Doom and gloom

Last week, in response to a post by a friend on the report of GDP, I posted an opinion about the size of the change. What followed on that blog was a long discussion that I am going to excerpt here. I am only including my comments as I do not have permission to quote someone else's. The discussion will illustrate some issues I have with the market and why I am generally downbeat about the near future.



I once had a book “How to Get Rich on the Obvious”. In it the author argued that looking at numbers in a stock market or an annual report meant nothing. He would go to a bowling alley and see lanes filled night after night - he bought bowling equipment providers - when the alleys’ starting having empty lanes, he sold.

For months, many months, housing has been declining. The empty developments, the run on for sale signs, has indicated at least a part of the economy wasn’t very rosy. The October employment figures showed an INCREASE in hiring in financial and real estate when mortgage brokers, lenders and real estate agencies were closing faster than locksmiths could change the hardware.

The housing ponzi scheme got interrupted in early 2007, the financial ponzi markets supported by housing ponzi got interrupted last August. With 687 TRILLION in financial derivatives outstanding and no one knowing how much they are really worth, lending - a necessary precursor to economic growth has locked up like Wisconsin lakes in January.

Sorry about being long, but a few of us were surprised that the GDP came in as HIGH as it did…!

a question asking about the quantity of derivatives

Nope, TRILLION. Derivatives are a nightmare behind the financial markets. The people that watch the financial markets are way beyond doom and gloom, they are just watching to see how far and how many are going to down the drain.

I will point you to this article.
http://www.minyanville.com/articles/index.php?a=15164

again, a question about what derivatives are used for...


The big use is interest rate hedges and risk on interest bearing paper hedges. Big changes in interest rates are bad for hedging - regardless of direction. And as most of the mortgage and commercial paper has been leverage 8-10x, meaning even small changes in the value of the underlying assets or changes in the interest rates can have big impacts. The financial market freeze in August was caused (primarily) but an unwillingness to roll over commercial paper that had mortgage paper as a underlying asset - no one knew the value of the underlying mortgages because the default rates were jumping. Remember default rates in the .5 or .6 range were ordinary, but defaults were increasing to .8 or .9 and have continued to climb.

As default levels continue to rise, the underlying valuations become questionable. The hedges, leveraged 8-10x, can not tolerate even small changes. Some of the underlying paper has been valued at 20 cents on the dollar. Such fire sale prices
call into question virtually everything of similar type. Everyone KNOWS that the valuations are higher than 20 cents, but everyone is scared that once things start hitting the market, no one can pretend that the paper they are holding at $1, is
worth that much. Another issue: the insurers of risk, the AAA insurers, have so little capital in comparison to their exposure, that losses of even 4 or 5 cents on the dollar will wipe them out. They lose their AAA rating, the paper they insure will lose theirs, and funds that require only AAA paper in their holdings will have to dump/fire sale those assets, leading to further price pressure down.


what is the impact of the Fed rate cut?


I have tried to avoid detail in my posts because, well, it would be long and I am trying to distill several months of discussions and posts. The issue in the financial markets is either one of liquidity or solvency. If there is a problem with liquidity, then the Fed injecting funds and lower the rates will help. However, if the issue is with solvency, then you will see lots of cash hoarding and adding funds and lower rates will just lead to inflation, but no real help in the markets. Right now, cash is sitting on the sidelines which is why things like the stock market are holding up really well…the cash has to go somewhere, preferably liquid and well defined as to value. You may recall some press about 6 weeks ago about the Fed and the European Bank injecting billions into the market…well, some digging revealed that the Fed did just the opposite, it TOOK funds out of the market. Our problem is solvency, not liquidity. No one trusts the value of the asset base and no one wants to lend based on assets they can’t determine the value of.

The Fed move calms the superficial markets, but it does nothing to the underlying problems…except maybe to give everyone some time to figure out how to put some trust back into the markets. But since last August, most of us have just been waiting for the other shoe to drop.

I will agree with Tom about this: there has been a lot of talking ‘down’ the economy. In some quarters, there is a desire to get the shoe to drop as quickly as possible, to get the drama and damage over. The alternative is to drag the problem out over many, many months, crimping the economy the entire time. It also gives the politicians more time to ’solve’ the problem by making it worse.

The derivatives issue has to be unwound, but there is almost no way around the damage it is going to cause. The question is: do you want 6 months of financial hell and serious asset deflation and then a slow recovery? Or would you prefer to have anemic growth for the next 3 years and then a very long, drawn out recovery that takes another 3 or so years just to get us back to today?

Frankly, from our point of view, there is no third choice. (I have one, but no one likes it - a nuke goes off in an American city. The financial markets force the s**tstorm during the chaos as a cover. See, no one likes that choice - can’t say as I blame them…but I don’t live near DC or NY either).


Thanks, this has been dragging on for almost 6 months. During that time we have seen a steady erosion in confidence in our ability to handle our economy. We are also seeing foreign creditors blaming the American people for financial misconduct leading to serious financial impairments in their own countries. The ’sub-prime’ mess has
hurt overseas banks almost as bad as our own. The result is the people that lend us money to finance our buying, are no longer confident that we are doing so honestly.

And, frankly, I don’t give a rats butt about which moron is in the White House, I care much more about Americans and our ability to live freely. Having a couple years of stagnant or little growth is NOT in our best interests. I don’t believe (based on research) that a recession - classical definition of 2 quarters of negative GDP, something we haven’t seen in 26 years - is possible. But it is possible to have .5 GDP growth per year for 5 years. Consider the limitations that would impose on our economy.

Without lending, there is no growth. America does not grow out of cash flow. You have probably heard many times in the last several months that mortgage applications continue to rise! Yea, right? What you haven’t heard is that mortgage FUNDING has dropped through the floor. Over 200 mortgage lenders have failed/closed their doors in the last 6 months.

In many places in the US housing prices did not skyrocket. But in more than 40 states, the median price of a home is beyond the range of a median income family - based on more traditional lending practices. Either incomes have to rise (not going to happen in a .5% GDP growth environment) or prices have to come DOWN…deflation. Reducing the Fed rate encourages INflation in absence of solvency.

Eating around a bad apple hoping to get good ones before they all go bad is as stupid as ignoring a wound because 99% of the rest of the body is fine.

I have privately said in the past that while the visible economy (the stuff we see in the news every day) appears to be fine, the foundation of our economy is rotten as all hell. Most people don’t know they have a termite infestation till the house falls down around them. Since August (and for some of us longer than that), the damage in our economy is apparent, if you are willing to look.


Failing to act will not change the facts that there is a very serious disconnect between our ability to earn and the debt that is out there, not just in the US but global. If we follow your plan, we are likely to see the same thing here that Japan has been dealing with for over a decade. The Fed is not looking out for the economy, it is looking out for it’s clientèle, the banks.

Because you don’t know me, let me state it: I am a fiscal conservative, (a registered independent - was a Republican for 25 years until 2005) and hold a degree in Economics. I work for a bankruptcy attorney (who happens to be my life partner, a raging liberal and a pretty smart lady in her own right).


Our problem is not liquidity, it is solvency.


Let me point you to a specific post that addresses the liquidity issues. Please, let me be clear. The problem in the financial markets is one of solvency - lenders do not know what the value of the underlying assets are. Default rates on mortgage lending have increased ‘dramatically’. Yes, a half a percentage point is a lot when you leverage the paper 10 times. Fed rate cuts help liquidity and only marginally, solvency (real cheap money makes even risky lending potentially profitable).



You are right that there is plenty of cash to lend. It is just no one is lending. So, I think you are getting a point about it not being a liquidity issue. But your point:

“So what I think you and Hussman are saying is the value of the securities used as collateral for the Repurchase Agreement to protect against default as the underlying basis for the transaction is of questionable value? But if that is the case, as long as a default does not occur, no one knows the difference”

This is the issue. For a long time, commercial paper that was issued using mortgage pools as part of the collateral was simply carried at par value and rolled over (most CP is short term - 6 months or less). As long as default rates were within parameters covered by the risk hedges, no one worried. When the default rates increased, the risk hedges started to kick in. In early 2007, the problem was ‘contained’ to small geographic areas, and specific types of loans, the so-called, sub-prime mess. But it wasn’t just sub-prime. Those mortgages were pooled with other prime mortgages and
sliced and diced and the returns sold off in chunks called trances. The trances were used as collateral for more loans, which in turn were sliced and diced and used as collateral. The paper was sold all over the world to financial organizations that had money to lend, but only would lend on AAA paper. As the defaults continued to rise, and spread, more and more people were finding out that a default in San Diego was affecting the default rate hedges on commercial paper being held in France. The more people looked at what they actually bought (instead of relying just on the AAA
rating), the more everyone began to realize that the sub prime mess was at the root of a lot of CDOs (collateralized debt obligations). The percentage wasn’t big, but again, when you have leveraged something 8 or 10 times, small gains are magnified - YEA! bigger returns!! - but so are small losses…BOO! People began to wonder just how bad the default issue was.

All through early 2007, the default rates continued to rise, .55, .56, .58, .60, .62 (examples, not exact). By July, the rate increase which had not shown any slowing, started showing up in places that were no where near residential mortgages. It started showing up in commercial loans. About 100m in CDOs were due to roll over in early August and the holders of the paper couldn’t get anyone to buy. Well, that isn’t true, they could get a buyer, at 20 cents on the dollar. WHOA! By the end of August, the problem had spread and the markets realized this was not a single issue.

Things have not ‘fallen’ apart because financial markets are doing what you suggest DC, they are pretending the value is still par because they are not selling, or lending, or defaulting - even when defaults are rising steadily - so that no one has to actually come up with a real market value. There have been lots of private placements of the paper, but most of it has been at an estimated 80 cents on the dollar (but some appear to be considerably worse). Where assets had to be sold, the price has been 20 cents or less.

The Fed did do one thing in November. It allowed banks to use whatever collateral THEY wanted to use to borrow from the Fed - before, it had to be bona fide AAA assets. Borrowing from the Fed grew a bunch in December. That helped loosen things a little.

Last point, some of the CDOs done in late 2006 and early 2007 have default rates approaching 50%, not 5 percent, not .5 percent, 50%. Those CDOs were sliced and diced and leveraged to the point where 10 million of CDO is supporting 60-90 million in debt. I have not seen any good estimate of how much of the CDOs were written then, but a couple of billions would not be off.

I wanted to address the issue of flipping and illegal labor leading to overbuilding. Flipping and speculation did fuel price bubbles in several areas, notably, California, Nevada, Arizona, and Florida. But as I commented earlier, 40 states
have median home prices above the median income level. I think California had the worse, only about 9% of the people in California had sufficient income to buy a median priced home. That means a lot of people buying homes did so in a way that risks default.

