Goldman Sachs Gets Justice – Justice Kagan – A White, Lesbian, Obama

What is most striking about soon to be Justice Kagan is how much she mimics the worst of Barack Obama. She is an careerist egghead with little practical adult experience in the world other than in the distorted and distorting world of the privileged. Career advancement has been achieved via networks and connections in rarefied academic circles not due to actual achievement. There are “community organizer” moments with these types of characters, but as we, via John Judis, have discussed before, these temporary brushes with the “community” are the “sowing your wild oats” phase before a return to the “more sober and sedate occupations appropriate to their social background and education“.

Recently, much was made by the Obama thugs when CBS news briefly mentioned that Elana Kagan is a lesbian. That “revelation” was about as shocking to those who know Kagan or have read “Gay” blogs, as the revelation that Barack Obama is half black. Gay activists will cheer this fact in the same way that African-Americans cheered Obama. But Kagan might disappoint the Gay community. In the same way that Obama has produced little for African-Americans other than opportunity to cheer (and unemployment opportunities for all strata), Kagan’s Gay days might be past:

“The meme has taken hold that Kagan is a stealth candidate who has avoided taking positions on important constitutional or other issues throughout her career.

But on one issue of critical importance to the left — the constitutional right to same-sex marriage, Kagan has staked out a very clear and unequivocal position: There is no constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

In the course of her nomination for Solicitor General, Kagan filled out questionnaires on a variety of issues. While she bobbed and weaved on many issues, with standard invocations of the need to follow precedent and enforce presumptively valid statutes, on the issue of same-sex marriage Kagan was unequivocal.

In response to a question from Sen. John Cornyn (at page 28 of her Senate Judiciary Questionnaire), Kagan stated flat out that there was no constitutional right for same sex couples to marry (emphasis mine):

1. As Solicitor General, you would be charged with defending the Defense of Marriage Act. That law, as you may know, was enacted by overwhelming majorities of both houses of Congress (85-14 in the Senate and 342-67 in the House) in 1996 and signed into law by President Clinton.

a. Given your rhetoric about the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy—you called it “a profound wrong—a moral injustice of the first order”—let me ask this basic question: Do you believe that there is a federal constitutional right to samesex marriage?

Answer: There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage. [snip]

This doesn’t mean that Kagan opposes gay marriage. But she clearly believes it is a matter for the political process, not a constitutional right.

While it is not clear what view the other Justices have, it is likely that a Kagan on the Court will put an end to any ultimate chance of success in the federal lawsuit lawsuit filed by David Boies and Ted Olson to have California Prop. 8 declared unconstitutional. [snip]

In California, gay marriage is dead … unless and until the people of California vote otherwise. In other states, the battle again will be at the ballot box or in state court; the federal court doors effectively have been shut. The hope of a nationally recognized right to gay marriage is over.

People who oppose recognizing a constitutional right to gay marriage routinely are called bigots and homophobes in academia and progressive circles. It will be interesting to see if these labels will be put on Kagan.”

Kagan, like Obama, will remain free of labels, at least from the “creative class” Nutroots. The Nutroots will protect Obama’s choice much as they have protected Obama. No questions will be raised by the Nutroots over the Obama style lack of substance in Kagan. No eyebrows will be arched by the Nutroots at the lack of actual accomplishment, other than self-advancement, by Kagan.

Harriet Miers, an abandoned George W. Bush appointee, had a stellar career too. But conservatives saw she would not represent their interests and she was rejected. The conservatives saw that Miers had no “clear record on issues likely to be encountered as a Supreme Court Justice. The O’Conner replacement was the very conservative Samuel Alito.

The Nutroots and what passes for the Democratic Left these days will not have the fortitude conservatives displayed. The Nutroot Left will gull themselves with the Obama style Hope that somehow Kagan will fulfill their own delusional projections in the same way they deluded themselves with tabula rasa Obama

The Kagan “brilliance” and high quality “legal mind” must be taken without evidence. Just like Obama. The results might just be the same. Ladder climber Kagan, like ladder climber Obama does not have much to show for all that “brilliance”. What we are left with is a life in snob appeal Harvard but not much else. It’s Obama lite. A life at Harvard with few footprints:

“Imagine a candidate for the U.S. Senate who has never taken a public stand on almost any policy issue. Imagine that her campaign consists of asking people for their support because, according to friends and colleagues, the candidate is smart, fair, and good to others. When her friends are asked what her views are on various political matters, they reply that they don’t know—but that they’re confident she’d make an excellent senator.

This bizarre hypothetical closely resembles the actual campaign to put Elena Kagan on the Supreme Court.[snip]

Unfortunately, nobody seems to know what Kagan’s views are on most political issues, nor does anyone know what she believes about how judges ought to interpret the Constitution, how much deference courts should give to Congress and state legislatures, and what role the judiciary should play in checking the powers of the executive branch. We don’t know because she hasn’t told us. Indeed, Tom Goldstein, a Washington lawyer and publisher of SCOTUSblog, describes Kagan as “extraordinarily—almost artistically—careful. I don’t know anyone who has had a conversation with her in which she expressed a personal conviction on a question of constitutional law in the past decade.”

Would conservatives accept a blank slate? Will Americans trust a Justice widely considered a stealth candidate whose stealth aims are known only to her career advisers? The Nutroots will argue that Kagan will wink and nod, like Obama, but eventually be on “our side”.

“What’s more, various groups who respect Kagan personally and professionally have projected their own views onto her “blank slate”; progressives believe she’s a liberal, centrists assume she’s a moderate, and conservatives say she isn’t a bleeding heart.”

Wasn’t that the entire Obama campaign as waged by the Nutroots? How has that turned out?

“Kagan has published very little: three scholarly articles, two shorter essays, two brief book reviews, and two other minor pieces. [snip]

In contrast, Kagan’s opinions on these matters remain unknown. A nominee, even one who has never been a judge, doesn’t have to be a graphomaniac, but Kagan’s publications consist largely of cautious descriptions and categorizations of current legal doctrines. And, quite self-consciously, they lack almost any critical component. [snip]

(That Kagan’s academic writings tell us so little about what we want to know when evaluating a Supreme Court nominee is especially problematic given that she hasn’t published for a general audience; we can’t find evidence of her views in the mainstream media, either.)

And yet, despite her largely blank record of opinion, Kagan’s candidacy for the High Court has provoked almost ecstatic enthusiasm from various current and former colleagues on both sides of the political aisle. She has been praised for her “brilliance,” for her “many remarkable qualities,” and for being “scrupulously fair-minded” to people of various political views. Yet no one, not even her biggest admirers, can offer any real evidence for what sort of judge she would make, or which side of major legal issues she would fall on.”

Sounds like Barack Obama. And that’s not a good thing. And it’s a lifetime position.

“The contrasting assumptions about Kagan’s views continue to bump up against each other in media coverage of her pending nomination because we lack definitive evidence of what she really believes. Perhaps her views will become clearer during her confirmation process in the Senate, and perhaps, if confirmed, she will make an excellent justice.

But, for a president to appoint someone to a lifetime position, wouldn’t it be preferable to know what she believes on the biggest issues of the day—and how she arrived at those conclusions?

Would conservatives accept a blank slate of nothingness? Dimocrats did when the Dimocratic establishment gifted Obama the nomination and Obama Dimocrats will perform the same “please humiliate me further” routine with Kagan. Glenn Greenwald:

“It’s anything but surprising that President Obama has chosen Elena Kagan to replace John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court. Nothing is a better fit for this White House than a blank slate, institution-loyal, seemingly principle-free careerist who spent the last 15 months as the Obama administration’s lawyer vigorously defending every one of his assertions of extremely broad executive authority. The Obama administration is filled to the brim with exactly such individuals — as is reflected by its actions and policies — and this is just one more to add to the pile. The fact that she’ll be replacing someone like John Paul Stevens and likely sitting on the Supreme Court for the next three decades or so makes it much more consequential than most, but it is not a departure from the standard Obama approach.

The New York Times this morning reports that “Mr. Obama effectively framed the choice so that he could seemingly take the middle road by picking Ms. Kagan, who correctly or not was viewed as ideologically between Judge Wood on the left and Judge Garland in the center.” That’s consummate Barack Obama. The Right appoints people like John Roberts and Sam Alito, with long and clear records of what they believe because they’re eager to publicly defend their judicial philosophy and have the Court reflect their values. Beltway Democrats do the opposite: the last thing they want is to defend what progressives have always claimed is their worldview, either because they fear the debate or because they don’t really believe those things, so the path that enables them to avoid confrontation of ideas is always the most attractive, even if it risks moving the Court to the Right.

Why would the American public possibly embrace a set of beliefs when even its leading advocates are unwilling to publicly defend them and instead seek to avoid that debate at every turn?

Disagree or not with the conservative Right or Republicans, but they are not the debased cowardly hypocrites on what passes these days for the Left.

When Hillary Clinton was running for president the Dimocrats and their Nutroots yelped daily about the “unitary executive”. Now, the Nutroots embrace and embarrass themselves in extolling the virtues of a “unitary executive” advocate to be placed on the High Court.

“If you were Barack Obama, would you want someone on the Supreme Court who has bravely insisted on the need for Constitutional limits on executive authority, resolutely condemned the use of Terrorism fear-mongering for greater government power, explicitly argued against military commissions and indefinite detention, repeatedly applied the progressive approach to interpreting the Constitution on a wide array of issues, insisted upon the need for robust transparency and checks and balances, and demonstrated a willingness to defy institutional orthodoxies even when doing so is unpopular?  Of course you wouldn’t.  Why would you want someone on the Court who has expressed serious Constitutional and legal doubts about your core policies?  Do you think that an administration that just yesterday announced it wants legislation to dilute Miranda rights in the name of Scary Terrorists — and has seized the power to assassinate American citizens with no due process — wants someone like Diane Wood on the Supreme Court?

