“Like Mother, like daughter.” Sarah Palin used her children as props and now Bristol is following in Mommy’s footsteps —
This was always going to happen wasn’t it? Within days of Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin announcing their engagement, they are reportedly in negotiations to subject everyone else to their marriage, too, by angling for a reality TV show. According to TMZ, the couple is trying to sell “multiple reality shows” and some of the pitches even include their two-year-old son, Tripp. At this point, it is unclear whether the show would be based in Alaska or include any appearances by Sarah Palin. But a deal could come in the near future.
Seems like money is very very important to the Palin gang — much more important than people. Very sad, but it tells me a lot about their lack of judgment!
Isn’t it a wonderful world for Dick Cheney!? He is alive because he is covered by government health care! He is alive today despite a lifetime spent trying to deprive the needy of basic human rights such as health care.
Very sobering. The military has a long road ahead of it to change the attitudes of its members towards counseling, which I think should be the emphasis of any suicide prevention program.
Do you think our culture will allow an understanding that
— real men honestly do have emotions
and
— mental and emotional illnesses should be acknowledged and treatment sought just as readily as for physical illness?
It doesn’t seem it will happen in my lifetime. It’s still embarrassing to admit to some illnesses. Then there’s that ‘real men’ box our culture encourages.
I guess I got stuck on this from last night, how the extreme will actually manipulate people.
Making the outlandish claim or remake then when called on it dismiss it as it was joking or it was taken out of context.
An example, Rush Limbaugh when a soldier called in and took him to task.
He called him a fake soldier and belittled him, when it hit the general press Rush claimed it he was not talking about the soldier. I heard about it soon enough to go to the transcript of the broadcast and read his words. He had been talking about the soldier that had just called in.
But hours later, the transcript was reflecting his stance that he was not talking about that soldier.
A word missing here and a word added there to make it read that he was talking about some one else.
Either to when anyone makes it a point of contention pointing to he said this and that.
Checking it makes the complainer seem to be making it up or twisting the words.
So the claim can be made that the other side is liars or always distorting.
Or as a after fact they can make these outlandish statement and then claim they did not make them.
And the record and read is different then what they had said.
The problem is not so much Rush – it is the mentality of the people that listen to this constant nonsense and never question one thing that has been said.
The other problem is money – it seems the more outrageous Rush gets – the more money keeps pouring in to his bank account. So why would he want to shut up?
We’ve seen that ploy used often! Yep, that’s not what I meant is said in every way it can be said. Sometimes it might even be true. Who hasn’t said something that was misunderstood, needed clarification? All of us. But when you have to change the transcript instead of leaving it and adding an explanation, then you’ve got people wondering what else is hidden.
I seem to remember that same half-hearted apology line of ‘that’s not what I meant’ when several Republican elected officials got caught faxing racially charged emails after Obama got elected.
Of course, these same people then would say ‘if I offended anyone – if?’ That usually means the person apologizing does that think he/she really offended anyone – they are just trying to save their own neck at the moment.
Excuses seem to come more readily than apologies. I miss the days when it was OK to be wrong, to change your mind, to open your mind to new information that allowed you to see an issue differently.
Yes, I miss those days, too. Rhetorical question: when did each member of the human race learn everything there is to know on any given subject?
I know I’ve said this before, but (can’t resist) it is my opinion that a person who is ignorant about a given topic is not stupid, but becomes stupid by refusing to learn about it.
There was a Republican Congressman from South Carolina (Englis?) that was on Chris Matthews show the other night. This guy lost his primary to the Tea Party candidate.
Something this guy said stuck with me. He said ‘it is one thing to be stupid, but to be proud you’re stupid, that is something else.’
He also said that he did not know everything but he had the education to know where to go find the answer.
Chris and this guy was talking about how the Tea Party and other right-wing Republicans seem to think that anyone with an education beyond high school is somehow an elitist and don’t know what they are talking about.
If you watch Chris Matthews, then you know how feels about Sarah Palin’s nonsensical way in which she speaks. Chris has said he thinks Palin is a brilliant politician because she knows to manipulate a crowd. But when it comes to real answers – she is basically this down-home, aw shucks, common sense and it does not take a genius to know what to do type of Palin-speak she uses.