We were in Santa Barbara CA in late August. We went to an open house in a very generic neighborhood, no views, 6,000 sq ft lot, 1100 sq ft home, 3b/2b, small backyard. Nice home, nothing special. 1.3million. A family sized home in a Santa
Barbara ’suburb’ about 2 miles away from the 1.3m home, near the high school, 880k. Who can afford that?

Do you know where the people I hang with lay the blame? Greenspan and the Fed. You can afford a lot more home when the interest rate is 2% than you can when the rate is 6%. The significantly low interest rates helped build debt. When a home is appreciating at 5% or more a year and your loan is 2, or 3, or even 4%, you pile on the debt. Did you know that the Fed is offering interest rates now that are below inflation! What does that suggest to you?


If the Fed is offering rates below inflation, they must believe inflation is going to go down. Negative real interest rates usually lead to asset bubbles as cheap money seeks investments.

Retail commercial appears to be overbuilt and default rates on commercial loans have been going up for the last 6 months. Right now, almost every type of non-governmental debt is defaulting at increasing rates. California is already suffering from the housing mess with lower revenues. The likelihood of a state defaulting is next to zero, but smaller muni’s might have some problems soon. Credit card, auto loans, commercial real estate are all showing higher default rates.

4 years ago foreclosures were about 500,000 a year, we may hit 2.75m this year (my prediction last year was 2m, we hit 2.2m). Bankruptcies which were running about 1.3m prior to the bankruptcy reform law were just under 900,000 last year. I expect them to be close to 1.3m this year (and if things do go to hell in a hand basket, the number could be 1.6m, a record.

BTW, many consider the probability of a Citigroup bankruptcy at better than 50% this year.

Oh, maybe a final comment: you may be only minimally aware of the issue with financial insurers. Many bonds and other commercial paper are insured against losses. For many years these firms mainly insured bonds issued by municipalities. But several years ago, they branched out. Insuring CDOs and their many offspring led to nice new profits. The problem was their risk was growing from practically nothing (muni’s rarely default) to considerable but their capitalization was not keeping up. In many cases, a municipality with less than stellar rating, say A+, could purchase insurance from a AAA insurer and get an AA or better rating on the issue. The savings on interest would more than cover the insurance premium. The risk of default was transferred to the insurer. CDOs that are defaulting fall back on the insurers, several of the largest are MBIC and Ambac. About a week ago, Ambac was stripped of its AAA rating. Fitch, a credit rating agency, worried about the exposure. Ambac issued new debt earlier in January with a rate of 14%. A AAA insurer paying 14%
interest on it’s debt!? Worse, the price quickly dropped and the rate is now 19%. The paper insured by Ambac now has a risk of having their ratings also dropped. S&P quietly, around midnight Wednesday morning, indicated it had put over 500 Billion in bonds on a negative ratings watch.

Funds that are required to hold only AAA paper might be forced to sell assets that lose their ratings. 500 Billion in assets coming on the market would depress prices…deflation of assets.

While everything looks nice and bright in the economy, there is a storm of terrible size on the horizon. It is the structural issues that are a problem and it is getting little or no press because the financial markets are all standing around a bomb hoping it won’t go off, and trying to stay as quiet as possible while working very hard to figure someway out of the mess.


I appreciate the opportunity. The problem with unwinding, is the unwinding. Unlike futures contracts that can just expire, in most cases there is a value associated with both sides of the transaction. In most cases we have an underlying asset. Only if both parties to the transaction agree to the fiction of par, do we get a 'carefree’ unwind. Unfortunately, everyone wants their money back. Remember how this starts: I put a package of loans together, say 10m worth. I sell you that package for 10m. But there is risk. So, as a hedge to the risk, insurance is purchased or there is a corresponding interest or default hedge. If the package is AAA, then insurance is cheaper as the default likelihood is low. Now both I and the insurer have all but guaranteed AAA. You take your package and add it to 4 others you already own and sell all 5 to someone else looking for AAA paper.

I have kinda skipped over the tranches part. A lot of the paper is broken up this way: package of 10m is broken into 10 tranches. Each tranche is valued differently and has different rights. 1st tranche pays out first but has a lower rate, call it prime+.01; 2nd tranche pays out next, rate is prime+.015 with a slightly higher default risk, and so on. 1st tranche is AAA, second, maybe AA+, by the time we get to the 10th tranche, we have maybe C+, prime+1.

If the default rate increases, several things happen at once: the tranches start defaulting. Hedges start collapsing on the lower tranches and insurance kicks in on the higher ones. We lost several hedge funds last summer and fall - completely wiped out because the hedges turned and the funds had to cover. After the hedges started failing, the insurers started having capital problems.

Some of the big packagers made some promises to their buyers: if the defaults hit a certain point, the sellers would take back the packages at par. A safe thing under many circumstances, bad idea now. Because the sellers were banking entities, there are capital requirements and if the packages started coming back, they would need to raise capital….a lot of capital. So we have seen over the last several months some high profile capital raising. Right now both feds (FED and regulators) are letting a lot of the paper sit off the balance sheet. It can’t stay there forever.

Back to the unwinds: I sold you a package worth 10m. You took it with 4 just like it and sold them to Joe Sovereign Wealth Fund for 50m. JSWF is getting prime+1 for all his trouble…except, it is not prime+1 because 20% of the notes are defaulting. He either sucks it up and takes the loss, or he tries to pawn it off to someone else. Except no one else wants it. By the way, I took the 10m I got and went out and bought 42 more mortgages to make another package. So did you with your 50m. Only now, your buyers are not buying, and so you can’t. All of a sudden, I can’t buy more mortgages so the originators have to stop too. No one wants tranches, they want all AAA paper. Prime paper was fine in August and September, then prime paper defaults started rising in October and really got some steam up in November.

For the people that bought rights to the tranches, but not the underlying assets, they are fine except, well, they are sitting on a lot of money with no where to put it. They have to write off the income loss against other profits/income…unless their income is..oh, I don’t know…oil money or positive current accounts. Then the cash is still pouring in with no where for it to do but the mattresses. Lack of trust sucks. What happens when you have an abundance of something? It’s value declines.

For the people that bought the securities, they have a choice, hold them and wait or write them off. The only problem is that almost no one bought to hold them, they were used as collateral. And accounting rules are pretty strict in most places. Every once in a while, you have to say how much your assets are worth. Oh, and if you happen to be using said collateral to meet financial benchmarks, say to keep your AAA rating, or to keep your cash flow necessary line of credit…mark to market becomes important.

Repurchase agreements: if I borrow 10m from you and pledge my package, a package we both know now is worth 9m, or 8m, then you are going to want one of two things - repayment or a much higher interest rate. If I have to repay you, I have to raise 10m. How? The method I have used for the last 5 years requires me buying more mortgages and reselling them. A market that has dried up in several ways (property depreciation being one!). Or selling assets, assets everyone knows are worth less, but how much less? Put the paper on the market and get 20cents on the dollar? That is what is happening. The alternative is to agree to rollover the paper, but at a much higher interest rate. A serious impact on cash flow. And we still have to set a value (some currently at 89cents…a loss, but only on paper right now.

The big financial packagers haven’t really been making money on the interest earned, but on the fees for packaging and selling. Lose those fees and well, income drys up.

CDO’s are all but dead. There is no current market and with the exception of some private placements, none apparently have sold for months. Most repurchases are for less than 6 months, some considerably shorter, some, not a lot, for more than a year. For the banks with access to the Fed, the Fed is taking just about any collateral and the banks are using it. The collateral has to be redeemed at some point and it has to be redeemed at par which means somewhere the loss is going to show up.

You gave me 10m for my package. You will want your 10m back even if the package is only worth 2m. Worse, at some point, your people are going to want to know that the 10m loan you made is secured well. Right now, China holds a lot of paper and there is some belief that they are LOSING 4 billion a month because of the pricing issues. They are willing, up to the end of 2007 to tolerate it because of their exports to us helps their economy at home. Over the last 30 days, China appears to be ‘unhappy’ with the current situation.

All because of some flippers in Orange County California? Sub prime mess? Several things have happened. First securitization. Packaging of mortgages and selling them off let the originators and first packagers off the hook for quality. Who cared if they defaulted in 2 or 4 years? The originators got their fees (and nice they were) and the opportunity to sell more. The packagers were off the hook for the same reason. Everyone that was looking to add just a little bit more to their return could buy AAA paper and get .01% more…bump the volume to 5 or 10 billion and it adds up. Hedgers sprang up like weeds and made billions. Add really low interest rates, easy money all chasing an asset and it’s price has only one way to go. Make it easy to refinance and it doesn’t matter about no stinking payments! The financial gurus figured out how to take a $500,000, 30 year mortgage paying 5% and slice and dice and repackage it into a 5m package paying 5.1% and $500,000 in fees…just have to leverage it 8 or 10 times and know, know without a doubt, the value of the underlying asset was always to go to up…more than 5.1%. Oh, and you had to have a lot of buyers
convinced you were right.

Every ponzi scheme ends, eventually.

About my research. I do not believe a recession is possible. However, NO ONE could have foreseen 500 trillion in debt obligations. The number is staggering. A 1% loss wipes out our financial system. No one wants to do what the law and financial rules says has to happen, least of all the governments charged with enforcement. There
is going to be pain, and it is going to be very bad. But no one is willing to even guess how bad, or even to try to start slowly for fear that once started, the cascade will make Niagra look like a drippy faucet.

Predictions

I just posted this in the comments on another site, and decided I need a record so we can all snicker, laugh or cry in 4 years.

2/1/2008

The Republican Party is about to get exactly what it wants.

Predictions for 2008-2012:
1. The first recession in 26 years will last between 8 and 11 months and cause widespread dislocations specifically in housing.
2. Ford will declare bankruptcy. As will Citigroup. Both will survive but neither will recover. Four of the top 20 banks will fail or be forced into mergers to survive.
3. Obama will be sworn in as President in Jan 2009. Hillary and Bill will be divorced in 2010.
4. A series of 'minor' attacks on American soil (single bombers in crowded places) will focus Obama on terrorism....unfortunately, we will find that several of the bombers were illegals that got visas as part of the comprehensive reform passed and signed in 2009. Obama will seal the border with an overstep that will violate virtually the entire Constitution with the complete support of the American people and Congress.
5. The military withdrawal from Iraq begins to resemble a retreat under fire.
6. A small nuclear denotation in Iran signals Iran's entry into the nuclear club in early 2011.
7. Hezbolla attacks Israel from the West Bank, Gaza (with Hamas) and Lebannon using rockets, several of which will be chemical. Israeli government will fail and only the Iran nuclear threat prevents the US from doing anything to help. Assistance from a completely unexpected source keeps the country from falling.
8. Bankruptcies in the US hit 1.5 million in 2009 along with 2.5 million foreclosures.
9. The Democrats get a functional majority in the Senate in 2009 (with the help of several RINOs) and complete the hat trick with a functional majority in the House in 2010.
10. A major financial figure will expose one, maybe two flat out lies that the media had been reporting in financial matters that leads to a rout of the dollar on international markets. Only the complicity of the EU in the lie prevents the dollar from ouster as the currency of trade.
11. A chemical introduced into coca in South America spreads into the cocaine trade leading to thousands of deaths and tens of thousands of addicts having serious and permanent medical disabilities that WE will have to support.
12. A version of nationalized Medicare will be expanded to 50 and overs and pre-school aged children.
13. In 2011, after tax cuts that were put into place in 2003 expired, the Federal revenues decline for the first time in almost 40 years.