One final thought about Kagan for now.  As I said from the beginning, the real opportunity to derail her nomination was before it was made, because the vast majority of progressives and Democrats will get behind anyone, no matter who it is, chosen by Obama.  That’s just how things work.  They’ll ignore most of the substantive concerns that have been raised about her, cling to appeals to authority, seize on personal testimonials from her Good Progressive friends, and try to cobble together blurry little snippets to assure themselves that she’s a fine pick.  In reality, no matter what they know about her (and, more to the point, don’t know), they’ll support her because she’s now Obama’s choice, which means, by definition, that she’s a good addition to the Supreme Court.  Our politics is nothing if not tribal, and the duty of Every Good Democrat is now to favor Kagan’s confirmation.  Conservatives refused to succumb to those rules and ended up with Sam Alito instead of Harriet Miers, but they had a much different relationship to George Bush than progressives have to Obama (i.e., conservatives — as they proved several times late in Bush’s second term [Miers, immigration, Dubai Ports] — were willing to oppose their leader whey they disagreed).  The White House knows that progressives will never try to oppose any important Obama initiative, and even if they were inclined, they lack the power to do so (largely because unconditional support guarantees impotence).”

The PINOs who sold out principles for the Cult Of Obama will do so again. The Republican/Conservative right will laugh at what Barack Obama has served up in his cowardly attempts to not fight for anything:

“Kagan may have had a sterling reputation as a law school dean, but as a jurist, she’s a mediocrity simply on the basis that she has no experience at all in that position. There is an argument to be made to appoint people outside of the realm of judges to the Supreme Court to get real-world perspective (the Constitution doesn’t require that an appointee be an attorney, let alone a judge), but very few people would look at Kagan’s career as anything but academic and insider politics. While Kagan may be the least objectionable of Obama’s potential appointees, the truth is that she’s a lot like Obama — an academic with no experience for the position she seeks, with a profound lack of intellectual work in her CV.”

Indeed, in some quarters, Kagan’s nothingness is now hailed as a virtue:

“That might seem like an odd qualification for a Supreme Court justice. But it means she—and the White House—don’t have to worry about explaining a lot of persnickety legal opinions. You know, the kind that would prove she actually would be the sort of justice that Obama’s Democratic base would like.

In fact, Kagan has no obvious paper trail that makes for sound-bite attacks. Her academic articles are ponderous and abstruse, not Fox News fodder. And she has managed to work in both the Obama and Clinton administrations without marking herself indelibly as a liberal. That turns her lack of judicial experience into an asset. True, she’s not an outsider in the mold of, say, Earl Warren or Sandra Day O’Connor—she doesn’t bring real-world political experience, as they did. (Warren was governor of California, while O’Connor served in the Arizona state senate.) She came to her present job from the deanship of Harvard Law School. This is a different kind of alternative path: It comes straight out of the Ivy League elite but skips the usual last step of federal appellate judge.”

That “stealth candidate” “sort of justice that Obama’s Democratic base would like” argument is the old ‘Obama has a secret brilliant plan but he has to keep it quiet’ argument so beloved by the Nutroots Left.

Elena Kagan will no doubt be confirmed. Why shouldn’t she be? There will be no opposition from the Obama Dimocrats. There will be only lacerating cat and mouse games from the Republicans. Conservatives will chortle as they note with glee the many targets for their soon to be well aimed darts:

-It is also unclear that a Justice Kagan would be an adequately independent check on executive excesses. She has argued in favor of greatly enhanced presidential control over the bureaucracy, which is concerning in light of President Obama’s unprecedented centralization of power in the White House.

-Dean Kagan has argued that nominees to the Supreme Court should undergo a searching inquiry into the nominee’s substantive views of the law, and should comment particular issues. If nominated, it will be interesting to see whether Dean Kagan remains faithful to this prescription in answering the Committee’s questions.”

Nominee Kagan will violate her earlier views about Supreme Court Justices actually answering questions at her nomination hearings. About Goldman Sachs there will not be much for her to say. Her nomination says it all.

In 2009 it was revealed that “Kagan served on a Goldman advisory council between 2005 and 2008, with the task of providing expert “analysis and advice to Goldman Sachs and its clients.” This news was disclosed by Kagan during her confirmation hearings for Solicitor General. We are now in May of 2010, having experienced the latest financial shocks, this time from Europe. Last month Goldman Sachs was accused of fraud by the Securities and Exchange Commission in regard to subprime mortgages.

After all the financial skulduggery Americans have witnessed, it was assumed that Goldman Sachs’ name was “toxic”. What better way to rebut that claim and restore the prestige of Goldman Sachs than to appoint to the Supreme Court, at this moment, someone with ties to that financial behemoth? Goldman Sachs will get its tarnished reputation polished with the appointment of its very own Justice at the Supreme Court. What a way to communicate to Americans that “you don’t matter”. The world belongs to Goldman Sachs.

The Republican Party this week, under pressure from the Tea Party movement gave the boot, ignominiously, to a sitting Republican senator – a display of anger towards a Republican who was conservative but did not represent the conservative movement with sufficient clarity. Would the Democratic Left ever successfully pull off such a move? The Nutroots tried with Lieberman and now he is stronger than ever. Even Eric Holder was forced to admit that the Arizona law on illegal immigrants is “not racist”. Republicans/Conservatives fight, the Left whines.

This morning Barack Obama introduced Elena Kagan to the nation with an anecdote. That anecdote recalls the moment when a wholly unprepared Solicitor General Kagan faced Justice Scalia during the Citizens United argument. That moment does not speak well for Kagan when she has to actually outwit and outfight Justice Scalia a few seats away.

According to Barack Obama, when she clerked for Thurgood Marshall her nickname given to her by the historically gigantic Justice, was “Shorty”. What remains of the Left better hope that Marshall was referring to Kagan’s height, not her legal stature.


81 thoughts on “Goldman Sachs Gets Justice – Justice Kagan – A White, Lesbian, Obama


    “The reality is that Democrats, including liberals, will accept and push whomever Obama picks.”

    That’s liberal University of California legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, explaining to the Daily Caller that President Barack Obama’s failure to nominate a “Scalia of the left” to the Supreme Court won’t be a deal breaker for the president’s liberal base.

  2. “Imagine a candidate for the U.S. Senate who has never taken a public stand on almost any policy issue. Imagine that her campaign consists of asking people for their support because, according to friends and colleagues, the candidate is smart, fair, and good to others. When her friends are asked what her views are on various political matters, they reply that they don’t know—but that they’re confident she’d make an excellent senator.

    Imagine a senator that starts his job by voting present most of the time, has community organizing as his only work experience, pretends to be a professor but only taught a few classes at best and then because his father is black, he is qualified to be the President of the United States.

    Who would have thunk????

  3. / is good today:
    Orly Taitz is running for Sec. of State of California.
    bwahahaaa if she was elected 😉

  4. / is good today:
    Orly Taitz is running for Sec. of State of California.
    bwahahaaa if she was elected 😉

  5. I pay my cable bill
    My cable company then sends an amount of money based on the audience to the channels it carries
    So am I in effect paying for msnbc to exist?
    Product boycotts have worked in the past and it really annoys me to think that that trash news organization gets a quarter out of every bill I pay.
    I find it obscene that I am in anyway contributing to such a fiasco.
    What can I do?
    Cancel my cable?
    Don’t know how many tea party members there are but I am sure the realization that collectively their cable bills keep that pathetic network on the air might prove efficacious.
    With everything being digital and the simplicity of subscribing to pay stations why shopuldn’t we be able to unsubscribe to channels we find worthless or offfensive?
    Thoughts anyone?

  6. shadowfax,
    As I mentioned before, some Obots I spoke to, didn’t vote for Hillary because Bill cheated on her!!! (Believe me, I sure gave them a piece of my mind and they won’t soon forget it.)

    Is it just me or does this statement (which is true) sound bizarre?? If we dissect this, we can say they did not vote for Hillary because Bill sinned. These are the people who voted for the sinner Barack Obama, the gangsta! These bots have a flawed mind!

  7. admin: great analogy! I was wondering what your take would be on Kagan…isn’t it scary that Obama is picking the supreme court. It is also sickening!

  8. Just wandered over to the dinky Kos and see their posted favorable vs unfav for their dear leader isn’t looking too darn healthy in the land of the obots:

    55% favorable towards dear leader
    41& the Kool-aid is worn off and this guy is bad news

  9. I found this on Daily PUMA:

    Kagan thesis lamented decline of socialism. ‘Sad’ development for those who ‘still wish to change America’

    Aaron Klein, Jerusalem bureau chief for World Net Daily, writes from New York:

    In her at Princeton, President Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court, Elena Kagan, lamented the decline of socialism in the country as “sad” for those who still hope to “change America.”

    Titled “To the Final Conflict: Socialism in New York City, 1900-1933,” Kagan opined that infighting caused the decline of the early socialist movement. She asked why the “greatness” of socialism was not reemerging as a major political force.

    “In our own times, a coherent socialist movement is nowhere to be found in the United States. Americans are more likely to speak of a golden past than of a golden future, of capitalism’s glories than of socialism’s greatness,” wrote Kagan, Obama’s solicitor general.

    “Why, in a society by no means perfect, has a radical party never attained the status of a major political force? Why, in particular, did the socialist movement never become an alternative to the nation’s established parties?” she asked.

    In the senior thesis, Kagan, who graduated from Princeton in 1981, addressed infighting in the socialist movement.

    “Through its own internal feuding, then, the SP [Socialist Party] exhausted itself forever and further reduced labor radicalism in New York to the position of marginality and insignificance from which it has never recovered.