This Republican Congressman also stated that when Sarah Palin came out with that death panels nonsense about the health care reform bill – he went back home and told the people the truth about there were no death panels and he actually got hammered on that fact alone.
That’s when he knew his days were numbered.
So, from this man’s experience are we to assume the entire GOP is going the way of the dumb this election cycle?
One day I had the honor of meeting a man who was 82nd Airborne who had served in Vietnam.
When he learned my son was also 82nd, he made a point of two things.
One was to beg my son to go to get counseling, do not let him bottle up the experience and what he would see.
The other was to get his records and do it repeatedly, so that if something does happen you have the unedited and full documentation.
The good thing is that my youngest is a talker and does not hold in how he is feeling.
He seems to be able to put things in prospective too so he seems fine.
If it was my oldest I would have more to worry about, you can not totally know exactly how or what he is thinking.
Yes it is like Beck, my son said he loves to hear him but thinks of it as he is a cartoon character and is not serious. Though he makes some good points, it is an act and for comic relief.
But there are those who do think he is right and serious and takes him so.
I received another call from an opinion survey, this time the main subject was social security. All the questions were written around the premise that social security is broken and will be depleted by such and such year.
I tried to tell the woman I couldn’t answer the questions truthfully if I had to choose one of the answers she read because those answers were too limiting. I tried to tell her I wasn’t going to accept deficits caused by the war machine had to mean cuts and changes in social security.
It didn’t go well. If you can’t choose one of their pre-written responses your answers don’t count.
I continue to receive about 10 times more calls now that I’m a registered Republican than I did as a Democrat.
To me there are just something you do not say even in jest, I use the example yesterday of them saying something like “The best sex I ever had was with a six years old!”.
It could have never happened and was said for shock value but still it is something that should never be said even in jest or for shock value. It was Rachel who brought up the point that these things are being used to make Liberals seem to be too sensitive and just looking for anything to put down Conservatives.
They make these statement and it get news and attention plus they get more money sent to them.
There is one Republican Conservative that preaches about about how everyone else should raise their kids but yet when those half-naked pictures of 15-yr-old Miley Cyrus came out, he was the one that made the comment how yummy she looked. And this man is married with children.
To me, that was totally out of line and went against everything that he seemed to be preaching about good morals, good parents, etc.
But he insisted on keeping the ‘joke’ up and said that he was just kidding.
Was he kidding – maybe so. But when confronted by someone who thought he was being hypocritical, I would think he would have been more cautious and not go down that road as many times as he kept it up. It seemed he just did not know when to shut up.
And to this day – the man still makes a comment about any young celebrity as being yummy.
Maybe this is the mother and grandmother coming out in me – but that just ranks right up there as being perverted and certainly not something I would want my father or grandfather to be saying.
Does this man really think it is okay for a grown married man to lust after 15 yr old girls – maybe not. But do we have a problem with grown men (married or not) going after 15-yr-old girls (and even younger) – yes we do.
So why would anyone want to give the impression they think that is funny?
Yesterday I brought up the prospect of Jeb Bush running for president.
Today, I would like to share with you a thought that struck me as I watched President Obama speak to the Kansas City electric vehicle manufacturing company.
I don’t know why this popped into my head – but it did. Let me know what you think.
What if Obama chooses to not run in 2012?
What if Hillary runs?
Maybe this is why Obama made Hillary the Secretary of State – to get on a more personal and first name basis with all the key global players?
Just think – Democrats got the first black president elected and then they could claim the first woman president?
If Hillary ran, what would that do the Republican side of the game?
Surely they would not put Palin in there to go up against Hillary. They might run Jeb Bush then but he does have his own baggage following him. Not only the negative Bush name but his part in that Terry Schiavo ordeal when he was the governor of Florida.
And if the Republicans are still running on no amnesty for illegals, how will that play to the hispanics even though Jeb’s wife is hispanic?
Like I stated above – I don’t know why this thought even popped into my head – but it did.