Why did this all happen? A candidate for office in Pakistan was murdered in December 2008.

I don't care if I am wrong on every single prediction. I don't care if I am right on every single prediction. I do care that the people currently running for President fail completely, and without exception, to understand the consequences of their actions and choices. Theology is running the Republican party right now. The day we thought God was on a side, was the day we lost our fight to keep freedom.

The Chinese were right: may you live in interesting times is a curse.

Tracy's law: Murphy was an optimist.

How far can it go....

Housing prices are declining. Certainly not everywhere, and certainly not as much as some places, but if you were to take the median income and compare it to the median home price, it might give us an idea of how far home prices have gotten out of whack.

I took 33% of the median income and calculated a monthly payment based on 6% interest. Using that information, I calculated a price for a home. Compare that number to the median price where you live and you can determine if prices need to crash, decline, remain the same, or can increase further. In some cases, even if the local median is higher, you have to consider local issues and still, prices might be able to rise if incomes in the area are rising above average.

Real estate is local, local, local and every market has its good places, bad places and average places. Your mileage may vary, but places like California with prices hundreds of thousands above where they 'should' be, expect prices to decline.

Here is the list:

State	Median income	Estimated home price possible for the median income	Monthly Payment
United States	48,023	220,270	1,321
Alabama	38,160	175,031	1,049
Alaska	57,071	261,771	1,569
Arizona	36,693	214,170	1,284
Arkansas	37,458	171,812	1,030
California	54,385	249,452	1,496
Colorado	53,900	247,227	1,482
Connecticut	60,551	277,733	1,665
Delaware	52,676	241,613	1,449
District of Columbia	47,473	217,748	1,306
Florida	45,038	206,580	1,239
Georgia	48,388	221,945	1,331
Hawaii	61,005	279,816	1,678
Idaho	45,919	210,619	1,263
Illinois	49,328	226,256	1,357
Indiana	44,618	204,653	1,227
Iowa	48,075	220,509	1,322
Kansas	44,478	204,011	1,223
Kentucky	38,694	177,481	1,064
Louisiana	37,472	171,875	1,030
Maine	45,503	208,711	1,251
Maryland	63,082	289,343	1,735
Massachusetts	56,592	259,574	1,556
Michigan	48,043	220,362	1,321
Minnesota	56,102	257,328	1,543
Mississippi	34,343	157,523	944
Missouri	44,487	204,051	1,223
Montana	39,821	182,650	1,095
Nebraska	48,820	223,926	1,343
Nevada	51,036	234,090	1,403
New Hampshire	60,411	277,091	1,661
New Jersey	66,752	306,176	1,836
New Mexico	40,126	184,050	1,103
New York	48,472	222,330	1,333
North Carolina	41,616	190,883	1,144
North Dakota	42,311	194,070	1,164
Ohio	45,776	209,964	1,259
Oklahoma	38,859	178,237	1,069
Oregon	46,349	212,593	1,275
Pennsylvania	48,148	220,844	1,324
Rhode Island	52,421	240,443	1,442
South Carolina	40,583	186,144	1,116
South Dakota	44,996	206,386	1,237
Tennessee	40,696	186,663	1,119
Texas	43,044	197,433	1,184
Utah	55,619	255,111	1,530
Vermont	52,174	239,311	1,435
Virginia	55,368	253,960	1,523
Washington	53,515	245,461	1,472
West Virginia	38,029	174,431	1,046
Wisconsin	48,903	224,306	1,345
Wyoming	46,613	213,803	1,282

Fred and McCain

Some people have suggested that McCain would be more palatable if Fred were to be his VP choice.
As a Fredhead, I will explain why if it happens, it will be unlikely to help McCain and it will damage Fred.

Fred is a conservative. McCain is not. Many of the positions Fred took, oppose the positions McCain has taken. If Fred were to join McCain, he would have to pocket his conservative principles to support McCain policies. Such a pocketing of principles would deny all that Fred stood for. If he were willing to do so, it would immediately call into question just how many of his 'principles' were for hire.

McCain is not a conservative. Having a VP that proved he would pocket his principles in order to attain the VP slot would only encourage McCain that despite all the vitriol, he held the correct positions for Republicans. Knowing that McCain would backstab the conservatives of his party, sorry, knowing that the conservatives in the party would support him and his VP, he would be more likely to through our principles right back in our face, and most of us are smart enough to know that....so if Fred did accept the VP slot, we are actually a lot more stupid than anyone gave us credit for.

McCain would not benefit by having a pseudo-conservative turn-coat, and the consistent conservative would be happily selling his conservative soul.

Sorry. If Fred were McCain's VP, it would send the wrong signal to McCain, and the conservative base would lose a voice they thought was theirs.

I had a dream...

Ok, maybe a nightmare, but I was awake:

"Welcome the last Democrat debate before Super Tuesday. We will start with opening statements. Senator Clinton?"

"Thank you Tim. Before I start, I want to address Senator Obama. Barak, if you are the nominee, the Republicans are going to really go after your lack of experience. I tend to agree with you that your life experience is more important, but I have seen their efforts up close and personal. That said, I think I can speak for most people that you campaign for hope and change is one that makes most Democrats proud. So, in that spirit I make the following offer.

Barak, join me in a campaign for the Presidency and Vice Presidency. Together, we will bring your message of change right to the Republicans. I am not asking you to be my Vice President, I am asking you to be my running mate. If Democrats vote for you in larger numbers that those that vote for me, I will take the VP slot. If it is the other way, you take the VP slot.

Our positions on virtually all the important issues are the same or very similar. I think if we combine forces, we will energize Americans the way no team has ever done. Will you join me?"

If she actually offered this, and he actually agreed. They would get 70% of the vote and crush, absolutely crush ANY republican pairing.

Fortunately, the ego of both of them will prevent it.....THANK GOD.

Walking away or business decision

It is clear that I am all for personal responsibility. And, I work for a bankruptcy attorney; and that attorney helps people in foreclosure.

Last night, 60 Minutes had a piece on the "sub-prime" mess. Of course, those of us in the know, know, it is not just sub-prime that is the problem.

One of the couples in the 60 minute piece are planning on walking away from their home because the value has dropped below the mortgage amount. Steve Croft seemed upset because the couple could afford the higher payment that had come with their adjusted rate mortgage, but they just didn't want to pay it.

One of my favorite bloggers has a piece where he laments the 'walking away' attitude.

But bear with me here: if a corporation had a contract to purchase 1 million pieces of equipment at $1.00 a piece over a couple of years and they found a supplier willing to provide the same pieces for $.75, would ANYONE begrudge the corporation their change? Assuming the contract to purchase had some penalty for not buying all million pieces, everyone would agree that the optimum business decision would be to get the less expensive supplies.

Why is owning a home different? There are penalties for failing to pay the whole contract, but if a reasonable person views the situation and determines the penalties are less than the future savings....why wouldn't you 'walk away'.

People for years have been trying to argue that buying a home should be a rational decision, not just a emotional one. Well, if people rationally believe walking away from a home that is losing 10, 20, 60% of it's value makes economic sense...why all the hand wringing?

McCane?

I don't often link, but here is one that just blew me away. John McCain has a person from the Mexican Government (formerly) on his campaign staff.

John McCain: doing the work Americans won't do....destroying US.

ht: Michelle Malkin

Tracy

Intentionally

What I am about to say is, well, mean spirited. Me!? Victoria suggested it was insulting. I agree, very, very insulting.

Rush was speaking of global warming. My thoughts wandered. What would be the most effective way of reducing the carbon footprint of humanity in the United States? Voluntarily. No forced conservation!

Hmmm...


Well. If we reduced the population that might work. But we need people to work, do their jobs. So, if we could get rid of the people that really don't contribute...


Hmmmm....


Ok. You might be thinking I am heading in a dangerous direction, but I am not.

Well, I will just say it.


If everyone that thought we should reduce our global carbon footprint would just kill themselves, then we can accomplish two things at once: permanent reduction of the global carbon footprint; and, reducing the number of stupid people wasting the time of everyone else with stupid ideas.

Ok? Just a suggestion....

To Conservatives:

We are a minority. Not just in the country, but in the Republican party. Fred Thompson is practically a perfect fit. And Ron Paul got more votes in Michigan than Fred.

I left the Republican party in 2005 after the Bankruptcy Reform Fiasco (BARF to those that have to deal with it day-to-day), so the implosion that is currently playing out bothers me less than it probably should.

John McCain a liberal hawk. Converted by decades in Washington, his occasional forays into the State Department have influenced his mind.

Mitt Romney is a born-again conservative. And like all baby-Christians, his passion is un-informed and will be short-lived. Maybe he will mature into a serious Conservative, but Washington is not the place to do it.

Mike Huckabee: Let me offer this from wikipedia: Fascism is a religious conception in which man is seen in his immanent relationship with a superior law and with an objective Will that transcends the particular individual and raises him to conscious membership of a spiritual society. Whoever has seen in the religious politics of the Fascist regime nothing but mere opportunism has not understood that Fascism besides being a system of government is also, and above all, a system of thought. Need I say more?

Conservatives that want minimal government intervention in our day-to-day lives, strong national defense and the strength of character to tell someone, hell, show someone, that personal responsibility is the FIRST principle no longer have a strong voice in our political process.

Maybe I am too blind to see the forest. Fred Thompson appears to be the only candidate that hasn't sold his soul for the Presidency....and apparently, for most Republicans, that is proof he can't be President.

Republicans....Americans, be careful what you wish for.....

A deeply religious man wants your support....

He speaks about oppression of the little guy. He claims God has given him a purpose and he will fulfill that purpose. He claims his faith is not bound by law, but rather his faith supports the law. He thinks that we should live by the dictates of his religion and he will work to build a country that abides as much by the laws of God as of man, more, if possible.

Osama Bin Laden wants your support. Mike Huckabee has already signed on.

Iowa....

Conservatives can take only one small comfort in tonight's results, the Democrats have annointed someone even less electable than Huckabee...