    “The story is a sad but also a chastening one for those who, more than half a century after socialism’s decline, still wish to change America,” she wrote. “Radicals have often succumbed to the devastating bane of sectarianism; it is easier, after all, to fight one’s fellows than it is to battle an entrenched and powerful foe. Yet if the history of Local New York shows anything, it is that American radicals cannot afford to become their own worst enemies. In unity lies their only hope.”

    Her thesis was dedicated to her brother “whose involvement in radical causes led me to explore the history of American radicalism in the hope of clarifying my own political ideas.”

    If confirmed, Kagan would give the high court three women justices for the first time.

    She would be the youngest member on the current court and the first justice in nearly four decades without any prior judicial experience.

    WND reported today Kagan has advocated for an increased presidential role in regulation, which, she conceded, would make such affairs more and more an extension of the president’s own policy and political agenda.

    Kagan was nominated as U.S. solicitor general by Obama in January and confirmed by the Senate in March. She was a dean of Harvard Law School and previously served alongside Obama as a professor of law at the University of Chicago.

    A former clerk to Abner Mikva at the D.C. federal appeals court, Kagan was heavily involved in promoting the health-care policy of the Clinton administration.

    Obama praised her because while he said a “judge’s job is to interpret the law, not make the law,” she has evidenced a “keen understanding of the impact of the law on people’s lives.”

    The president said she has a “firm grasp on the nexus and boundaries between our three branches of government.”

    But more importantly, she understands, “behind the law there are stories, stories of people’s lives,” Obama said.

    Kagan said the law is “endlessly interesting” and also “protects the most fundamental rights and freedoms.”

  10. confloyd: isn’t it scary that Obama is picking the supreme court. It is also sickening!
    Yep and he keeps us so busy with so much giving us insufficient time to keep track of his wars. For instance,

    Baghdad, Iraq (CNN) — At least 85 people have been killed and nearly 300 wounded in a string of bombings and shootings across Iraq, the country’s Interior Ministry reported late Monday. Attacks were launched in six provinces, including Basra, Wasit and Babil — which tend to be less violent than others — in violence reminiscent of what was typical during the height of the sectarian war. In the northern city of Mosul, a suicide car bomber killed two at a checkpoint manned by Kurdish Peshmerga forces. Many of the shootings and bombings targeted security forces

    edition dot

  11. A shadow of things to come for Mr. Obama. The demise of another globalist.
    U.K. Premier Brown to Stand Down as Labour Leader
    Wall Street Journal

    British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he will step down within months as leader of the country and his party, but the U.K’s confused political landscape was thrown into further chaos as his Labour Party began talks to form a government despite finishing second in last week’s inconclusive election.

    Mr. Brown’s announcement, delivered outside No. 10 Downing St., was the centerpiece of a day of high political drama in which the U.K.’s Labour and Conservative parties engaged in an aggressive and public tug-of-war for the support of the country’s No. 3 party, the Liberal Democrats.

    Mr. Brown’s move to step aside was packaged with his announcement that Labour has entered formal talks on a power-sharing coalition with the Liberal Democrats and their leader, Nick Clegg.

    View Full Image

    Mr. Brown said he will faciliate talks with the Liberal Democrats on a power-sharing coalition, but asked the Labour party to start preparations for a leadership contest in which he wouldn’t take part.

    Related Video

    U.K. Tories And Lib Dems Resume Talks (05/09/10)
    U.K. Hung Parliament Explained (05/07/10)
    Gordon Brown Constituency Speech (05/07/10)
    In essence, he offered himself as a sacrifice whose timing was tactically designed to both bolster Labour’s improbable attempt to stay in power and block the rival Tories from taking control of Britain’s government. Many senior members of the Liberal Democrats had made it clear that they would be less inclined to a deal with a Labour Party still led by Mr. Brown.

    Having won the most seats—but not a majority—in last week’s vote, the Conservatives and leader David Cameron have spent the last few days attempting to forge an agreement in which they would run the country in a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats, a party with which it shares little common ground on key issues.

    After Mr. Brown made his move, the Conservatives threw down the gantlet to the Liberal Democrats, making a fresh and seemingly final offer to Mr. Clegg;s team. Senior Tory official William Hague said the Conservatives would offer a referendum to overhaul the U.K.’s voting system, a key issue for the Liberal Democrats that is strongly resisted by many Conservatives.

    The resulting picture of increasing political uncertainty quickly rattled markets, and the pound and government bonds fell back after the announcement.

    “I personally was not overwhelmed” by the offer of a referendum, said Ed Davey, a senior Liberal Democrat official. Mr. Davey said the Conservatives offered other concessions, including government’s terms of office being fixed, as opposed to allowing the government to call an election within a five-year period, and freeing the very poorest from income tax altogether. But the Liberal Democrats say they want more details.

    Now, there is the question of whether either of the potential coalitions deals can be struck—and whether they would work in practice. Liberal Democrat negotiators were set to meet with both Labour and Conservative officials Monday evening and report back to their lawmakers.

    One problem for any deal between Labour and the Liberal Democrats is that, even together, they would lack a majority in Parliament, forcing them to turn to other small parties in a bid to construct what some call a “progressive coalition” and what others call “a coalition of losers.” Even some Labour officials say it doesn’t make sense.

    Mr. Brown’s move to fall on his sword comes as Labour is on the brink of losing control of the government it has ruled for 13 years. In Thursday’s election, it lost nearly 100 seats, a reality to which Mr. Brown bowed in saying he would step aside.

    “As leader of my party I must accept that is a judgement on me,” Mr. Brown said Monday.

    Journal Community

    While most Britons assumed Mr. Brown would step down, the notoriously stubborn leader didn’t announce resignation plans immediately, leading some to believe that he would try and cling on as leader if his party succeeded in forming a government with the Liberal Democrats.

    Mr. Brown’s move now sets up a scramble for the future leadership of the Labour Party. The prime minister said a leadership contest will begin with the idea of completing the process by the time of the party’s annual conference this fall.

    That sets up a competition in which there is no obvious candidate to take over. Front-runners include Foreign Secretary David Miliband, Education Secretary Ed Balls, and Harriet Harman, deputy leader of the Labour Party. Mr. Miliband will run, one of his key allies said. Mr. Miliband could not be reached for comment.

    Mr. Brown was able to make his move because talks between the Tories and Liberal Democrats are fraught with obstacles.

    Earlier Monday, the Liberal Democrats said that while there has been progress with the Conservative Party, they want the Tories to come back with more on the issues of taxation, education and electoral reform. Now, the offer of an electoral-reform referendum was pitched as a final offer to the Liberal Democrats by the Tories.

    Such a reform would change the voting system that resulted in the current mess. In the U.K., it is the number of seats won in the House of Commons, rather than the proportion of the vote, that wins the day. Under the alternative vote system, the electorate numbers their candidates in order of preference and it is the one with more than 50% of the vote that wins the seat.

    The Tories are making a calculation that the public would reject this. Even if accepted, it wouldn’t be too bitter for the Tories to take, as it falls shorter of a greater overhaul—proportional representation—favored by the Liberal Democrats.

    If the Liberal Democrats and Labour Party were to form a government with a Labour leader, that would once again leave Britain with a prime minister it hadn’t elected. Mr. Brown took over from Tony Blair midterm, meaning that his nearly three years as prime minister weren’t mandated by the public—a charge that hurt him throughout his short tenure.

    With investors now less sure of a Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition, the pound traded down to $1.4865 against the dollar from $1.4970 before Mr. Brown’s statement and Britain’s borrowing costs edged higher.

    Regardless, the end of Mr. Brown’s eventful political career is now in sight. Along with former Prime Minister Blair, Mr. Brown was one of three main architects of the New Labour movement that used the pro-business, pro-markets policies of the right to raise tax revenue that could be pumped into reformed public services, shedding many of the socialist principles that had made Labour unelectable for nearly 20 years.

    British Prime Minister Gordon Brown says he will step down as leader of the Labour Party later this year, but will hold talks with the Liberal Democrats aimed at forming a new government. Video courtesy of Reuters.

    Mr. Brown managed Britain’s economy for 10 years under Mr. Blair, the longest period for a chancellor of the exchequer in modern British politics, and the nation enjoyed a decade of almost unprecedented growth, low inflation, high employment and increased productivity. But many of the factors behind that boom—the debt-fueled consumer binges, the financial-services sector—would propel it to its crash, and the high public spending would make it harder for the U.K. spend its way back into health.

    Though he was widely blamed for driving Britain into its worst postwar recession, Mr. Brown clawed back some respect with his sure handling of the aftermath, bailing out Britain’s failing banks and keeping unemployment and housing foreclosures low.

    —Laurence Norman and Neil Shah contributed to this article.

  12. More on the facts behind the Article 10 argument against Obamacare which I was talking about early this morning.

    ObamaCare’s Phony Medicaid ‘Deal’
    The new health law unconstitutionally coerces the states.


    The attorneys general of 13 states recently filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the constitutionality of the Medicaid portions of the new health law. Given the dismal track record states and individuals have had challenging New Deal social programs, many pundits have concluded their suit will be dismissed out of hand. I wouldn’t be so sure.

    The new health law gives states frontline responsibility for setting up an untried system of “exchanges” through which individuals will purchase health-care insurance. States receive partial federal support for running the exchanges up to 2015, after which they run them at their own considerable but uncertain expense. States can opt out of organizing these exchanges—but only if they extend Medicaid coverage to more of their residents, including all uninsured persons whose incomes are 133% to 200% of the poverty level.

    This program is highly coercive and it raises a constitutional problem of the first magnitude.