I remember telling people for several months before the 1980 election that the Iran hostages would be released the minute Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. I was laughed at for several months but guess who everyone thought of when that is exactly what happened. My phone rang off the hook.
I guess that is why I like to blog about politics – it is a strange and twisted little world – isn’t it? Sometimes it is the craziest what-ifs that actually pan out.
The only downside to this theory is that Obama would look like he wimped out by not running. But I don’t think Obama is that ego driven (I know that sounds contrary to what all Conservatives say about Obama being very egotistical). I also thought about Obama’s two girls and Michelle. Maybe Obama values his family more than the job at the White House? Obama would certainly be set for life financially. He could go on the speaking circuit – like Bill Clinton has – and do quite nicely. He could write a few more books or do a global foundation thing like Bill Clinton?
Again – politics is a strange and twisted little world and is anything really too strange to happen?
I’d never discount anything, but I think it’s highly unlikely President Obama won’t run for reelection.
The Clinton and Bush names both have a bunch of baggage. Like Palin, you either love or hate, there seems to be no squishy middle. They would all three motivate people to turn out to the polls for two divergent reasons and contribute to the partisanship.
You made a good point Indy, not too sure about the Hillary part but Jeb is the dark horse that the Conservative could throw into a election. He has minor baggage and is the smarter brother.
Few actually know of his connection to the one and the same Neo-Conservatives that lied us into the invasion.
Hillary running would get the base out like no one else could for both sides.
If the President did decide to not run for a second term.
I think Hillary running would certainly knock out Palin.
But I don’t think the establishment GOP would allow Palin to get as far as the presidential nomination. They use her to get the base out but after that, Palin is of no use to them – only a detraction.
The roadblock I see to what the establishment wants is that they’ve unleashed their own enemy in the Tea Party! A bit like Reagan unleashing the religious right. Now they’re stuck with what they created as political tools!
I agree with you on the GOP establishment and former Gov. Palin, indy. However, they better be careful of what they wish for; the distraction might become the main event.
BTW, I don’t see the 2012 scenario you present as realistic for many reasons, not the least of which is the “baggage”.
This piece has tabs (Consumer Protection, Too Big to Fail, Derivatives, Risk to the financial system, Regulator shopping) so you click to see a graphic and brief (with little detail!) explanation of effects on those various areas. Someone needs to tell me what this doesn’t say so I better understand. Please.
—————–
Reinventing financial regulation
The landmark legislation approved by Congress represents the most profound restructuring of financial regulation since the Great Depression. Here are some of the highlights of the bill, which was born out of the wreckage of the recent financial crisis, and the problems it is designed to address.
The main problem that exits in the new legislation is that there is too much discretion placed in the regulators, employees of the Executive, without (as nearly as I can ascertain) very concrete minima in the statutes themselves as to what the regulators should require. While flexibility is needed to consider investment products not yet created, there seem to be numerous loopholes. One is derivatives.
Re: derivatives, the statute prohibits direct trading by the banks, but does not proscribe the banks from using the clearinghouses as a proxy so long as the trading is primarily for “customers” with incidental trading on behalf of the institution permitted. Banks should be flatly prohibited from derivative trading; period.
One could argue that there are valid “hedging” reasons for such trading, but I submit these reasons are outweighed by the inevitable interconnection of entities occurring by derivatives trading. Once the interconnection occurs, then we have the “too big to fail” issue reappearing.
The Clinton name has baggage but I don’t think Hillary’s baggage is as full as Bill’s.
Like I said – I do not put anything out of contention as being too crazy. We’ve seen crazy in the past and it seems to find an audience whereever it goes.
Does anyone here feel there will be a challenger to Obama if and when he does announce his reelection plans?
If the far left are really upset with him, like I’ve heard and read on a few other blogs; do you think there is enough political steam to get something going?
I seriously think alot of the success or failure of Democrats in 2012 will depend on the economy and what happens to each individual states and their budget deficits. Which ever party is in state power may find the wrath of the voters trickling up to that same party on the federal level?
The next year will be very telling and very interesting.