Islam

The GWOT is a fight against Islam. Sorry my moderate, Muslim friends. Your religion has been co-opted for a war against everything this country stands for. Islam has become the rallying point for every bad impulse against the future.

Only when Islam is cursed and discredited can it hope to become a Religion of Peace. There may be an interpretation of Islam that is consistent with Western values, but such an interpretation has been buried under a raging flood of hatred and violence.

The West can no longer give Moslem's the freedom they deserve to practice their religion because so many of them, MILLIONS of them, practice it via bloodshed. No religion should, or can be allowed to practice blood sacrifices of humans, and as seen around the world, Moslem's are claiming blood for their rituals. What is truly unfortunate is that the blood spilled is more often Moslem than infidel.

Nationalize

Medicine. Yep, take the whole damn medical system and nationalize it. That is what the left wants! It would be cheaper, it would eliminate almost all the administrative overhead - except for the cost of the BUREAUCRACY!

Of course the left can't actually call it socialized medicine because, well, that would sound like, socialism. Much better to call it single payer.

In one move, we get rid of HMOs, insurance companies, uninsured and under-insured people.

The government gets 3 million (a guess) new employees all ready to join a UNION and beholden to government largess for pay raises and benefits.

What, you don't believe I want this? Really? Right.

Can someone answer?

For years the left has blamed America for supporting dictators. Obviously, the left wants us to support democratic movements. However, Bush has spent the better part of 6 years trying to do just that. What has been the result? First, the left complains we are interfering with the sovereignty of other nations. Second, the left complains that promoting democracy is a fool's errand. And Third, when given a choice, many of the 'countries' that have voted, have voted for anything but democracy.

Also, where is the left on Venezuela as it moves closer and closer to dictatorship?

I am more and more pining for imperialism....

5 against 100

It started as a simple conversation about population control. We were sitting near the faux surfing pool in a major American indoor waterpark on December 22nd. The ambient noise was quite high and frankly, I was shouting just to be heard, not to make a point.

Our friend had said that the way to cure over-population (and therefore decrease the stress on global resources) was to educate women. Educated women have fewer children. I called her a misanthrope (I actually had to ask what the right word was.) She took some offense to the name-calling, however, I had a different fish to fry in this conversation.

Her next point was that we had advanced too fast as a society, technologically, and that we needed to slow down the advancement of technology so as to allow civilization time to catch up. I find this position to be very dangerous and so I responded:

On this hand we have 5 people that think we need to save the planet; one the other hand we have 100 people that just want what the 5 have. Assuming that the 5 have abdicated what is in their own economic interest for the benefit of all humanity, all that prevents the 100 from taking from the 5 is technology.

The conversation looped over itself several times, so bear with me.

I further argued that if educated women had fewer children, then we needed to force them to have more children because the 100 uneducated women were going to have LOTS more children furthering the creation of uneducated masses. We would soon have only 4 on one hand to prevent 120 on the other; then 3 to prevent 150; and then 2 to prevent 200 and finally, when on one remained, the 250 would overwhelm even the one technologically advanced denier of economic self interest.

Her attempted rebound was to argue that the earth could not support both the 5 and the 100 growing by leaps and bounds and that technology was doing more harm. My first response was the 5 could not be forced to abandon their economic interests unless it was…by force. Taxation, legislation or even fear of global consequences could force people to abandon their economic interests, but pitting the 5 against the 100 without technology to support them was cultural suicide.

My second response was that technology was all that was saving us now! If advanced agricultural techniques had not been found, millions, maybe hundreds of millions would have died of starvation. Medical advancements have saved millions more. Abandoning technological advancement means the death of millions AND because the haves are seriously outnumbered by the havenots, only the threat of technical superiority prevents the 5 from being overrun.

My problem is of course only 1 of the 5 really wants to stifle technology and abandon economic self-interest ‘for the benefit of all humankind’. But that 1 is doing everything it can to force the other 4 to agree or at least comply with it’s goals. Meanwhile, the 100 are doing everything they can to multiply and steal technology to use against the 5. The 100 are not contributing ANYTHING to ‘the benefit of humankind’. They are reproducing and calling the 5 racist, selfish, and imperialist. If the 4 allow the 1 to guilt them into abandoning economic self interest, there will be nothing to stop the 100, or 150 or 250 from overrunning them.

Economic self-interest is not a bad thing people. If you don’t know where you will sleep tonight, or where the next meal is coming from, global warming is the LEAST of your problems. And if you happen to see a One proclaiming concern for you and offering you a handout from her doorstep, you are more likely to see a slap at the hand and rushing of the door.

As long as the 5 insist on having fewer children and stifling economic growth, the 100 will continue to grow in numbers and demands, eventually overrunning the 5. We are reaching a point where we will have to choose.

Our government

I am required to listen to Air America. Victoria doesn't 'demand' it, but equality does require I have to give her time to listen to the left as I listen to the right.

Today, I heard, for what is probably the 1,000th time, how our government is corrupt and as soon as we impeach, depose or otherwise get Bush out of office, we will have an 'honest' government for the good people once again.

Hey idiots....when the next President takes office, 99.8% of the government in place RIGHT NOW, will continue to work in 2009, 2010 and so forth. Barring wholesale slaughter, only the politicians will change, the bureaucracy will continue to subvert the will of the people as it did in every Administration since Kennedy (maybe even before that).

All you need to see is the State Department, the CIA, FBI and a dozen other agencies ignore the proclamations from the 'ruling class'. For the last 7 years the liberals in the bureaucracy have done everything they can to subvert this President. If the Democrats win the White House in 2008, you can bet the conservatives in the bureaucracy will return the favor.

It is a lesson I learned 30 years ago, better to be the lead peon than the boss....at least WE know how to run things right...

Imperial Hubris or ....

The United States has gotten a lot of bad press about our invasion of another country. It has been held up as imperial hubris, it has been used to claim aggressiveness, it has been used to show us as acting unilaterally. I don't give a rats......

Iraq is a country, MADE UP OF PEOPLE. We may have done a bad thing at the level of country: thou shall not interfere with another country. But for the PEOPLE....we have done a wonderful thing - even if it has caused much angst. Folks, didn't we 'invade' Indonesia? Sent lots of troops and the Navy? Granted we were not shooting people there, but then, they weren't shooting at us either.

Can something be good for the people of a country, but bad for the 'country'? (which means, bad for it's ruling class?)

The Effect of Bankruptcy Reform on Mortgage Interest Rates

That is the title of a post on TPMCafe. I second the bottom line of that article, bankruptcy reform will have NO effect on interest rates.

One of the items used to sell the previous bankruptcy reform in 2005 was the savings everyone would benefit from, $400 was thrown around, by the change in the law. There has been no reduction in interest rates, just a continuing flow of profits to credit lenders.

Now, after billions in fees and interest from mortgage lending over the last several years, mortgage lenders are suffering. Poor baby. Suck it up. It is called RISK and you have many ways of calculating it. Your failure is not our problem.

The current bill, H.R. 3609 does much good for people facing foreclosure with little overall impact on mortgage lenders except the perception that they only sell cash cows to their investors.

For once, I support THIS bankruptcy reform!

TED

If you have never heard of the TED Conference (like me) then you will have probably missed something that has occupied me for hours over the last 2 days....

18 minute presentations by some of the most interesting people on some of the most interesting topics (and some interesting presentations by interesting people on some boring topics!)

Do it on the weekend, because just 4 or 5 of those things will just ruin an afternoon of planned work...

No to a Moslem President

In response to an email: hell no, not a chance in hell would I EVER consider a Moslem for President. EVER.

Just to be clear.

Buffet should STFU

I am tired of hearing from Warren Buffet how terrible it is that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does. One, give the woman a damn raise. Two, pay more taxes Buffet. NO ONE is stopping you from paying anything you damn well please to the government.

Not a single change to the tax code is being proposed that will have ANY impact on Buffet's day to day existence. If his taxes were to double, he would still wear the stupid suits and ties and look like a grumpy old man and he would still be able to buy any politician out of petty cash.

Waterboarding

Some commentators have suggested that if the United States does not condemn waterboarding, then we have no ground to stand on if such a technique is used on our military members.

Hell, if it would guarantee that our adversaries will use waterboarding on our military, I say we announce it to the world that we will waterboard. I think most of our serving soldiers would prefer waterboarding to the current shoot them, cut them up, burn them and hang them torture they are currently facing...

Modification of the Bankruptcy laws

H.R. 3609 would make some changes to the way the bankruptcy courts handle mortgages on a debtor's primary residence. Here are some of the changes and some comments:

Sec 2:
'While a case is pending, no fee, costs, or charges may be added to a debt that is provided for in a chapter 13 plan and is secured by the debtor's principal residence unless the holder of the secured claim gives timely notice of such fee, costs, or charge to the debtor and to the trustee.'.

Mortgage lenders are great for adding fees to mortgages in foreclosure, many servicers add fees to the mortgage account without listing them on statements during the bankruptcy. The result of this little slight of hand is debtors coming out of bankruptcy thinking everything has been solved only to find hundreds, sometimes thousands in fees had been accruing during the bankruptcy. Makes debtors awful pissed off at their attorneys.

SEC. 3.

Section 1322(b)(2) of title 11, United States Code, is amended by striking `, other than a claim secured only by a security interest in real property that is the debtor's principal residence,'.

This section makes mortgages on principal residences subject to the same rules as every other debt.

SEC. 5

Section 109(h) of title 11, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(5) The requirements of paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to a debtor in a case under chapter 13 who submits to the court a certification that the holder of a claim secured by the debtor's principal residence has initiated a judicial or non-judicial foreclosure on the debtor's principal residence.'.

This is huge for people facing foreclosure and needing to file, NOW to prevent the loss of the home.

Generally speaking, I like this.

A moderate mainstream review

I chose the name for this blog to indicate to the readers my belief that over the long term, my point of view was similar to a moderate, cross-section of the US population. I don't live that far from Peoria.

I am a fiscal conservative. I am a social liberal. I think many, most, Americans would fit that general description.

So, to our Republican candidates for President:

Governor Mitt Romney. Sir, your experience as a business person, a cat herder (Olympics) and as a governor gives you a strong leg up on the competition. Unfortunately, I think you might be a candidate for poster child of the Peter Principle. President will elevate you to the highest position you are incapable of. Political life requires an ability to compromise and you have shown that ability as Governor. Unfortunately, we have problems that compromise will only make worse. The GWOT requires a strong position that is not swayed by opinion, either public or private. I do not trust you understand this. Illegal immigration is a problem you can not turn your back on or leave it up to others to police. I respect your faith, but your religion is a problem for me. I know something of the doctrine of Mormonism and frankly, I am not impressed. Understand, for many DIFFERENT reasons, I would be opposed to a Moslem running for President, but a belief in Mormonism calls into question your ability to reasonably judge and analyze facts.