    View Full Image

    Associated Press
    Barack Obama promoting health-insurance reform in March.

    ObamaCare’s defenders say there is no problem—since no state has to participate in Medicaid at all, they’re free to walk away entirely from the ObamaCare deal. But this too is a fake option.

    Suppose a thief takes your family portrait worth $100 to you and then makes a take-it-or-leave it offer to sell it back to you for $50. You prefer the picture to the money. He prefers the money to the picture. Does that make the thief’s offer a win/win? Of course not. It is ransom.

    Obama Defends Health-Care Law
    President Barack Obama said Saturday in his weekly address that millions of Americans already are reaping benefits from the new health care law.

    And thus the ObamaCare deal: States may leave Medicaid but the Medicaid taxes their citizens pay will support the program in other states. The state’s option to leave Medicaid would be real only if the federal government refunded its citizens’ Medicaid taxes or paid them into the state treasury.

    There is one big obstacle to state success in the courts. In Frothingham v. Mellon (1923), a citizen of Massachusetts and the state itself challenged the use of federal tax dollars for infant and maternal health under the 1921 Maternity Act. Their argument was that the payments to individual people were not expenditures for the “general welfare of the United States,” which, properly understood, only covered standard public goods like national defense.

    But the Supreme Court there mistakenly held that neither the individual citizen nor the state had standing to challenge the program—on the peculiar ground that any potential constitutional violation that hurt everyone could be challenged by no one. That ruling put Massachusetts (like states today) in an impossible bind. A principled decision not to accept the federal funds meant that its citizens’ tax dollars simply would go to mothers and infants in other states.

    Fortunately, the obstacle that the Supreme Court raised to a state’s standing to sue has already been breached. In Massachusetts v. EPA—the notorious 2007 decision allowing the EPA to treat carbon dioxide as a pollutant—the Supreme Court recognized that the state had standing to sue to protect its own coastline from the supposed ravages of excess CO2. The Supreme Court should likewise also recognize a state’s standing to sue when the federal government seeks to command its resources to serve federal objectives. In New York v. United States (1992), the Court prevented the U.S. from forcing states to take title to nuclear waste. It can surely prevent the federal government from mandating massive expenditures of scarce state resources.

    Under the Constitution the states are not wards of the federal government. Clever federal tax and spending statutes must not be allowed to reduce states to a servile status that allows the federal government to force massive wealth shifts among them.

    The federal government should be told either to refund to the states their citizens’ Medicaid tax dollars when they pull out of the program or to drop the new mandates to expand Medicaid coverage as the price the states must pay to escape ObamaCare-created duties.

    Mr. Epstein is a professor of law at the University of Chicago and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.

    EmailPrinter FriendlyOrder Reprints

  13. Wonderful News. Hillary supporter Seastak leading Turncoat Spector 47/42 in latest Rassmussen Poll. The Republicans think Tommey can beat either one of them. They are wrong.
    Posted by Moe Lane (Profile)
    Monday, May 10th at 10:31AM EDT
    Nobody loves a turncoat.

    Congressman Joe Sestak has moved ahead of incumbent Arlen Specter in their Senate primary match-up with just over a week left before Pennsylvania Democrats go to the polls to pick their nominee.

    The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely Democratic Primary voters in the state shows Sestak earning 47% of the vote while Specter picks up 42%. This marks the first time Sestak has held the advantage in the race.

    Do you know what this situation needs? A lot more money spent in the last week on negative primary race advertising by the Democratic candidates, that’s what it needs. Time to pull out the big guns there, Arlen; after all, if you’re gone after next week you won’t be spending it anyway. So feel free to use the really damaging stuff.

    Thanks in advance!

    Moe Lane

  14. More good news: the DCCC (race bait’n Chris Van Hollen) Cuts and Runs on the first congressional district of Hawaii (Neil Abercrombie’s seat)
    Posted by Moe Lane (Profile)
    Monday, May 10th at 11:19AM EDT
    Guess they decided to stop throwing money away, more’s the pity.

    The DCCC is pulling out of the race to replace ex-Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), effectively ceding the heavily Dem seat to the GOP as intra-party feuding splits the vote.

    “The DCCC will not be investing additional resources in the HI-01 (Abercrombie-open) special election. Local Democrats were unable to work out their differences,” DCCC communications director Jennifer Crider said in an emailed statement. “The DCCC will save the resources we would have invested in the Hawaii special election this month for the general election in November.”

    But they swear that they’ll be back for the general election! – Assuming, of course, that Hawaii Democrats stop with this silly notion that they know better than Washington does about who would be a suitable candidate for HI-01.

    Moe Lane

  15. People are starting to realize what Obama is and what he is not:

    1. Obama is NOT Robbin Hood of Sherwood Forest–

    a. who takes from the rich

    b. and gives to the poor

    2. Obama IS a Robbing Hood from the mean streets of Chicago–

    a. who takes from the middle class

    b. and gives to the rich and famous

    Fascinating web applet by Paul Rademacher, which allows you to superimpose the Gulf Coast oil spill’s cover area (as of 5/6/10) onto any city you’d like. According to this, if Ann Arbor was the central point of the spill, it would extend west to Jackson, south past Toledo, north almost to Flint, and east into Canada.

  17. This is a huge oil spill, but the oil folks say that the gulf currents will make it easier to get rid of…I would think just the opposite. I think it could carry it to many more places making the spill worse of an impact on the enviroment.

    This spill can’t be good news for either party!

  18. Great minds converging?
    [….] So if the Democrats don’t nominate an actual liberal or at least a progressive where you live, vote Republican in 2010 and 2012. For the love of all holy gods, vote for the Republican presidential candidate in 2012, however bad they are. In fact, hope that the Republicans vote for the most right wing, most banksterish, most theocratic candidate they have. Let them take the blame.

  19. wbboei
    May 10th, 2010 at 6:30 pm

    People are starting to realize what Obama is and what he is not:

    1. Obama is NOT Robbin Hood of Sherwood Forest–

    Robber from da hood, aka: Slick Rick the Poverty Pimp (per Ario)

  20. The world belongs to Goldman Sachs.
    True. They have their puppet in the White House, and soon they will control a seat on the US Supreme Court. What better leverage could they have to continue their criminal enterprise to rob the American People blind, while the ignoranti of the left sit there like rubes applauding the crook as he robs them blind.

  21. Tennessee needs attention and help. Video with a funny weather report and questions about “where’s Obama?”

  22. Here is Morris’s take on the Fraud’s strategy and how to counter it:



    Published in the New York Post on May 10, 2010

    Printer-Friendly Version

    He said he had the audacity to hope that America could rise above the politics of partisan polarization and embrace the sunlight paths of compromise and cooperation. But that was then and this is now.

    Faced with falling polls and the chance of wholesale obliteration of his majorities in Congress, President Obama has plainly decided to pursue the very politics of division and partisan animus he once claimed to eschew.

    To grasp the reasons behind Obama’s descent into the mud, start with some basic facts. In 2008, he won almost exactly the same percentage of the white vote that John Kerry won in 2004. The reasons he won and Kerry lost were all demographic:

    * Obama generated an African-American turnout three points higher than Kerry, and almost all of those new voters supported him.

    * Latino-American voters gave Obama a margin of 45 points while they supported Kerry by only 10 — and they constituted 1 percent more of the vote in ’08 than in ’04.

    * Obama offset his losses among older white voters by increasing the turnout and the Democratic margin among whites under age 30.

    While Obama seemed to avoid the politics of race in his campaign, identity politics and ethnic fault lines were in fact crucial to electing him president.

    Now he’s returning to dance with those that brought him. He has launched a broad campaign to polarize the electorate and increase levels of fear and racial tension to serve his cause. Each aspect of this new offensive has a clear strategic objective.

    * Obama is outspoken in his criticism of the Arizona immigration law as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pushes an immigration-reform bill. Both surely realize that the bill has no serious chance of enactment this year now that the Republicans, led by Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) have walked away from the table. But they want the issue and the polarization it brings.

    By making Hispanic voters feel under assault — by emphasizing that the Arizona law could mean that they would be hauled down to the police station at any moment to prove their legal status — Obama hopes to repeat the Democrats’ top-heavy Latino margins from 2008.

    * His second front is to demonize Fox News and conservative advocacy groups like the Tea Partiers as polarizing and even accuse them of fomenting domestic terrorism. While he denounces Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, former President Bill Clinton darkly warns that the anti-government rhetoric of the Tea Party activists could incite Oklahoma City-style bombings and terrorism.

    Both men are trying to scare the left and motivate a high turnout by painting the right as a force of darkness. By warning of barbarians at the gate, they hope to remedy the low turnout that has cost the Democrats victories in New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts.

    * Obama is also stepping up his attacks on the likes of Goldman Sachs and BP, disregarding the inconvenient truth that he is the largest recipient of their campaign donations in the nation. While both firms richly deserve our contempt, Obama is hoping to use their misconduct to link Republicans to big business and big oil to deflect his own efforts to foist big government on the country.

    All these efforts reflect the basic problem Democrats have in off-year elections — that voter turnout is typically 15 to 20 points lower than in presidential years. Normally, it is precisely the president’s political base that stays home — African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, single women and young people.

    By raising racial and partisan tensions and stoking class animosities, Obama hopes to gin up the turnout and avert disaster for his party in November.

    Republicans must not take the bait. They should emphasize employer penalties for hiring illegals so that the flow dries up and neither harsh laws like Arizona’s nor an amnesty will be needed. The GOP needs to stress Obama’s connections with both Goldman and BP and push their own ideas for regulatory reform. And Fox News needs to continue to do what it does best — get new viewers and expand its reach

  23. TurnDownObama, thanks for the bradhicks link. Devastating defeat and doom for Dimocrats in 2010, and if necessary in 2012, is the only prescription for sanity to return. After another year of Obama flim-flams and boobery many more will begin to understand our cold, clear, logic. Democrats who thought they were doing the right thing by voting in their traditional patterns in 2008 will begin to see something is wrong only after the November elections.