I still remember the few days after McCain announced Sarah Palin as his VP candidate. It all looked pretty dim for the Democrats and then she began to speak.
I think you’re right that the economy will dictate whether the people continue to be paying any attention at all. People like us who really enjoy politics and news will always pay attention, but most Americans only pay attention when things aren’t going well. They actually prefer to not hear, because if they don’t hear then everything must be perking along and no big controversies are going on. That means they can pay attention to the things they enjoy and don’t need to waste time on politics.
The tops of the trees are getting washed! Ah, a delightful, cooling rain is falling at my house. I hope all of you get some of it too. What a pleasant thing a rain storm is when it happens in the middle of a hot stifling day. 😉
We were just talking about Jeb Bush and his possible presidential run. It seems Jeb Bush is going to be at a fundraiser for Rand Paul in Kentucky.
If you have not heard anything about Rand Paul in Kentucky – he is the son of Ron Paul and it seems Rand has made quite a name for himself in the Tea Party. And he has made controversy his middle name as evidenced by the reaction to his numerous statements since he winning his primary.
If Jeb Bush is really serious about running for president, is it wise for him to be seen as a Tea Party favorite and try to be the GOP establishment good old boy at the same time? In fact, I thought one of the goals of the Tea Party was to get rid of all incumbents. Wouldn’t a third Bush be just like putting in an incumbent? And what about that Tea Party rallying cry for no amnesty for illegals. How will that play out?
Time will tell and things are getting interesting.
PrairiePopulistsAndProgressives.net 
“Like Mother, like daughter.” Sarah Palin used her children as props and now Bristol is following in Mommy’s footsteps —
This was always going to happen wasn’t it? Within days of Levi Johnston and Bristol Palin announcing their engagement, they are reportedly in negotiations to subject everyone else to their marriage, too, by angling for a reality TV show. According to TMZ, the couple is trying to sell “multiple reality shows” and some of the pitches even include their two-year-old son, Tripp. At this point, it is unclear whether the show would be based in Alaska or include any appearances by Sarah Palin. But a deal could come in the near future.
http://www.tmz.com/2010/07/15/levi-johnston-bristol-palin-reality-tv-television-show-negotiations-alaska-sarah-palin/
Ah, that is the angle. And here I was thinking perhaps this young family would do what is right for their son and become a stable family.
Silly me – thinking of only the child and not about all those millions.
Seems like money is very very important to the Palin gang — much more important than people. Very sad, but it tells me a lot about their lack of judgment!
Isn’t it a wonderful world for Dick Cheney!? He is alive because he is covered by government health care! He is alive today despite a lifetime spent trying to deprive the needy of basic human rights such as health care.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38267520
Very sobering. The military has a long road ahead of it to change the attitudes of its members towards counseling, which I think should be the emphasis of any suicide prevention program.
Do you think our culture will allow an understanding that
— real men honestly do have emotions
and
— mental and emotional illnesses should be acknowledged and treatment sought just as readily as for physical illness?
It doesn’t seem it will happen in my lifetime. It’s still embarrassing to admit to some illnesses. Then there’s that ‘real men’ box our culture encourages.
I guess I got stuck on this from last night, how the extreme will actually manipulate people.
Making the outlandish claim or remake then when called on it dismiss it as it was joking or it was taken out of context.
An example, Rush Limbaugh when a soldier called in and took him to task.
He called him a fake soldier and belittled him, when it hit the general press Rush claimed it he was not talking about the soldier. I heard about it soon enough to go to the transcript of the broadcast and read his words. He had been talking about the soldier that had just called in.
But hours later, the transcript was reflecting his stance that he was not talking about that soldier.
A word missing here and a word added there to make it read that he was talking about some one else.
Either to when anyone makes it a point of contention pointing to he said this and that.
Checking it makes the complainer seem to be making it up or twisting the words.
So the claim can be made that the other side is liars or always distorting.
Or as a after fact they can make these outlandish statement and then claim they did not make them.
And the record and read is different then what they had said.
CYA – cover your ass?
Rush is very good at what he is – an entertainer.
The problem is not so much Rush – it is the mentality of the people that listen to this constant nonsense and never question one thing that has been said.