Governor Mike Huckabee. Sir, many of my comments to Governor Rommney apply to you. Compromise is a necessary political skill. But as your faith should inform, giving up on your principles does more harm than good. I think giving people a second chance, or even a first chance is admirable, but you need to understand that evil exists and it often takes to form of an angel of light. Criminals and illegal immigrants come from the same cloth - a willingness to violate the law for their own benefit. Our adversaries in the GWOT do not even ascribe to the same set of morals, let alone laws, we do. Giving them the benefits of those morals is handing a gun to a murder and turning your back on him.

Senator John McCain. Sir, I hold you in the deepest regard. Your service to your country in the military and in the Senate are worthy of the respect of every American. But, your positions with regard to illegal immigration and campaign finance are damaging to all of us. I am also very uncomfortable with your apparent willingness to subvert our judicial appointment process with your gang of 14. I believe you are the strongest candidate with regard to the GWOT. However, your position with regard to illegal immigration damages that perception. I might be willing to support you for President if you were paired with someone like Tom Tancredo as VP.

Former Senator Fred Thompson. Sir, I support your positions on many issues. However, civil unions are fundamental issue with me and we disagree. Leave the states to make the rules in this regard, keep the Federal Government out of it. Your lack of overall experience is a problem. You benefit from the fact that your experience level is comparable to the experience level of the most likely Democratic opponent. Given a choice between relative inexperience, I will take your positions and fundamental beliefs over theirs (democrats).

Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Sir, I once was an air traffic controller. I performed very well when we were busy, less so when we were slow. Under pressure we often see the best of people and on 9/11, we saw the best of you. But, the President must deal with the day to day issues that face us when the only pressure is which group favors a particular outcome. In this way, you fail. Your behavior with regard to your former wife was reprehensible. And it was very public. Further, the problems with political compromise are showcased with you. The Presidency is not the prize for a popularity contest - or it shouldn't be - and based on what I have seen, it is the only reason you are considered a viable candidate, and it should not be.

Others: No one else in the field appears ready for prime time. I am very willing to consider other potential candidates and THAT is a problem for the current field. They are benefiting from the comparison to the Democratic field which is as poor, if not worse, than the Republican field.

In considering every candidate, both parties, I can say that the entire field leaves A LOT to be desired. If this is the best our 'political' class can field for President of the United States, the fall of Western civilization is further along than many might be willing to admit.

NIE = Not intelligent enough

Just a short note. The NIE is a steaming pile of crap.

Either the authors are a bunch of idiots or they think the readers of their report are. In either case, they need to be given all the respect their work deserves.....

UPDATE: Sunday, 10:26pm

After skipping all news for the last 36 hours, I spent the last one catching up on posts. I need to indicate that I am totally disgusted. After reading more commentary on the NIE and the Annapolis Conference, it is clear to me that a significant portion of our State Department, the CIA, the Congress, journalists and our fellow Americans are either hopelessly naive or dangerously stupid.

Given the serious disconnect those on the left apparently have with the reality I see daily, I have no choice but to wonder if it is drugs or some brainwashing indoctrination system that I safely avoided driving the opposition to the GWOT and peace for Israel.

Every time I think it might actually be ME that is disconnected with reality that the left sees clearly, something happens to confirm that it is I that view reality correctly. Today on Fox News Sunday, Juan Williams, responding to the Rommey speech on Thursday, said that he couldn't understand how anyone could say that religion was being forced out of public life and that it was clear Rommey was calling for a Christian government. HUH? How many communities have Holiday trees and ban Nativity scenes? Dozens, hundreds? Maybe the count is 10,000 with Christmas and 200 without....but those are 10,000 Bedford Falls and 200 Metropolis'.

I have said before that there is a serious breach in the reality the left and right share...unfortunately, that breach will not prevent a disaster from reaching all of us....

Politically correct or just a stab at perfection

This morning whilst driving, the local talk show was working on the Christmas Tree/Holiday Tree issue bubbling here in Madison. A caller got on and claimed to be agnostic and therefore, able to offer a non-religious opinion. The host asked her what she meant by agnostic to which she replied, I don't believe in God. The host said. "So, you are an atheist?" No came the reply, "I have beliefs, just not about God."

Now, as an agnostic, I can be pretty clear in saying that the caller was an atheist. Not believing in God is pretty much the qualifier. Her belief in the Easter Bunny or in cow reincarnation does not make her an agnostic.

Now all of this leads up to this: am I being a purist? If she wants to call herself an agnostic, for whatever reason, even a wrong one...who am I to question her? Well, I'm an agnostic and I should be able to say that someone that does not believe in God (and those definitions can be pretty broad) is not an agnostic. I believe the Universe was created, that act was done by something, most people call that something God and as such, I can agree with them. Any further discussion about the nature or character of that something is beyond human understanding - and may forever be so. Back to the question, am I being a purist. Am I imposing a politically correct response to her claim? Is that what politically correct is, an attempt at some sense of purity?

Maybe political correctness is about offensiveness. How can we not offend someone yet still get across our meaning? The caller seemed to be offended that someone would call her an atheist. "I have beliefs." was pretty strongly stated. But isn't free speech specifically about offensive speech? We do not need someone to call our speech into question when we are being nice...it is when we are being offensive that we need protection.

I am sure many wonderful writers have made this point before so excuse my 4th grade verbiage but political correctness is an affront to free speech.

Many people have complained that American's are sloppy speakers, or the language is sloppy. Walking down the street smiling at people and saying Ho Ho Ho is likely to get you slapped by someone.

More than a few of my posts have probably offended someone, yet no one has complained to me. Still, is my response to the caller a symptom that I too seek some sense of political correctness in others? I hope not, but I will still correct someone that is obviously wrong, even if it is just an opinion.....and the caller, she was an atheist....

Illegal Immigration

I have been against any attempt to allow amnesty for illegal immigrants, still am. However, over Thanksgiving the common refrain from those FOR amnesty, "can't arrest them all" was again tossed my way. So, what are we to do? Because, in a general way, the argument is correct, we can't arrest them all. We can't even arrest all the citizens that do something wrong.

So, I gave it some thought. Here is my idea.

If you are here illegally you must report to the police station closest to where you live. You must provide positive identification - not false US IDs - and you must provide your address and where you work. If you are not wanted for any other illegal activity, you will be given a fine, a probation, and documentation to register as a resident alien. You will never be granted citizenship unless you leave the country and apply for citizenship from the country you were born in. As a resident alien, you may hold a job, pay taxes and enjoy life. You can not vote, nor receive welfare benefits. Every year, you must report to the police your address and work. Failure to do so is a violation of the probation and makes you subject to deportation. Yes, this is for the rest of your life in this country. If you commit another crime, you get deported. Failure to register results in deportation if you are arrested. No path to citizenship.

Your children born here become citizens, but you may not become on based on their advantage. As a resident alien, you can not sponsor another person into this country.

To the naysayers, yes, many, many people will not register. When and if they are arrested for other reasons, they can be deported. We don't have to round up people, the biggest problem people will make themselves available by being stupid sooner or later. Those that stay way under the radar will be marginalized. Employers can hire all the resident aliens they want, fine them heavy if found with illegals...and deport the employees and their families - minus any citizen children.

A Soldier's Christmas Eve

'Twas the night before Christmas, he live all alone,
in a one bedroom house made of plaster and stone.
I had come down the chimney with presents to give,
and to see just who in this home did live.
I looked all about, a strange sight I did see,
no tinsel, no presents, not even a tree.
No stocking by mantle, just boots filled with sand,
on the wall hung pictures of far distant lands.
With medals and badges, awards of all kinds,
a sober thought came through my mind.
For this house was different, it was dark and dreary,
I found the home of a soldier, once I could see clearly.
The soldier lay sleeping, silent, alone,
curled up on the floor in this one bedroom home.
The face was so gentle, the room in such disorder,
not how I pictured a United States soldier.
Was this the hero of whom I'd just read?
Curled up on a poncho, the floor for a bed?
I realized the families that I saw this night,
owed their lives to these soldiers who were willing to fight.
Soon round the world, the children would play,
and grownups would celebrate a bright Christmas day.
They all enjoyed freedom each month of the year,
because of the soldiers, like the one lying here.
I couldn't help wonder how many lay alone,
on a cold Christmas Eve in a land far from home.
The very thought brought a tear to my eye,
I dropped to my knees and started to cry.
The soldier awakened and I heard a rough voice,
"Santa don't cry, this life is my choice;
I fight for freedom, I don't ask for more,
my life is my God, my Country, my Corps."
The soldier rolled over and drifted to sleep,
I couldn't control it, I continued to weep.
I kept watch for hours, so silent and still
and we both shivered from the cold night's chill.
I didn't want to leave on that cold, dark, night,
this guardian of honor so willing to fight.
Then the soldier rolled over, with a voice soft and pure,
whispered, "Carry on Santa, it's Christmas day, all is secure."
One look at my watch, and I knew he was right.
"Merry Christmas my friend, and to all a good night."
- Anonymous

Clinton

If Hillary Clinton's time in the White House as First Lady gives her the experience necessary to supersede the somewhat comparable experiences of Edwards and Obama, what does that say about the possible involvement of Bill Clinton in another Clinton White House?

My Father specifically stated that he will be voting for Clinton with the hope that she will bring the same people and policies of the previous Clinton Administration back.

One would hope that the vast majority of people voting will have the same concern/hope in mind.

Friendly fire...

I am sure everyone has noticed (except the possible exception of CAIR) that the vast majority of Moslems killed in the war on Islam are the result of friendly fire.

At least when we kill our own because of friendly fire, it is almost always, accidental...

What is different...

I have made the argument that the current foreclosure ' crisis' is not that big a deal given the size of our economy. I am not even willing to concede that the 'credit crisis' is in fact something that will cause any significant economic problems.

Earlier in the year, when gas was surpassing $3 a gallon, we waited for the flow of bankruptcies to start. Nothing. Fully absorbed. Practically without a twitch.

Now gas is going back over $3 a gallon, and it's timing is bad. Holiday shopping. No, I don't think $3 gas is going to stop or even slow holiday shopping. Matter of fact, I think we might actually have a good holiday season. My problem is that people are looking at their house, the mortgage, the possible payment increase, the big truck or SUV with a payment of $400 or $500 a month and another $300 a month in gas, and thinking, next year, things are going to be bad. May as well have a good holiday.

Credit card balances are going up. They will continue to go up. Did you know that from the time people start having financial difficulties to the time they file bankruptcy is often 3 years? People will rob Peter to pay Paul for a long time, and if they have decent credit, that can be a couple of years - as long as nothing bad happens like illness, divorce or job loss.