    We were the first to suggest that destruction/doom as the only viable strategy to quickly return to the FDR coalition. We are not going to be the last. It’s going to be tough for many to recognize the wisdom of that course.

  24. admin
    May 10th, 2010 at 7:39 pm
    TurnDownObama, thanks for the bradhicks link. Devastating defeat and doom for Dimocrats in 2010, and if necessary in 2012, is the only prescription for sanity to return.

    I agree. So that means Tommey MUST win.

  25. That’s liberal University of California legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, explaining to the Daily Caller that President Barack Obama’s failure to nominate a “Scalia of the left” to the Supreme Court won’t be a deal breaker for the president’s liberal base.
    Of course it won’t be a deal breaker. These people profess to have principles, but when push comes to shove they fold.

  26. confloyd
    May 10th, 2010 at 9:45 am
    The market is suppose to soar today because we bailed out the EU with a trillion dollars…how can this go on??

    Because everyone LOVES the middle class Americans and there wallets. “We are the World”. Ya, daddy and mama going to bail us out!!!! AGAIN

  27. Clinton Mulls Seoul Visit Over Cheonan Findings

    South Korea and the U.S. are discussing a visit by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Seoul once the findings of an investigation into the sinking of the Navy corvette Cheonan are announced late this month.

    A diplomatic source in Washington on Monday said Clinton is to reaffirm the strong alliance “and send a solemn warning message to the North if findings of the Cheonan’s sinking point clearly to North Korea’s involvement.”

    She may visit and meet Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan either before or after the U.S.-China strategic and economic dialogue in Beijing from May 24. There she is to meet with Dai Bingguo, the Chinese state councilor for foreign affairs.

    If Clinton’s schedule does not permit a visit, the U.S. could send James Steinberg, a deputy secretary of state, and Kurt Campbell, an assistant secretary.

  28. Obama, Clinton, Palin Are Top Political Heros

    May 10, 2010
    By Paul Bedard, Washington Whispers

    Finally there’s a poll where Sarah Palin doesn’t swamp her opponents. But she does come in second.

    In a new poll provided to Washington Whispers and timed for this week’s release of Brad Meltzer’s Heroes For My Son, which we recently wrote about, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ties the late Princess Diana as the world’s top politician who isn’t a president. Tied for second: Sarah Palin, first lady Michelle Obama, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and the last two members of the 20th Century Kennedy dynasty, former Sen. Edward Kennedy and his older brother Robert Kennedy.

    The poll, conducted by M/A/R/C Research March 22-26 with 1,000 adults, asked the overall question of who people most considered their hero and then broke the results down by roles. The only politician in the top 10 was President Obama, beaten out by “dad,” “mom,” and other family and religious figures.

    However, he fared better in two other breakdowns: The “most famous” hero and the top five presidential heros. In the most famous breakdown, Obama was bested only by Jesus Christ himself. Here’s how the Meltzer’s PR firm wrote it up:

    The #1 Famous Hero: Jesus Christ—When prompted for a famous hero, Americans prove that the good book isn’t People Magazine. It’s the actual good book. Jesus was the number one answer, though followed closely by…

    #2 Most Famous Hero: President Obama (followed by Lincoln, Reagan and JFK)—Politicians may have the most amount of dirt kicked on them, but when it comes to American heroes, it’s tough to beat a president, which are admired as much as either athletes or celebrities. However, this answer relied a great deal on age. People in their 60’s (30%) were roughly three times as likely as people in their 20’s (11%) to name a resident.

    And Obama won the top slot among presidential heroes. Here’s how that broke down:

    Top 5 Presidential Heroes:

    1. Barack Obama

    2. Abraham Lincoln

    3. Ronald Reagan

    4. JFK

    5. George Washington

  29. 10.05.10

    Obama is faltering at Ahmadinejad’s trapeze act

    Iran is getting away with more and more as the U.S. president stumbles through his failed brand of politically correct diplomacy.

    By Moshe Beker

    Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the only head of state who participated in the ongoing Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference at the United Nations headquarters in New York. He didn’t arrive there with a newfound attitude toward Iran’s responsibility toward the treaty, to which it is signed, but to deceive U.S. President Barack Obama and to continue his defiance of the United States’ role as a global leader. Ahmadinejad filled that role well, and, true to form, gave a vehemently anti-American address, declaring that Iran was not alone in its struggle against the U.S. but that the nations of the world were united in rejecting its policy. Western media outlets showed the walk out by U.S. representatives and of a few other western countries, but could not hide the 170 states that remained in the assembly and listen to the Iranian leader’s malicious comments. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s plea for a forceful international reaction for Iran’s NPT transgressions had likely fallen on deaf ears.

    The best proof of Tehran’s position as a UN-leading state was given the next day, when Iran was voted to another term in the Commission on the Status of Women, the declared goal of which is “gender equality and advancement of women.” While the U.S. and a handful of other western nations successfully cut off Iran’s attempt to join the UN’s Human Rights Council, by displaying the now famous images of the beating and killing of women during recent Tehran protests, the Iranians were able to lay a diplomatic ambush by infiltrating the reputable women’s rights assembly. The Iranians, who cannot “oversee” human rights from within the UN, will instead focus their efforts on the advancement of women around the world from within the Commission on the Status of Women in Geneva and New York.

    As the Iranian president rams U.S. policy and its leaders at the UN General Assembly, the New York Police Department, along with federal law enforcement officials, was scampering in an attempt to detain Pakistani-Muslim terrorist Faisal Shahzad, suspected of leading the failed car bombing at Times Square, a symbol of New York’s nightlife and freedom. At the same time, Ahmadinejad defiantly asked the UN assembly if terror was down as a result of ten years of U.S. military presence. While president Obama, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs and two cabinet members, the attorney general and the secretary of homeland security, squirm for hours in an attempt to avoid, in line with the president’s policy on political correctness, treating the booby-trapped car as a terror event, Ahmadinejad asked the UN floor: “Which one is more dangerous? Yesterday the United States announced that ‘We have more than 5,000 atomic bombs.’ Is 5,000 more dangerous or a country that might get the atomic bomb? Which is more dangerous for the world’s security?”

    The drama taking place in New York, part of which was happening on the corner of the Broadway musicals street, emphasized just how out of touch is Obama’s foreign policy with the painful and bitter reality of the world we live in. Obama, who enlisted all of his talents and rhetorical abilities to ensure a safer and fairer world is forced to face the challenges many considered to be his predecessor’s nightmare. He was successful, after an impressive campaign, to narrowly pass his health reform, but is finding it very difficult to cure the world’s ailments. Rhetorical know-how, public relations and diplomatic slight of hand cannot deter the world’s rogue states.

    These are not just local failures, with only sheer luck preventing some of the bombing and hijacking attempts from turning into mass terror events. Obama’s promise of a changed foreign policy is crashing more and more against the rocks of international threats. The American ineptitude in the face of Iran, the Taliban and Al-Qaida in Pakistan, along with the other hubs of Islamic terror, is putting Obama and Clinton’s promise of a diplomacy of “soft power” or “smart power” in question.

    The promise of a dialogue with the Muslim world did not bring about a change in the hate felt toward the United States or diminish the threats against it. The “active diplomacy” led in face of Iran is drawing contempt in the nuclear arena, and the campaign trail’s two main promises of improving multilateral diplomacy in the UN and other international organizations are not reaching fruition: nuclear disarmament and the global advancement of human rights.

    Middle East countries have already drawn their own conclusions, and not only in regards to the stalled peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. The Al-Jazeera network, a trusty barometer of the Persian Gulf and the entire region, had already taken on itself a strategic decision based on the recognition that the United States would not confront Iran head on. In its analysis of Ahmadinejad’s UN address, Al-Jazeera presenters said that the Iranian president had been successful in conveying to the world that the aggressor was the United States, while the rest of the world was the victim. A pundit on the Qatar-based network warned of a day in which the UN and the NPT conference would become a circus where the entire international community sits paralyzed and watches on as the United States and Iran engage in an obsessive battle. That’s all Ahmadinejad needs to continue his trapeze act in the UN.

  30. One thing that really ticks me off when I watch Fox and many of the talking heads there, they only report the truth that works for their argument, but not the facts that blow their comments to smithereens.

    For example— Dick Morris stated above:

    While Obama seemed to avoid the politics of race in his campaign, identity politics and ethnic fault lines were in fact crucial to electing him president.

    Bullflippin’sh!t……………letting his halfwits prance around calling Bill Clinton (yes, Morris……you sack of dung, you worked for that guy, so you should remember) A FLIPPIN’ RACIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ……..and by calling Bill a racist, they are lumping Hillary in with that mother of all political lies.

    Freakin’ Morris knows this, remembers it and acts like it never happened to make his point. How about all those whackjobs that the Fraud listened to for 20 years in his church???

  31. I just got this report from The McKinsey Group. They are the premier management consulting firm in the world. If you are the CEO of a Fortune 500 Company which is under performing and you have the Board and stockholders all over your ass because of it, then you bring a firm like this one in to find a solution, or if you already know the solution but there are political obstacles you feed information to them discretely and have them issue a report with those findings. They will play either role for you, just as long as you pay their fee which starts in the low seven figures.

    This article is germane for two reasons. First, it sheds some additional light on the question of where the global economy is heading. For those who have an interest in that subject, this article will be interesting. Second, it discusses the economic model of state capitalism, which is where I believe Obama is trying to take the United States.