The other problem is money – it seems the more outrageous Rush gets – the more money keeps pouring in to his bank account. So why would he want to shut up?
We’ve seen that ploy used often! Yep, that’s not what I meant is said in every way it can be said. Sometimes it might even be true. Who hasn’t said something that was misunderstood, needed clarification? All of us. But when you have to change the transcript instead of leaving it and adding an explanation, then you’ve got people wondering what else is hidden.
I seem to remember that same half-hearted apology line of ‘that’s not what I meant’ when several Republican elected officials got caught faxing racially charged emails after Obama got elected.
Of course, these same people then would say ‘if I offended anyone – if?’ That usually means the person apologizing does that think he/she really offended anyone – they are just trying to save their own neck at the moment.
Excuses seem to come more readily than apologies. I miss the days when it was OK to be wrong, to change your mind, to open your mind to new information that allowed you to see an issue differently.
Yes, I miss those days, too. Rhetorical question: when did each member of the human race learn everything there is to know on any given subject?
I know I’ve said this before, but (can’t resist) it is my opinion that a person who is ignorant about a given topic is not stupid, but becomes stupid by refusing to learn about it.
Good question! You are so good at succinct explanations! This ‘I am an expert’ attitude must be why we seem unable to practice the art of compromise.
There was a Republican Congressman from South Carolina (Englis?) that was on Chris Matthews show the other night. This guy lost his primary to the Tea Party candidate.
Something this guy said stuck with me. He said ‘it is one thing to be stupid, but to be proud you’re stupid, that is something else.’
He also said that he did not know everything but he had the education to know where to go find the answer.
Chris and this guy was talking about how the Tea Party and other right-wing Republicans seem to think that anyone with an education beyond high school is somehow an elitist and don’t know what they are talking about.
If you watch Chris Matthews, then you know how feels about Sarah Palin’s nonsensical way in which she speaks. Chris has said he thinks Palin is a brilliant politician because she knows to manipulate a crowd. But when it comes to real answers – she is basically this down-home, aw shucks, common sense and it does not take a genius to know what to do type of Palin-speak she uses.
This Republican Congressman also stated that when Sarah Palin came out with that death panels nonsense about the health care reform bill – he went back home and told the people the truth about there were no death panels and he actually got hammered on that fact alone.
That’s when he knew his days were numbered.
So, from this man’s experience are we to assume the entire GOP is going the way of the dumb this election cycle?
One day I had the honor of meeting a man who was 82nd Airborne who had served in Vietnam.
When he learned my son was also 82nd, he made a point of two things.
One was to beg my son to go to get counseling, do not let him bottle up the experience and what he would see.
The other was to get his records and do it repeatedly, so that if something does happen you have the unedited and full documentation.
The good thing is that my youngest is a talker and does not hold in how he is feeling.
He seems to be able to put things in prospective too so he seems fine.
If it was my oldest I would have more to worry about, you can not totally know exactly how or what he is thinking.
Yes it is like Beck, my son said he loves to hear him but thinks of it as he is a cartoon character and is not serious. Though he makes some good points, it is an act and for comic relief.
But there are those who do think he is right and serious and takes him so.
And those who take him serious are also going to be graduates of Beck University someday? A fool and his money are soon parted?
I received another call from an opinion survey, this time the main subject was social security. All the questions were written around the premise that social security is broken and will be depleted by such and such year.
I tried to tell the woman I couldn’t answer the questions truthfully if I had to choose one of the answers she read because those answers were too limiting. I tried to tell her I wasn’t going to accept deficits caused by the war machine had to mean cuts and changes in social security.
It didn’t go well. If you can’t choose one of their pre-written responses your answers don’t count.
I continue to receive about 10 times more calls now that I’m a registered Republican than I did as a Democrat.
It is because that means you now care about the country since you are a Republican!
I thought it meant I’d quit thinking and it was easy for me to pick an answer written by someone else.
To me there are just something you do not say even in jest, I use the example yesterday of them saying something like “The best sex I ever had was with a six years old!”.
