie and Freddie in his speech. And his reform does nothing to fix them.

April 23, 2010 at 5:34 PM
William R. Barker said...

http://article.nationalreview.com/432201/the-global-warming-tax/patrick-j-michaels

Climategate, Copenhagen, Snowmageddon in the nation’s capital, the EPA ruling that CO2 endangers us all, and...

* WAIT FOR IT...

(*GRITTING MY TEETH*)

...Senate Republicans pushing for a global-warming tax.

(*SLAMMING MY FIST ON THE DESK*) (*MUTTERING TO MYSELF*)

Never has a public-policy agenda been pursued with so little regard for scientific fact or public opinion. ... Sens. Lindsey Graham (R.-SC) and John Kerry (D-MA) and President Obama insist upon ramming a new global-warming tax (called a “fee”) through the Senate. The bill is slated to be introduced next week...

(*BLOOD PRESSURE SHOOTING THROUGH THE ROOF*)

April 23, 2010 at 10:15 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)