    The Council of Foreign Relations have been dicussing this and published an article on the subject in Foreign Affairs Magazine a few months ago. Two of their former members are big proponents of that system. Soros and Brzezniski. Both of them are mentors to Obama. They like state capitalism because it gives government control over the people and Zeib even said that at one point. Dingel would like it too I’m sure for the exact same reason.
    China’s state capitalism and multinationals: An interview with
    the president of Eurasia Group

    Ian Bremmer discusses the changing rules of competition in China, where the state is the principal actor and arbiter in the economy.

    As China gains dominance on the world stage, more and more multinational corporations will need to rethink their assumptions about competing under its state-capitalism model—one in which the government is the principle economic driver. So says Ian Bremmer, president of the political-risk consulting firm Eurasia Group and author of the upcoming book The End of the Free Market: Who Wins the War Between States and Corporations? In this video interview, Bremmer discusses the fundamental distinctions between state capitalism and free-market economies, as well as the strategic implications this has for Western companies and governments alike. McKinsey Publishing’s Rik Kirkland conducted the interview in New York.

    We’re in an environment, over the course of the last 20, 30 years, where we’ve declared a lot of obituaries: We’ve declared that communism is dead and that the West has won. We’ve declared that the state is dead and that multinational corporations have won. And we’ve declared that authoritarianism is dead and that instead democracy has won. Now, we got one of those three correct: communism’s gone. And it’s really not coming back. You look at Cuba, you look at North Korea—I’m not getting all that inspired by the return of global communism. But multinational corporations? The state’s gone? No way.

    And democracy? Authoritarianism’s gone? Not from where I sit. And the fact that authoritarianism and the state are back, and back with a vengeance—particularly following the economic crisis and the folks that got hurt as a consequence of the economic crisis—that has congealed into the rise of state capitalism.

    In the last year, the country that has come the fastest out of this global economic crisis has been the one that does not accept the notion that a regulated free-market economy is the way to run things. Rather, it is the rise of state capitalism. State capitalism is a system where the state is the principle actor and arbiter in the economy. And so, as a consequence, the state is driving investment and it’s setting the rules.

    So if you are a Western multinational, and your model is saying, “I’m going to be making lots and lots of money in state-capitalist countries,” you better have reasons to believe that, over the medium and long term, you will still be able to do business there. In other words, are there local competitors right now? Are they of scale? Will there be [competitors] in three or five years? What is it that you offer that is not only indispensable today but is going to be indispensable tomorrow that [the state] cannot compete with, rip off, or decide it doesn’t need because there are local, state-owned or stated-connected companies that will take you out? And I will tell you that Western multinational CEOs have not yet gotten this joke. This is of critical importance.

    You have to recognize that your comparative advantage today is not necessarily going to be your competitive advantage tomorrow. You furthermore have to recognize that what you think is your comparative advantage may not be appreciated by a state player as a comparative advantage that matters.

    Google in China: yes, they have difficulties with the fact that there’s censorship. But that’s not why Google isn’t in China. Google’s not doing well in China because Baidu was supported by the Chinese government to be the premier search engine for China. And ultimately, Google had to make that decision.

    I think we have reached a peak on openness. I think that the Chinese model hasn’t changed all that much. They’ve been state capitalists, embracing lots of what the West had to offer. They’ve been sending lots of exports out there. But the point is that they needed money. And so it really didn’t matter what kind of a system China had, because they were so relatively underdeveloped that anything the West was prepared to go and invest in, they said yes.

    China no longer needs foreign capital. What China needs is technology, advanced technology, increasingly, quite advanced technology. But Western corporations, increasingly, aren’t willing to provide that level of technology, especially given how bad [intellectual-property] protection and regulation is in China. And especially given what’s been happening on cyber security over the course of the last several years, which is getting much more public and much more well understood.
    So as a consequence, you have an environment where everyone used to go into China because the Chinese needed the investment. Now they don’t need the cash. What they need, Western corporations are increasingly loathe to provide. The model has become vastly harder. Now, the reason for the model becoming harder is different. It’s still this fundamental incompatibility. It’s just that the extraordinary scale and the competitiveness of China has made it front of mind. And that’s the point. When you have 10 percent Chinese growth and 10 percent US unemployment, you’re unable to avoid these things. You have to look at them right in the face.

    China’s not going away in a year. It is not going to crack from social instability. It is not going to crumble from environmental degradation in the next couple of years. The Chinese state-capitalist model is robust not because of the model but because 1.3 billion people at sub-$3,000 per capita income, building out and urbanizing, still have extraordinary productivity gains that they can wring out of the system.

    So you can do massively inefficient things at the national level and still look like you’re winning for a long time. In fact, it may well be the most appropriate model for China to get through politically over the course of the next five, ten years. And that’s what’s so hard about this, that the Chinese, ultimately, may well be doing the right thing given this level of development. But you’re now in a world system where the most important growing economy is not a mature, developed state with commitment to rule of law and strong institutions and robustness and the rest—it is an emerging market. An emerging market where the political insecurities are the ultimate driver. Hence, state capitalism.

    The one thing that a very serious, very rapid rise of a state-capitalist model will do is it will force Western governments, eventually, out of this gridlock, out of this lethargy. And if that can be harnessed for constructive purposes, then that’s going to ultimately be a very positive story. The fear is, of course, that it isn’t and that you end up looking inward. You end up focusing on closing up borders, less immigration, less free trade, more subsidies, more protectionism. And that, ultimately, is not the way to ensure that the free-market system prevails.
    Copyright © 2010 McKinsey & Company. All rights reserved.

    Related thinking
    “State capitalism and
    the crisis”
    “Beyond economics: Factoring politics into investment strategies”
    “A new world disorder”
    “Preparing for the next Asia”

  32. JanH
    May 10th, 2010 at 8:20 pm

    USnews? I don’t believe for a second that the 60 and older population voted for the Fraud. He probabaly came in last and BC, who wasn’t mention, first!

  33. Shadowfax–I am trying to give you a sense of their strategy. What you say is true. But that is why we have to listen to both sides. Neither side tells you the whole truth. I so not maintain that the Republicans have the substantive answers we need. Their main virtue is they are not dimocrats. And they can be useful to us in achieving our goal of reforming the party and clearing a path for Hillary. Believe me there is no love lost. When I tried to get them to work with the PUMAs against Obama they held me at arms length despite past associations. As far as Morris is concerned, he is what he is.

  34. NYT: Greece’s Economic Salvation Can Only Come By Privatizing Health Care and Laying Off Thousands Of Unneeded Government Workers

    What makes Greece so damn lucky?

    Lucky in the sense that they can benefit from such changes, whereas we in the United States are apparently required to do the precise opposite.

    Actually, the NYT isn’t endorsing this plan (as the linked analysis at Hot Air suggests); it’s just reporting, neutrally, that this is the austerity plan forced on Greece by the IMF, EU, and European Central Banks.

    Still: I’m sure the NYT doesn’t notice the irony that the program it urges for America is the exact program which must be undone in Greece to keep the country from going bankrupt.

    As unions denounced the cost-cutting measures and pledged to take to the streets over the weekend and go on strike on Wednesday, Prime Minister George Papandreou said Greece must quickly adopt the international aid plan. “Today, the top priority is the survival of the nation,” he told Parliament on Friday. “This is the red line.”

    Greek officials close to the discussions said the deal would include as much as 130 billion euros in aid over the next three years at reasonable interest rates. In return, the I.M.F. asked Greece to cut public sector spending by 8 billion euros in the 14 months after the plan was adopted. Economists called that provision crucial because past reform programs by the government have relied too much on overly optimistic assumptions about the collection of unpaid taxes.

    Union and government officials said Greece had also pledged to raise its value-added tax to 25 percent, to freeze civil servants’ wages and to eliminate public sector bonuses amounting to two months’ pay. They said the government intended to increase taxes on fuel, tobacco and alcohol.

    Among the most significant features of the plan, a Greek government official said, would be a measure making it easier for the government to lay off some of the many thousands of public sector workers, whose low levels of productivity and high wages are a big contributor to Greece’s debt problem. Until now, the government has not been able to lay off civil servants, whose employment rights are in effect constitutionally guaranteed.

    In America, they’re not constitutionally guaranteed per se, but they are politically guaranteed — one party is dedicated singlemindedly to expanding the government workforce and jacking up its already-generous compensation.

    Another reform high on the list is removing the state from the marketplace in crucial sectors like health care, transportation and energy and allowing private investment. Economists say that the liberalization of trucking routes — where a trucking license can cost up to $90,000 — and the health care industry would help bring down prices in these areas, which are among the highest in Europe.
    Yes, a lot of “raise taxes” stuff in there too, but that’s because Greece has gotten so far down the road of guaranteeing a bunch of pricey while avoiding raising the tax rates, preferring to borrow and spend, so that the public is never alerted to the true costs of these programs until it’s too late, and the country must accept higher tax rates or go bankrupt.

    Sound familiar? Seems to me there’s a very cool cat with nice pecs at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue who has a similar agenda. Hide the costs of your programs in order to get them passed, and then, when it’s politically impossible to restrain those costs, tell the country you are sadly forced to raise taxes due to circumstances beyond your control.

    Can’t happen here? Reason argues it already has happened here, at least in the once-Golden State of California.

    California’s longterm population-loss trend has reportedly turned around slightly in the last few months, and Greece will no doubt bring in a new haul of tourists this summer, proving the claim that self-satisfied Californians love to make whenever their state is compared unfavorably with Texas: The weather is really nice. And people still haven’t managed to screw up the weather.
    But every suntan eventually turns into parched, leathery skin. The insidious thing about an unfriendly business climate is that it takes a long time for the effects to show up in the government’s inability to pay its bills. So long, in fact, that when the sovereign bankruptcy comes, it’s easy to draw the conclusion that tax rates are too low. Both California and Greece are going through a variety of this type of denial right now. But with the governor of California and the prime minister of Greece both promising to turn over a new leaf, this is a good time to remember that you can’t take people’s money if you prevent them from making money in the first place.