It could have never happened and was said for shock value but still it is something that should never be said even in jest or for shock value. It was Rachel who brought up the point that these things are being used to make Liberals seem to be too sensitive and just looking for anything to put down Conservatives.
They make these statement and it get news and attention plus they get more money sent to them.
There is one Republican Conservative that preaches about about how everyone else should raise their kids but yet when those half-naked pictures of 15-yr-old Miley Cyrus came out, he was the one that made the comment how yummy she looked. And this man is married with children.
To me, that was totally out of line and went against everything that he seemed to be preaching about good morals, good parents, etc.
But he insisted on keeping the ‘joke’ up and said that he was just kidding.
Was he kidding – maybe so. But when confronted by someone who thought he was being hypocritical, I would think he would have been more cautious and not go down that road as many times as he kept it up. It seemed he just did not know when to shut up.
And to this day – the man still makes a comment about any young celebrity as being yummy.
Maybe this is the mother and grandmother coming out in me – but that just ranks right up there as being perverted and certainly not something I would want my father or grandfather to be saying.
Does this man really think it is okay for a grown married man to lust after 15 yr old girls – maybe not. But do we have a problem with grown men (married or not) going after 15-yr-old girls (and even younger) – yes we do.
So why would anyone want to give the impression they think that is funny?
I just don’t get it.
Yesterday I brought up the prospect of Jeb Bush running for president.
Today, I would like to share with you a thought that struck me as I watched President Obama speak to the Kansas City electric vehicle manufacturing company.
I don’t know why this popped into my head – but it did. Let me know what you think.
What if Obama chooses to not run in 2012?
What if Hillary runs?
Maybe this is why Obama made Hillary the Secretary of State – to get on a more personal and first name basis with all the key global players?
Just think – Democrats got the first black president elected and then they could claim the first woman president?
If Hillary ran, what would that do the Republican side of the game?
Surely they would not put Palin in there to go up against Hillary. They might run Jeb Bush then but he does have his own baggage following him. Not only the negative Bush name but his part in that Terry Schiavo ordeal when he was the governor of Florida.
And if the Republicans are still running on no amnesty for illegals, how will that play to the hispanics even though Jeb’s wife is hispanic?
Like I stated above – I don’t know why this thought even popped into my head – but it did.
I remember telling people for several months before the 1980 election that the Iran hostages would be released the minute Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. I was laughed at for several months but guess who everyone thought of when that is exactly what happened. My phone rang off the hook.
I guess that is why I like to blog about politics – it is a strange and twisted little world – isn’t it? Sometimes it is the craziest what-ifs that actually pan out.
The only downside to this theory is that Obama would look like he wimped out by not running. But I don’t think Obama is that ego driven (I know that sounds contrary to what all Conservatives say about Obama being very egotistical). I also thought about Obama’s two girls and Michelle. Maybe Obama values his family more than the job at the White House? Obama would certainly be set for life financially. He could go on the speaking circuit – like Bill Clinton has – and do quite nicely. He could write a few more books or do a global foundation thing like Bill Clinton?
Again – politics is a strange and twisted little world and is anything really too strange to happen?
I’d never discount anything, but I think it’s highly unlikely President Obama won’t run for reelection.
The Clinton and Bush names both have a bunch of baggage. Like Palin, you either love or hate, there seems to be no squishy middle. They would all three motivate people to turn out to the polls for two divergent reasons and contribute to the partisanship.
You made a good point Indy, not too sure about the Hillary part but Jeb is the dark horse that the Conservative could throw into a election. He has minor baggage and is the smarter brother.
Few actually know of his connection to the one and the same Neo-Conservatives that lied us into the invasion.
Hillary running would get the base out like no one else could for both sides.
If the President did decide to not run for a second term.
I think Hillary running would certainly knock out Palin.
But I don’t think the establishment GOP would allow Palin to get as far as the presidential nomination. They use her to get the base out but after that, Palin is of no use to them – only a detraction.
The roadblock I see to what the establishment wants is that they’ve unleashed their own enemy in the Tea Party! A bit like Reagan unleashing the religious right. Now they’re stuck with what they created as political tools!