Many people that argue the economy is fine are complaining that those of that point out problems are 'talking the economy down'. To an extent, that is true. Perception is important.

As long as the average person believes THEY will survive this 'crisis', the crisis is non-existent. The economy is going to be dealing with several bad things at one time, and it will have an impact on many people. What will cause the biggest problem is the average person believing THEY are going to be harmed. Such a mindset will do more damage to our economy than any CDO or SIV. Oh, and $3 a gallon gas...is pretty personal.

Thanksgiving...

In a comment I left elsewhere, I pointed out that I have only two real traditions in my life: my birthday plans and Thanksgiving with my parents.

Thanksgiving with my parents has been a tradition only interrupted by my living in California for 9 years and Montana for less than one. Victoria and CJ look forward to it as much as I do. My mother cooks: turkey, beef, ham, corn, green beans, mashed potatoes, stuffing, yams, cranberry sauce, biscuits (usually burned as is our family tradition - unintentionally I might add), and minced meat pie for dessert...with Cool Whip. It usually takes two plates of food to actually sample everything.

But it is not just a time to break bread with my parents. We visit several times a year, Easter, the 4th, Thanksgiving and we try at least one other time. It is a holiday. A rekindling of something that existed when I was a kid and we sat as a family. It is seldom that we are joined by anyone else, but both my sister and brother often stop by sometime during the day or evening. Dinner is early 4ish or so as it always has been. Leftovers and dessert are usually saved for later in the evening. Despite her best effort, Mom usually has more than enough leftovers for the several days of our visit.

I am often reminded of the fact that my parents are still here, and that my relationship with them, strained as it has been on occasion, is as good as any I know between parents and their adult children. Both my parents are in the mid 70's and generally, in good health. My father has had a heart condition that has always been dangerous and it will eventually take him. Still, Thanksgiving is precious time with them and I try not to waste it.

Every visit has an evening or two of discussion of the family and our history. My parents, my Dad especially, often hear things they did not know, or claim to know. Last year we talked about how we as kids knew we had the best parents in the neighborhood, it was obvious and most of the kids in the neighborhood agreed. I have told my father on a couple of occasions that my love of science fiction is directly the result of his taking me to see two movies when I was 10. My love of country is a directly result of the second movie of that double feature. The movies were 2001 and The Green Berets. My love for golf came about because he introduced me to the game and played with me well beyond the point that I could beat him.

My mother loves to read, and she made sure she encouraged my reading growing up. I received dozens of books for Christmas every year. Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys were staples. We also spent a lot of time cooking, and I still love the kitchen, especially with her in it with me.

We each take after one parent more than another. I take after my mother, but there are things that are unique about me that are no doubt from my father. Both of my parents have a wanderlust and a willingness to explore new things. It should be no surprise then to learn I am a first generation American. My parents, both born in Ireland, left their birthplace to raise a family here. They raised American children, not Irish-American children. I do not miss an Irish heritage, I have an American one, one that I am proud of and hope to pass on to our daughter.

My father is an only child. He and my mother attempted to visit Ireland once several years ago by my father's health did not allow it. My mother did get a chance to visit England a while back and saw her sisters for the first time in decades. My father's birthday is November 11th. My youngest sibling, Elizabeth, shares the same birthday. My dad served in the United States Army, part of his process towards becoming a citizen. I served in the Air Force, part of my process towards becoming a citizen. Yes, I was born here, but becoming a citizen is not about birthright, it is about a conscious decision to accept both the rights, and the responsibilities that are part of that title.

On Thanksgiving I am thankful for my parents. For their travel to this country, for raising us American. I am thankful for each time I get to spend with them, and for the time our daughter, their youngest grandchild, gets to spend with them. I am thankful for the example they set: willing to take risks, willing to work hard, willing to dream for their children an impossible dream.

None of their children grew up to be Senators, or CEOs. Only I have completed college, although several others have some college. My brother spent 24 years in the Air Force; his only son serves in Iraq today, his second tour there. We are middle America.

I have immense wealth, opportunities and access to resources incomprehensible to over 5 billion other people on the planet. I have a wonderful partner, an incredible child and the best parents I have ever met.

I may not think about it every day, but on Thanksgiving, I am reminded why we celebrate by sitting down with the two people that made it possible and important, for me, to be thankful.

Might is not right (at least the polls say so...)

Right is right. Having popular opinion either for you or against you is not the determining factor.

Whether Bush was right or wrong to go into Iraq is now beside the point, we have troops there and we need to stay til it is done. If every person outside the military and their families disagreed with Bush, it would be right to stay the course; polls don't matter.

Marriage has two components. There is the religious ritual and the legal union of two people. Religions can limit their blessing to only those acceptable to the religion - two Jews, two Muslims, a man and a woman... But the state controls the legal union and that should not be limited by a religious point of view. The state does not have the right to discriminate. State sanctioned unions are not marriages and marriages are not state sanctioned unions. While there may be considerable overlap, there is no reason to believe one MUST beget the other.

If Elliott Spitzer wants civil unions in NY to be gay-friendly, I think he is right. Claiming the polls oppose such unions does not make the opposition to them right.

Conservatives should stand for what is right, not popular. It is a lesson that conservatives wanted to teach Congress and Bush on immigration, it should be a lesson conservatives learn for themselves on civil unions and marriage.

Impeachment

The calls for impeachment of the VP have increased in volume (if not in quality) and I think we should have impeachment hearings. As a matter of fact, I DEMAND impeachment hearings.

I think every Republican and conservative should strongly state that we support impeachment hearings. Victoria doesn't like me calling for impeachment because she says that I don't believe the VP (nor the President) has done anything wrong. I demand that if the left wants impeachment they should have to put on a set of hearings to PROVE their claims.

Republicans and conservatives should not be afraid of such a set of hearings. As a matter of fact, I can't think of a single thing Congress should spend its time on that is more important. And if it takes all of next year to get through those hearings, well, time well spent.

Pass it around. Time for impeachment hearings.















A more certain method of insuring Republican control of Congress and the Presidency in 2009 and beyond I can't think of....

UPDATE: Welcome Daily Pundit readers and thanks for the comment Bill...

Are we in trouble?

Bumped and updated:

Is the economy in trouble? Oil is almost $100 a barrel. Foreclosures are sky high. What is the truth? Here is my opinion:

Go to Starbucks and buy a latte. Pay $3 for 16 oz. That is $24 a gallon for coffee.
Go to the convenience store, buy a bottle of water. Pay $1.49 for a liter. That is $5.60 a gallon.

I drive about 35 miles a day on average, my car gets 26mpg. That is about $4.02 (@2.99/gal) for gas a day. And I don't drink bottled water or lattes.

There are over 118 million households. 68% own their own homes, so 80 million homes. Foreclosure filings do not always result in the loss of a home (50% in this area), figure this is a bad season and 68% lose their homes, 4 mill foreclosures * 68% = 2,720,000 homes lost, or about 3.4%. But those people are not going to be homeless, they will drive up demand for rentals, especially in harder hit areas.

This is not to suggest that high gas prices and foreclosures are not problems. They will create issues in the economy. Higher gas prices will cause fewer miles to be driven and reduce some discretionary spending, but not tons. Foreclosures will cause lower home prices, which will make moving happen less....If my home didn't appreciate in value, I might stay longer in it and add the features I wanted in a new home to my existing home.

Chaos theory in economic systems suggest that while the larger economy continues to chug along, certain segments will occasionally feel pain.

Only a significant act (and 9/11 barely touched the economy) will have an economy wide impact....short of a disaster of BIBLICAL proportions, there is nothing even close....

UPDATE 9am 11/07:
I want to make clear that the implications of chaotic behavior on economic systems does not say that pain will be minor, it can be quite bad, but that in a 7 or 8 TRILLION dollar economy, we need a multiple hundreds of billions of dollars event to even get noticed. In regions, you can have a very bad time without the national economy even noticing. Case in point, I came across this little item this morning: suburbs in Phoenix are getting hammered with foreclosures/forced sales.

Who ME?

When the Pastor of our church called all white people racist, I pulled the plug on giving any serious thought to any future utterings from her mouth. I ended my relationship with her church but continued my relationship with many of the congregation. I am nominally still a member, but we are discussing leaving.

The University of Delaware has made a similar proclamation, that all us White People are racists.

Frankly, I am sick of the demented, pathetic, self-loathing liberals that hoist that crap. I demand that if you are going to point to me and yell racist, that you back up that SLANDER with some evidence.

Can't? Didn't think so. Assholes.

Revenge

How many of the attacks on the soldier Beauchamp, author of some hideous libel on fellow soldiers in Iraq, were a call for revenge upon him? Really?

Rep. Pete Stark jumped the entire shark pond by suggesting last week that soldiers getting their heads blown off in Iraq was for the amusement of the President. He apologized this week.

O'Reilly of the Fox News Channel called Stark a patriot for apologizing. And he has gotten a lot of shit for it.

Michael Yon has posted a story about Beauchamp you need to read - if you don't already read Michael regularly, you should. His reporting from Iraq is the best balanced reporting available.

Forgive and never forget...something I tend to practice. All that is required is an apology. Stark apologized. I wouldn't call him a patriot for doing what is right. Beauchamp has apparently apologized to his comrades if I might infer from what Michael reported.

Beauchamp can write stories from Iraq if he wants, no one should believe a word he writes. Stark can talk all he wants about Iraq, but not a word should be paid the least bit of attention to. But neither deserve our further attention. Like all small people with a stage, both have proved their inability to justify the attention. It is a wasted effort, as is all revenge.

Housing prices

To my friend Tom Blumer at Bizzyblog: Tom, the numbers, they be a lyin' to ya.

Friends are trying to sell their house, two doors up, one street over. The house next to them, same style, size, one year newer, but without landscaping, sold for 315k last summer. Our friends had their home on the market for 3 months at 280k...no buyers, two lookers. They put it with a realtor, bumped the price up, had an open house, no one came. Two months with the broker, one showing. That house is only in the stats since going with the realtor, and the price they're asking represents a profit (not a big one) but it will not sell there, apparently.

A single example? Too close to the forest....maybe? But we do see people every week in trouble. Client bought house in 03. Lost job in late 06. Purchase: 157k On market for 165k, no buyers or lookers. Bankruptcy filing, trustee took house on condition (approved by court and mortgage lender that he would list it for NO MORE than 144k - he listed it for 147k). Owed 121k to lender. One offer, 120k, trustee countered at 135k, no deal. House is back in lenders hands.

Prices reported are for homes sold. The backlog represents a dangerous truth. Prices are going to continue down, alot, for a long time. And it is not because the market has been talked down, credit has dried up for the majority of people. Clients that recently lost their house had a $2500 a month mortgage payment, their GROSS income was 32k a year, and has been for at least 3 years? How did they get such a loan?