  35. The McKensie article may also help explain why there is confusion as to what Obama is. Most Republicans see him as a socialist and his rhetoric can be interpreted that way. They see him taking over entire industries and they say that is what socialists do, ergo Q.E.D. What they fail to realize is that is also what state capitalists do, to create an economic system where the state is the main actor. Obama is a state capitalist. By no stretch of the imagination is he a socialist. A socialist would not cut half a trillion from medicade.

  36. must go….

    I’m not even sure what ‘state capitalism’ is. I bet for lots of people, the only words they know are ‘socialist’ and ‘communist.’ Even admin’s ‘totalitarian’ is too strong for them.

    As for Hicks, he has a great anti-obama rant. He’s a bot and bashes Hillary too. His strategy is more like mine than like yours. He wants to support any good Dems that get nominated (‘real progressives’) and just crush the DINOs.

  37. wbboei

    Shadowfax–I am trying to give you a sense of their strategy.
    I understand that and I listen to the other side too and try to wade though the bs to get closer to what is real.
    Just the statement void Clinton’s bashing as a racist was one of the biggest clues as to what was going to happen in the future, and the Repubs avoiding the truth makes me realize their agenda isn’t much better.

  38. Shadowfax– we can even learn from Obama. For example, we can learn how to lie with impunity; how to polarize a society; how to throw supporters under the bus; and how do Rezko deals with the same lobbyists he promised to drive out of Washington when he was campaigning. But in order to learn from Obama we must train ourselves to ignore his words–they mean nothing, and focus instead on his actions, because that is where you will learn the truth.

  39. JanH
    May 10th, 2010 at 8:23 pm

    Obama is faltering at Ahmadinejad’s trapeze act

    Iran is getting away with more and more as the U.S. president stumbles through his failed brand of politically correct diplomacy.
    Correct: why not set it to music?

    He threatens world peace

    With the greatest of ease;

    This nut named Mamoud on

    His Flying Trapeze.

    He kicks Bambis butt

    Until Hugo is pleased;

    And nukes he is building away!

  40. wbboei, Let me see if I understand what Obama is doing compared what Greece has to do now.

    1) The only jobs right now are govt. ones. The pay for those govt. jobs are higher than main street since Obama took over.

    2)Obama has actually screwed up healthcare to the point, not even the Dr.s know what is going on.
    3)Obama is spending money like a drunken sailor


    Conclusion: Obama wants to get us to the point Greece is in….WHY? That’s the question???

    MY ANSWER: When all the rioting, open borders, race rioting, class warfare takes place…it will be easier for the One World Govt.

    THis is just my answer..but I think I am right! They are all in this together!

  41. Scary: the EU bail-out breaches the walls of fiscal and economic sovereignty, the German People are furious with Merkel, and we had better not get too involved in this or we could go down with the ship. This deal may not have long term stability. Lawyers have a saying that hard cases make bad law. In this case, hard economic conditions make for bad policy in the long term.
    Europe Prepares Nuclear Response to Save Monetary Union
    By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
    Telegraph UK
    Published: 7:54PM BST 09 May 2010

    Masked protestersstand outside the Greek Parliament in Athens on Sunday
    Live market reaction to the euro rescue

    “It is an absolute general mobilization: we have decided to give the eurozone a veritable economic government,” said French president Nicolas Sarkozy, once again basking as Europe’s action man. “Today we have an attack on the whole of the eurozone. This is a systemic crisis: the response must be systemic. When the markets open on Monday morning we will be ready to defend the euro.”

    German Chancellor Angela Merkel has so far said little. The descriptions of the deal agreed by EU leaders in the early hours of Saturday are coming from the French bloc and EU bureaucrats. How many times during the Greek saga of the last four months have we heard claims from Brussels that turned out to be a distortion of what Germany had actually agreed, causing each relief rally to falter within days? They had better get it right this time.

    But if the early reports are near true, the accord profoundly alters the character of the European Union. The walls of fiscal and economic sovereignty are being breached. The creation of an EU rescue mechanism with powers to issue bonds with Europe’s AAA rating to help eurozone states in trouble — apparently €60bn, with a separate facility that may be able to lever up to €500bn — is to go far beyond the Lisbon Treaty. This new agency is an EU Treasury in all but name, managing an EU fiscal union where liabilities become shared. A European state is being created before our eyes.

    No EMU country will be allowed to default, whatever the moral hazard. Mrs Merkel seems to have bowed to extreme pressure as contagion spread to Portugal, Ireland, and — the two clinchers — Spain and Italy. “We have a serious situation, not just in one country but in several,” she said.

    The euro’s founding fathers have for now won their strategic bet that monetary union would one day force EU states to create the machinery needed to make it work, or put another way that Germany would go along rather than squander its half-century investment in Europe’s power-war order.

    Whether the German nation will acquiesce for long is another matter. Popular fury over the Greek rescue has already cost Mrs Merkel control over North Rhine-Westphalia and with it the Bundesrat, dooming her reform agenda. The result was a rout.Events are getting out of hand, and not just on the streets of Athens.

    For now, the world has avoided a financial cataclysm that would have been as serious and far-reaching as the collapse of Lehman Brothers, AIG, Fannie and Freddie in September 2008, and perhaps worse given the already depleted capital ratios of banks and the growing aversion to sovereign debt

    Bond risk on European banks as measured by the iTraxx financial index reached even higher levels late last week than in the worst moments of the Lehman crisis. The safe-haven flight into two-year German Schatz was flashing the most extreme stress warnings since the instruments where created forty years ago.”We’re seeing herd behavior in the markets that are really wolfpack behavior,” said Anders Borg, Sweden’s Finance Minister.

    Credit specialists in Frankfurt, London, and New York feared a blow-up by Thursday afternoon, when ECB president Jean-Claude Trichet said the bank’s council had not even discussed the `nuclear option’ of buying Club Med bonds. The ECB seemed to be on another planet.

    It was the fall-out from that press conference — at a moment when markets were losing all confidence in EU leadership — that had much to do with the DOW’s 1000 point drop in New York hours later. This is not to blame Mr Trichet. He did not have a mandate to go further at that stage. The Bundesbank had blocked him, knowing full-well that ECB purchases of bonds is the end of monetary discipline and the start of a Primrose Path to Hell. As they say in Frankfurt, a central bank should be like pudding: “the more you beat it, the harder it gets”.

    It is pointless to fault either camp is this clash of Latin and Teutonic mores. The euro was never an “optimal currency area”, which is to say it was never an “optimal legal and cultural area”. It was a late 20th Century version of the same Hegelian reflex of imposing ideas from above — making facts fit the theory — that has so cursed Europe. Schopenhauer said Hegel had “completely disorganized and ruined the minds of a whole generation”. Little did he know how long the spell would last.

    But I digress. There is a difference between quantitative easing by the US Federal Reserve and the Bank of England for liquidity purposes, and use of this policy to soak up the debt of governments dependent on external finance to cover structural deficits. The lines are of course blurred. One purpose can leak into the other.

    But whatever the objections of the Bundesbank, it seems that Europe’s elected leaders pulled rank this weekend — and high time too says the French Left. The reaction in Germany already been fierce. “The ECB is going crank up the printing presses,” said Anton Börner, head of Germany’s export federation. “In five to ten yeas we will have a weak currency, with rising inflation and higher rates of inflation that will act as a break on growth.”

    I don’t agree with Mr Börner. The M3 money supply is contracting in the eurozone, pointing to the risk of a Japan-style slide into deflationary perma-slump, although the panic response to that down the road may well be to call in the printers. But there is no doubt that Mr Börner represents German opinion.

    The EU is invoking the “exceptional circumstances” clause of Article 122 of the Lisbon Treaty, arguing that the euro is subject to an “organized worldwide attack”. This is a legal minefield. A group of professors has already filed a case at Germany’s Constitutional Court, claiming that the Greek bail-out is illegal and that the EMU is degenerating into a zone of monetary disorder.

    The judges have denied an immediate injunction on aid to Greece, saying that it would to be too “dangerous” to take such a step on limited facts, but it has not yet decided whether to hear the case. The battle has escalated in any case. The new EU rescue mechanism is to be permanent and no longer just bilateral help, if Mr Sarkozy is right. The professors have been given an open goal. One almost suspects that the Kanzleramt in Berlin is so weary of this dispute that it has given up worrying about lawsuits. If the judges block an EU debt union, be it on their heads.

    Nor is this rescue fund any more than chemotherapy for the cancer eating away at the foundations of monetary union. It is not a cure. The rot set it when the South joined EMU before it was ready to cope with ultra-low interest rates or match German wage-bargaining. The ECB made matters worse by gunning M3 at an 11pc rate during the bubble. Club Med lurched from credit boom to bust. It is now trapped in debt deflation at an over-valued exchange rate, like Argentina with its dollar peg in 2001 until air force helicopters rescued President De La Rua from the roof of the Rosada.

    The answer to this — if the objective is to save EMU — is for Germany to boost its growth and tolerate higher `relative’ inflation. This would allow the South to close the gap without tipping into a 1930s Fisherite death spiral. Yet Europe will have none of it. The weekend deal demands yet more belt-tightening from the South. Portugal is to shelve its public works projects. Spain has pledged further cuts. As for Germany, it is preparing fiscal tightening to comply with the new balanced budget amendment in its Grundgesetz.