I agree with you on the GOP establishment and former Gov. Palin, indy. However, they better be careful of what they wish for; the distraction might become the main event.
BTW, I don’t see the 2012 scenario you present as realistic for many reasons, not the least of which is the “baggage”.
This piece has tabs (Consumer Protection, Too Big to Fail, Derivatives, Risk to the financial system, Regulator shopping) so you click to see a graphic and brief (with little detail!) explanation of effects on those various areas. Someone needs to tell me what this doesn’t say so I better understand. Please.
—————–
Reinventing financial regulation
The landmark legislation approved by Congress represents the most profound restructuring of financial regulation since the Great Depression. Here are some of the highlights of the bill, which was born out of the wreckage of the recent financial crisis, and the problems it is designed to address.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/financial-regulation-graphic/
fnord,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/16/financial-reform-bill-pas_0_n_648746.html
The main problem that exits in the new legislation is that there is too much discretion placed in the regulators, employees of the Executive, without (as nearly as I can ascertain) very concrete minima in the statutes themselves as to what the regulators should require. While flexibility is needed to consider investment products not yet created, there seem to be numerous loopholes. One is derivatives.
Re: derivatives, the statute prohibits direct trading by the banks, but does not proscribe the banks from using the clearinghouses as a proxy so long as the trading is primarily for “customers” with incidental trading on behalf of the institution permitted. Banks should be flatly prohibited from derivative trading; period.
One could argue that there are valid “hedging” reasons for such trading, but I submit these reasons are outweighed by the inevitable interconnection of entities occurring by derivatives trading. Once the interconnection occurs, then we have the “too big to fail” issue reappearing.
The Clinton name has baggage but I don’t think Hillary’s baggage is as full as Bill’s.
Like I said – I do not put anything out of contention as being too crazy. We’ve seen crazy in the past and it seems to find an audience whereever it goes.
Does anyone here feel there will be a challenger to Obama if and when he does announce his reelection plans?
If the far left are really upset with him, like I’ve heard and read on a few other blogs; do you think there is enough political steam to get something going?
I seriously think alot of the success or failure of Democrats in 2012 will depend on the economy and what happens to each individual states and their budget deficits. Which ever party is in state power may find the wrath of the voters trickling up to that same party on the federal level?
The next year will be very telling and very interesting.
I still remember the few days after McCain announced Sarah Palin as his VP candidate. It all looked pretty dim for the Democrats and then she began to speak.
Enough said?
I think you’re right that the economy will dictate whether the people continue to be paying any attention at all. People like us who really enjoy politics and news will always pay attention, but most Americans only pay attention when things aren’t going well. They actually prefer to not hear, because if they don’t hear then everything must be perking along and no big controversies are going on. That means they can pay attention to the things they enjoy and don’t need to waste time on politics.
The tops of the trees are getting washed! Ah, a delightful, cooling rain is falling at my house. I hope all of you get some of it too. What a pleasant thing a rain storm is when it happens in the middle of a hot stifling day. 😉
Ginger and I played in the water in the gutters. The neighbors laughed, so did we. 😉
I’m gonna have to have a talk with Ginger about getting you to behave!
Is there a difference between childish and childlike? Never mind, I don’t really care. 😉
We were just talking about Jeb Bush and his possible presidential run. It seems Jeb Bush is going to be at a fundraiser for Rand Paul in Kentucky.
If you have not heard anything about Rand Paul in Kentucky – he is the son of Ron Paul and it seems Rand has made quite a name for himself in the Tea Party. And he has made controversy his middle name as evidenced by the reaction to his numerous statements since he winning his primary.
If Jeb Bush is really serious about running for president, is it wise for him to be seen as a Tea Party favorite and try to be the GOP establishment good old boy at the same time? In fact, I thought one of the goals of the Tea Party was to get rid of all incumbents. Wouldn’t a third Bush be just like putting in an incumbent? And what about that Tea Party rallying cry for no amnesty for illegals. How will that play out?
Time will tell and things are getting interesting.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/16/jeb-bush-to-appear-at-ken_n_649449.html#comments