If your credit score is above 670, have a good payment history and at least 10, but preferrable 20% down, loans are available and rates are great. If your score is under 640, forget a loan unless you are putting down 30% or more. That is from a local broker. For the moment, subprime is dead, and that means a lot of people will not be able to buy, or refinance.

Something read: only a first time home buyer takes a home off the market. Otherwise, every buyer of a home, is selling a home.

I'm sorry, did I miss something?

Apparently, two banks from OTHER countries, have been authorized to borrow money from the United States Federal Reserve System. I realize we don't have a central bank like most countries, and that in general, the Fed is in fact private, however....

Just because those banks invested in our private individuals mortgages, does not mean our banking system needs to bail them out.....right??

Contract

Can anyone that reads this blog please tell me why, when faced with signing a contract with 30 or more pages of fine print, the vast majority of people in Wisconsin won't even bother to have an attorney LOOK at it????

Oh, and why do Real Estate Agents NOT recommend an attorney for every single one of their clients buying and selling a home??

An independent voice..

I was one of many voices (though quite alone in this area) that suggested a loss for Republicans in the last election would not be a bad thing. I also suggested that Republicans could sit out the 2006 elections given the lack of quality Republican candidates running.

I have also clearly stated that I consider myself an independent, that I no longer considered myself Republican.

That said, it would be a mistake for anyone to believe that I think not voting in 2008 was a good idea, or that voting for a democrat was also a good idea.

The next President will nominate one or more supreme court justices. Time for Republicans to understand that with the exception of the GWOT, no other issue is as important for conservatives than the nomination of supreme court justices like Roberts and Alito.

I will be voting Republican in 2008 and so should every conservative.

On a similar note...

If America is the evil empire of the left, can they point to a non-evil empire that they want America to aspire to?

Stupidity

For most of my adult life I have tried to understand opposing viewpoints. Think about it. Reasonable people can come to different conclusions about various topics despite viewing the same information.

However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to understand the stupidity of the far left. It is clear they either refuse to acknowledge information/facts that undercut their position, or they believe any information/facts that undercut their position are false regardless of the source.

Commentary and discussion about General Sanchez's speech to a room full of reporters where he absolutely blasted the media. Headlines however only note his relatively short blast at Bush.

ht: My Pet Jawa

Repubican Debate - #2

You can be a Republican and be against the war, however, you can NOT be a Republican Presidential Candidate and be against the war.

Ron Paul, yes, that means you. Please exit, stage left.

Republican Debate

I have finally watched a debate. If you are so inclined, there are discussions and comments on two of my favorite sites, Powerline and Townhall.

One of the things noted was online polls of Republican debates are heavily influenced by Ron Paul supporters. Frankly, those polls reminded me of something...

Do you think Ron Paul and Sanjai are related?

Western Values

I am going to do something I seldom do....link:

The debate motion: We should not be reluctant to assert the superiority of Western values.

When : 6:45pm at Royal Geographical Society, London.

Ok, no one here would have been able to make it, but what makes this interesting is that it is even a matter of debate! No, I mean, it is great that someone doesn't automatically dismiss the idea that Western values ARE SUPERIOR!

What was great was that voting after the debate indicated over 60% voted for the motion!

ht: Little Green Footballs

The 2nd Amendment

First, let me state: I do not own a gun - that could kill or even bruise someone.

Second, if I want a gun, I want to be able to have a gun.

Why?

To make sure that I can shoot anyone who thinks I should not have a gun...especially if they are "from the government and are here to help..."

Bankruptcy Reform Act

From 1998 until 2005, the lending industry complained that bankruptcy laws needed changing because consumers were being allowed to game the system: run up large credit debts and then discharge them in bankruptcy. Consumers were described as deadbeats, irresponsible, and in a few cases, 'thieves'.

Well, the Bankruptcy Reform Act (BARF for those of us in the biz) passed in 2005 with a fair amount of publicity over the resulting wave of bankruptcy filings...some 2 million filed that year, a 33% increase over the year before. Many people predicted what would happen after the law passed and in large part, they were right. Let's look at a few.

Credit counseling was mandated but considered a waste of time, a burden on consumers and a boon for the credit counseling industry - an industry supported by their parasitic relationship with lenders. Reports have shown that the credit counseling has been of no particular use. 97% of consumers taking the counseling had no means to repay any of their debt (study from earlier in 2006) yet almost 40% actually filed chapter 13...meaning they tried anyway. Some have noted that as many as 10% that have taken the counseling did not file, meaning that the counseling helped them in some other way. There is no evidence that those that did not file entered into alternative debt management programs. It is equally possible - I might suggest considerably more likely - that they simply could not AFFORD to file bankruptcy due to the increased costs. The credit counseling industry did benefit by getting many, many new clients, but they are overburdened by the flood of people paying a small fee (small in relationship to their claimed costs).

Means test: This has been a disaster. This was supposed to be a bright line test to determine the potential for a debtor to repay debts. More than 85% of filers pass the means test - they have insufficient income to repay debts, BUT, almost 40% of debtors are filing chapter 13s!

Early last year, less than 6 months after passage of a 'perfect' bill requiring no amendments, Congress amended the law to allow charitable contributions into the means test...leading the way was Senator Hatch....consigliere of the original bill. Further, there have been complaints that the test lets debtors with high secured debts off the hook. It is true, the more secured debt you have, the less you will end up paying to unsecured creditors (the main supporters of the reform). The means test has led to many interesting outcomes, including a ruling that a family with over $2500 a month in disposable income needed only to pay $1500 a month as specified by the means test.

Filings would go down: Duh. For the three months after the law went into effect, filings were minimal compared to previous years. Many that would have filed anyway in 06, filed before the law changed. But filings have steadily increased. Even with increased costs, document burdens and longer preparation times, filings have already reached levels seen in 2000/2001 with no indication that they are leveling off. The current rate of increase, if maintained, will find filings near pre-BARF levels by the end of next year. There is still a strong perception that bankruptcy is no longer available...as that perception wears off, filings will grow faster.

Those that need bankruptcy will still be able to file: Many attorneys that filed bankruptcies before, have stopped. Fees have double in almost all areas (higher in some) and the filing fees and counseling fees have added to the burden of those least able to afford it. Too broke to go broke. Fewer attorneys, higher fees, higher costs, heavier burdens. This has fallen dis proportionally on those least able to afford it. It appears that 90% of bankruptcy filers are BELOW their states median income. The drop off in filings are right in this group.

Lenders would reduce interest rates: HA, HAHAHA, have you seen any reduction? Proponents said that easy bankruptcy added $400 to the cost of everyone. Apparently, only the lenders have benefited from the 'reduction' in this cost as across the board, profits have never been higher...except....

now. Foreclosures, defaults on mortgages, are creaming lenders. Bankruptcy might help debtors keep their homes and default on less mortgages, but bankruptcy is less available and those lenders involved in mortgages also are getting hammered. Many will file bankruptcy, because you see...the Reform Act of 2005, all but ignored Chapter 11 changes...

Welcome to the bankruptcy court lenders....attorney fees are paid first....

Speaking Truth to Power

There has been a lot written about the President of Columbia's speech calling the President of Iran a 'petty and cruel dictator' as speaking truth to power. Frankly, that's crap. When you speak truth to power, it is to it's face. Stupid though they may be, the protesters that stand up in Congress or at press conferences and call out their targets are speaking to power - I don't always agree they are speaking truth however - are living examples of the consequences our Founding Fathers knew all too well. Speaking truth to power has consequences, and absent those actual or potential consequences, what you get is a President of Columbia University jabbering like an adult in a Peanut's sketch.

THIS is speaking truth to power.

A show of support

Charlie Schutze is running for a position on the Supreme Court of Wisconsin. I support his run.

Charlie's website is here . I have known Charlie for a number of years as his law practice and Victoria's have considerable overlap. I have also occasionally done administrative work for him. I have found him to be considerate and dedicated to his family, clients, staff and community.

Daily, sole practitioner attorneys often provide the type of legal assistance to the public that larger firms tout as their pro bono work. Unlike attorneys in large firms that 'specialize' in particular fields, sole practitioners have to be experienced in the broad range of issues facing individuals, families and small businesses today. A sole practitioner might have a father seeking custody, a wife seeking a divorce, someone seeking help dealing with a DUI, long time clients getting estate planning, couples buying or selling a home and a parent accused of neglect. Experience dealing with the many facets of the legal world is exactly the type of experience we need in judges.

Charlie's opponent was appointed to the position and has created a mess with opinions based not in law but in outcome. And, after the debacle of the last election (our most recent addition to the Supreme Court is facing serious ethics charges - raised during the run-up to the election but apparently ignored - that may cost her the seat she spent over a million dollars trying to win), we need someone that is not beholden to either the trial lawyers nor the corporations that donated millions to the election of a judge.

Please consider him as we move towards election day.

And now a word about marriage

I am not prone to sharing links with people. I offer my opinion either on other sites or here. Linking is supposed to be the currency of the blogssphere and frankly, I seem to be one of the skinflints.

Most of you know that I am a conservative, especially in matters financial. Also, as many of you know, I am agnostic and in a long term lesbian relationship (14 years this Thanksgiving). This means that in some matters, I diverge from 'traditional' republican views. One of those is gay marriage. I am opposed to government getting involved in marriage. If the government is going to license the union of two adults, then discrimination is inappropriate. Marriage, as most view it, is a religious rite. I think churches and religions can make whatever rules they want about marriage and unions and the state should keep it's nose out of it. So, I have stood for civil unions, as long as everyone has a civil union and that 'contract' is the basis for government actions (property, custody, taxes....etc). We are not getting there.

The Mayor of San Diego made an announcement recently. After running against gay marriage, he was handed a resolution supporting it. Here was his press conference concerning his decision . I agree with him....please consider your own positions.

Saudi ....duplicity?

Is there any real reason to be friends with Saudi Arabia? I know all the conspiracy kooks that claim Bush is bought and paid for...but have we been bought and paid for?

I think I am going to renew a request to turn Mecca into glass...

But, sometimes I can get the first word...

Some pinheads in Iran have issued 10 questions for Lee Bollinger of Columbia University. I take my shot at answering them. One comment to start. Peoples in the Middle East (and many other places) expect respect and hospitality for guests. Bollinger was insulting, regardless of what he may actually have meant or said, the Middle East will consider his behavior very, very insulting. Good.

The questions:

1- Why did the US media put you under so much pressure to prevent Mr. Ahmadinejad from delivering his speech at Columbia University? And why have American TV networks been broadcasting hours of news reports insulting our president while refusing to allow him the opportunity to respond? Is this not against the principle of freedom of speech?

First, because Mr. Ahmadinejad has insulted the United States repeatedly in the past. First as a ringleader in the unlawful kidnapping of Americans and holding them hostage in 1979-1980. Then, as a leader of a country that is actively supplying material assistance to terrorists in Iraq. Such a platform as a University is well above the respect that should be granted such a despicable person. Mr. Ahmadinejad had an opportunity to speak after Mr. Bollinger, that is all that was offered. No media outlet is required to carry opposing viewpoints or be forced to grant Mr. Ahmadinejad additional broadcast time because he wants it. He can purchase the time if he so chooses. THAT is free speech....you get what you pay for.


2- Why, in 1953, did the US administration overthrow the Iran's national government under Dr Mohammad Mosaddegh and go on to support the Shah's dictatorship?

As I was quick to bring up the past, let me offer an opinion here also. In 1952 and 53, Dr. Mosaddegh was rapidly approaching the communist principles supported by and encouraged by the Soviet Union. Such principles were a direct threat to the United States and given the geographic location of Iran, a security threat to oil supplies. Such a turn towards communism was simply not allowable. The choice was not made easily, nor accomplished well, but the result speaks for itself. Communism was/is a dangerous political/economic system both for the world in general and for the people suffering under it specifically. I am not suggesting the Iranian people were better off under the Shah, but they were better off than under a communist rule, even if they stupidly choose such a rule.

3- Why did the US support the blood-thirsty dictator Saddam Hussein during the 1980-88 Iraqi-imposed war on Iran, considering his reckless use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers defending their land and even against his own people?

First, Iran had openly declared war on the US, so of course we were going to support your enemies. Iran had shown no particular desire to adhere to international law, no reason for us to withhold support of someone fighting you. Dictators is what we did, because the alternative was communists. Easier to control one bonehead than an entire populace of boneheads. We admit it was not a good choice, but the alternative was empire building and multiple wars...Europe tried that for 300 years with no success...we have tried a different path with more success. And as for Hussein, we have now rectified that error...why are you not happy about that?

4- Why is the US putting pressure on the government elected by the majority of Palestinians in Gaza instead of officially recognizing it? And why does it oppose Iran 's proposal to resolve the 60-year-old Palestinian issue through a general referendum?

a) the people of Gaza continue to lob missiles into Israel. The 'elected' terrorists of Gaza seek to destroy Israel. Just because an election - even a completely fair, open and honest one - is held doesn't mean we accept the consequences of such an election. Gaza decided that they want to kill Jews and destroy Israel. They held an election to prove it. So WHAT? Mob rule isn't just or fair. As long as stupid people vote for stupid things, stupid elections will be ignored by more intelligent people. b) see a.

5- Why has the US military failed to find Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden even with all its advanced equipment? How do you justify the old friendship between the Bush and Bin Laden families and their cooperation on oil deals? How can you justify the Bush administration's efforts to disrupt investigations concerning the September 11 attacks?

a). Frankly, we could find and kill OBL if we acted like ...well, Muslims...indiscriminately killing anything that moves. We try to be more selective in our killing fields. That is why OBL and other muslim mufsid hid as women, hid with women and children. They have no honor, they engage in hirabah. b) We try to hold the people actually responsible for terrorism accountable, rather than their whole family. the Bin Laden family is quite large, no need to tar and feather all of them. Further, we do believe engagement is better than war when possible. When people have a stake in commerce, they are less likely to blow it up. c) I am uncertain what efforts you speak of....maybe it is the same type of investigations into the holocaust you are so fond of?

6- Why does the US administration support the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) despite the fact that the group has officially and openly accepted the responsibility for numerous deadly bombings and massacres in Iran and Iraq? Why does the US refuse to allow Iran 's current government to act against the MKO's main base in Iraq?

Freedom fighters are always in the eyes of the beholders eh? Your support of terrorists in Iraq is ok, but our support of terrorists in Iran is not. Awww...too bad. Also, given the reporting quality of Iranian media, I would be remiss if I didn't question "massacres"?

7- Was the US invasion of Iraq based on international consensus and did international institutions support it? What was the real purpose behind the invasion which has claimed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives? Where are the weapons of mass destruction that the US claimed were being stockpiled in Iraq?

a) yes. UN support, multiple country support....I know you are not a big fan of research that actually deals with facts...but this one is pretty obvious. b) the real purpose was to provide the US military with sufficient bases and in place assets to attack you. We don't have the 'balls' to do it yet, but you are a people that keep giving! c) 177 tonnes of chemical weapons have been found. There are reports of massive movement of materials to Syria prior to our entrance into Iraq.

8- Why do America's closest allies in the Middle East come from extremely undemocratic governments with absolutist monarchical regimes?

Because the alternatives are extremely undemocratic governments with absolutist religious regimes hostile to non-muslim countries? Of course, ISRAEL is not a monarchy....nor is Turkey...or India...

9- Why did the US oppose the plan for a Middle East free of unconventional weapons in the recent session of the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors despite the fact the move won the support of all members other than Israel?

When you outlaw the guns, only the outlaws will have guns. Right now, only Israel has unconventional weapons, though there are some states trying to get them. So the impact is not to prevent the weapons, but to disarm Israel. I know you THINK we are stupid, but...

10- Why is the US displeased with Iran's agreement with the IAEA and why does it openly oppose any progress in talks between Iran and the agency to resolve the nuclear issue under international law?

Because such agreements have worked out so well in the past! A lie is not deception if the person being lied to is deceptive, right? If your country actually lived up to the agreements it makes, we might be more open, however, your country has proved repeatedly that such agreements are worth exactly the paper they are written on.

Finally, we would like to express our readiness to invite you and other scientific delegations to our country. A trip to Iran would allow you and your colleagues to speak directly with Iranians from all walks of life including intellectuals and university scholars. You could then assess the realities of Iranian society without media censorship before making judgments about the Iranian nation and government.

Yes, but could we talk to your women and homosexuals?

I don't get the last word....

THERE ARE NO FREEDOMS WITHOUT LIMIT.....what part of that do you not understand?

Free Speeck

Does anyone agree with me that before we offer someone like the President of Iran our freedom of speech, he should be required, you know, to offer free speech at home?

Ok, maybe that is too hard. But someone from the Kos thinks she is actually turned on by the President of Iran DESPITE the fact that if she actually lived in Iran she would be killed out of hand for being lesbian...hello?

The Columbia faculty wants to hear from the President of Iran, but they don't want to actually LISTEN to him....because, you know....the President of Iran is for the genocide of Jews, the destruction of Israel, the murder (sorry the cleansing) of homosexuals and the destruction of the US....but he may just be 'posturing'.

The entire left wing of the American populace is like that kid in the insurance commercial when his dad, cleaning up the cornpuffs, asks his child (with the orange all over his face, hands and shirt) if he was responsible for the mess? No, is the response.

I am beginning to agree with the left. We brought the 9/11 hijackers down on ourselves. We invited them into this country and gave them our freedoms...none of the attendant responsibilities however and it appears we are going to continue to do so in the future. Columbia University said it would have invited Adolf Hitler had it the opportunity before Germany attacked Poland. You have to wonder how they would answer the question: if you could go back in time to just before WWII and kill Hitler, would you? It appears that many would say nope, they would join him in a lively conversation about how Jews were ruining the world and how French wine would taste with the veal.

Interest Rates

People, I don't care if our mortgage rates drop to 3%, adjustable rate mortgages are based (almost exclusively from our experience) on LIBOR, the London Interbank Rate!!

This week Month ago Year ago 1 Month LIBOR Rate 5.80 5.59 5.33 3 Month LIBOR Rate 5.70 5.53 5.39 6 Month LIBOR Rate 5.49 5.40 5.43

THIS is what is driving the ARMS....and the FED has NO control over it....

Patriotism

There is no need to question the Left's patriotism. It is apparent, it lacks any such emotion.

Global Warming Hot Spots

Read over the weekend:

"Scientists studying global warming have been reluctant to specify any particular area as contributing more to global warming. Although quick to specify general classes of emitters of greenhouse gases such as factories and vehicles, no specific location has ever been identified. In a leaked report from the U.N., this reporter has learned of three specific hot spots that apparently are causing as much as 15% of all the global warming greenhouse gases. The report suggests that a strong effort be made to limit gases from these three areas. Further reductions for the rest of the world would be minimal. They are: an area just north of Los Angeles, mid-town Manhattan and Washington DC. A fourth, minor area in Belgium, appears to be contained but a significant contributor."

Link is not working but I would suggest holding their breaths until everyone else gets on board with greenhouse gas reductions...

Gay Muslim Men

I believe it is possible, even likely, than fanatic Muslim men are gay. Consider this: they are usually unmarried, living with other Muslim men and are childless.

Also, who else needs 72 virgins for sex but men so unschooled in sex that each new partner needs to be equally unschooled?

I recall someone once commenting that terrorists are less than 10% of the Muslim population. Seems to be a coincidence but I think it bears out my theory..

Muslim jihadists are gay.

Ethanol

Why would anyone support ethanol:

1. It costs more to produce than gasoline
2. It takes more ethanol than gasoline for a car to travel each mile
3. It takes 1.5 gallons of gasoline to make 1 gallon of ethanol
4. It uses more water than gasoline to produce
5. It uses food resources to produce - increasing the cost of foodstuffs
6. It relies heavily on corn - corn is more water intensive and requires more fertilizers (made from petroleum products)
7. It is only cost viable with government subsidies - subsidies on the production side not capital side so an increase in volume equals and increase in subsidy costs
8. Less corn food production means higher prices for just about everything sweet

Ethanol means higher gas prices, lower fuel economies, higher food costs and higher government spending.

We have built more ethanol refineries in the last 5 years than oil refineries in the last 30.
We could replace ALL middle east oil if we opened all restricted American fields (Alaska, California and Florida coastlines)

Housing market help

There has been a lot of talk about how to help the thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure as ARMs reset over the next 18 months. The following idea has been floating around and needs serious consideration:

When a person files bankruptcy, contracts can be modified or eliminated EXCEPT for the mortgage of the debtor's primary residence. If this portion of the law were changed to allow the interest rate to be frozen during the bankruptcy proceedings, three things could happen:

1. Only those people that need the help would get the help - means tested provisions of bankruptcy;

2. Only those people that are facing the loss of their primary residence would get help (investors would be out of luck);

3. Debtors would get assistance getting the rest of their debt situation straightened out so that when they came out of bankruptcy and the mortgage would resume it's normal rate of interest, they would be in better financial shape to handle it.

LIBOR

Did you know that most adjustable rate mortgages are based on the London Interbank Lending Rate? Did you know that the rate has increased almost a full point in just the last 30 days? and almost 1.5% since the spring?

Finally, did you know that almost without exception, ARMs will reset to rate OVER 10%, in many cases as high as 12 or 13%

Inflation is 2-3%......not a bad spread on a secured loan.