    While each component makes sense in its own narrow terms, the EU policy as a whole is madness for a currency union. Stephen Lewis from Monument Securities says Europe’s leaders have forgotten the lesson of the “Gold Bloc” in the second phase of the Great Depression, when a reactionary and over-proud Continent ground itself into slump by clinging to deflationary totemism long after the circumstances had rendered this policy suicidal. We all know how it ended

  42. Soros moving everything along for his one world government!

    Brazil Enters Hyperinflationary
    Blow-Out Phase
    May 6, 2010 (EIRNS)—This release was issued today by the Lyndon LaRouche Political Action Committee (LPAC).

    The disintegration is centered in Europe, and also Brazil,” Lyndon LaRouche advised participants in a private gathering of diplomats in Washington yesterday.

    In fact, as the Eurozone meltdown spreads across the region, the situation in Brazil — which is the carry trade destination so essential to the Inter-Alpha’s group’s international speculative bubble — has now entered a phase of hyperinflationary blow-out.

    After Brazil’s central bank raised interest rates by 0.75% last week, market traders are betting that they will be jacked up by another 1.0% next month, and even further beyond that — purportedly because inflation is raging out of control. “The front end of the curve has just blown out,” a Citigroup analyst stated. “The momentum is so strong that it’s hard to step in front of it.”

    The huge speculative carry trade into Brazil has led to credit growing inside the country by 47% per annum. So, rising interest rates are needed to continue to attract the carry trade flows, to try to keep the bubble from bursting. As the London Financial Times editorially warned Brazil today, “complacency” is dangerous: “the worst falls often come just when you are strutting your stuff.” They point to the fact that Brazil is awash in liquidity, and that housing prices in Rio de Janeiro are rising by around 50% per year, “just two early warnings of a post-boom headache to come.”

    A major component of the financial bubble inside the country, through which the population is being savagely looted, are payroll deductible loans. This is one of Banco Santander’s big “growth” areas in Brazil, and represents over half of all consumer credit in the country. Average interest rates are 2.5% per month, and regulations were recently altered to allow for people to take out such credits for up to 30% of their monthly income. Pensioners are particular targets for these predatory practices, with 89% of pensioners sucked into the operation, often because it is the only way they can purchase food and other vital items. The total amount owed by pensioners as of March 2010, was 111% more than what they owed one year earlier.

  43. Connie: the global financial system is very fragile at the moment. The corrective steps taken under circumstances of duress tend to have long term consequences, unfortunately. On the one hand you can see the logic behind this huge bail out. On the other hand, you can readily appreciate the reaction of the countries who will be called upon to finance the bailout. There is rioting in Athens by people who do not want their entitlements cut. Ultimately, that rioting may spread to Germany. As the German people take to the streets, the question they will demand answers to from their leaders is why should we who have managed our economy frugally, and are already subject to a 45% tax rate, be required to tighten our collective belt even further, and sacrifice our future in order to bail out nations that spent money like a drunken sailor to use your words? The wind sheer in that debate will be enough to tear things apart and end the career of more than one politician. I doubt this crisis was orchestrated. The kind of crisis Soros and company like to orchestrate are those that they can control. This one has more the feel of an Armadeddon to it, so I think they were caught short like everyone else. But that does not preclude them from taking advantage of it now that it has happened.

  44. Connie we have got to get Barack off the basketball court long enough to tend to this Euro crisis. This is why the bots elected him–to make magic and solve intractable problems. All in a days work for a messiah. So why the reticence? Lassie come home, I mean ah er Barach get over to the Haig and show those benighted European what a man born in Kenya can do. If he is half as smart as that idiot Bill Maher says he is, then solving this problem will be child’s play.

  45. wbboei, I agree, feels like armagaddeon to me too. I think Soros and Zbig started this crap by dabbling to make sure their boyking got elected and it backfired and went out of control.

    I also can’t get over what Hillary said on 60 min…I just can’t get it out of my head…they were asking about Chelsea’s secret wedding date…she laughed and said it was a state secret…then added for no reason…”I can keep a secret”. I don’t know why but it was just weird. Of coarse we all hang on her every word for secret messages which I am sure we are all nuts, but with things this bad, I look at everything closely.

    Now Obama telling us that all the new information age is bad…does this mean hes about to shut down the internet??? Who knows, times are crazy…I am just glad Hillary is there…she is level headed and will try and keep us from going down the tubes if it is within her power.

  46. Yes, I can smell Soros in the woodpile too- The absence of his name mentioned anywhere when Soros’ specialty is bankrupting nations speaks like thunder.

    Federal Reserve opens credit line to Europe

    WASHINGTON – The Federal Reserve late Sunday opened a program to ship U.S. dollars to Europe in a move to head off a broader financial crisis on the continent.

    Other central banks, including the Bank of Canada, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, the Swiss National Bank and the Bank of Japan also are involved in the dollar swap effort.

    The move comes after the European Union and International Monetary Fund pledged a nearly $1 trillion defense package for the embattled euro, hoping to calm jittery markets and halt attacks on the eurozone’s weakest members. The ECB also jumped into the bond market Sunday night, saying it is ready to buy eurozone bonds to shore up liquidity in “dysfunctional” markets.

    The Fed’s action reopens a program put in place during the 2008 global financial crisis under which dollars are shipped overseas through the foreign central banks. In turn, these central banks can lend the dollars out to banks in their home countries that are in need of dollar funding to prevent the European crisis from spreading further.

    The Fed said action is being taken “in response to the reemergence of strains in U.S. dollar short-term funding markets in Europe,” and to prevent the spread of that strain to other markets and financial centers.

    A so-called “swap” line with the Bank of Canada provides up to $30 billion. Figures weren’t provided for the other central banks. The arrangements are authorized through January 2011.

    The debt crisis first erupted in Greece. Fears that it could spread to Spain, Portugal and other eurozone countries. The crisis has pushed up demand for the U.S. dollar and has sharply weakened the value of the euro, the currency used by 16 European countries. Eurozone ministers and the IMF this weekend approved a $140 billion rescue package of loans to Greece for the next three years to keep it from imploding.

    The Fed had wound down these crisis-era programs with other central banks in February, along with other emergency programs to get lending flowing more freely again and return stability to financial markets. At that time, financial strains in the United States were easing, and the Fed began to take steps to move policy closer to normal.

    It also had begun to lay out a plan to reel in the unprecedented stimulus money pumped out during the crisis. The Fed’s balance sheet ballooned to $2.3 trillion, more than double where it stood before the crisis struck. The program reopened on Sunday will expand the Fed’s balance sheet, economists say. However, the program poses little credit risk to the Fed because the arrangements are with other central banks, they added.

    Soros is cashing in on this crisis and as always we will hear his version of what happened after the fact.

  47. Here he goes again…


    Obama to host first ever reception honoring U.S. Jewish Heritage month
    Obama: We are a stronger, more hopeful country because so many Jews have made America their home.

    By Natasha Mozgovaya

    U.S. ‫President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama will host at the end of the month the first ever White House reception honoring Jewish American Heritage Month, the White House announced on Monday.

    “The Jewish American story is an essential chapter of the American narrative. It is one of refuge from persecution; of commitment to service, faith, democracy, and peace; and of tireless work to achieve success,” Obama said in a press statement regarding Jewish Heritage month.

    “Jewish Americans have shaped our Nation and helped steer the course of our history,” Obama said, adding that “we are a stronger and more hopeful country because so many Jews from around the world have made America their home.”‬

    The president intends to invite leaders from the Jewish community, and prominent Jewish Americans ranging from top athletes to members of Congress, business leaders, scholars, military veterans, and astronauts, the press statement said.

    “The reception serves as an opportunity to highlight and celebrate the range and depth of Jewish American heritage and contributions to American culture,” the statement added.

    Since the U.S. president George Bush’s administration, the White House has celebrated May as the month of Jewish Heritage. This year’s reception intends to “highlight and celebrate the range and depth of Jewish American heritage and contributions to American culture,” the White House statement said.

  48. Mrs. Smith @ 7:52

    Those “swaps” are a big Ponzi. Here’s how they work: The Fed gives a billion dollars to the Eurobanks, and in return gets a “check” for an equal amount of Euros. But they do not cash the check. They simply hold the check. So now the Eurobanks have an infusion of dollars, plus the Euros that they originally had never leave their account. – they can still use them as part of their “positive” balance sheet. Note that if you or I ran our accounting for our small business this way, we’d be in jail for fraud.

    Sooo……what do the Eurobanks do then? They do what they are doing today – they short the Euro like mad. It’s to their benefit if the value of the Euro falls, because that means that the “check” they just gave the Fed is worth less and less.

    All the posturing that they were “protecting the Euro” or “shoring up the Euro” is complete bullshit. They are doing the opposite. That money is going to disappear down a black hole of bankster profits (the Eurobanks are making billions today shorting their own currency), and we will be right back where we started with insolvent countries. The only difference will be that the banks made a killing while getting us back where we started.

    This system is so gamed that it’s not even funny. It’s like continually being required to give blood to save the life of your rapists.

  49. Denninger is dead on with this this morning:

    Let’s see if I can figure out what’s happened here.

    Banks shorted the Euro, (correctly) surmising that Greece, Portugal, Spain and others can’t possibly cover their debts.

    The ECB freaks out as the Euro heads toward PAR and calls “emergency meetings” (forgetting, I might add, that the Euro traded under PAR not that long ago.)

    The ECB and Eurozone decides to “defend” the Euro with €1t in “defensive measures”, including buying bonds of bankrupt sovereigns (gee, that’s nice – monetization by another name.) Since the ECB and EuroZone cognescenti is of course connected to the large banks in Europe (including France, where Sarkozy is located) these banks know to back off on Friday (notice the nice little uptick?) to lock in their bonuses from these insanely-profitable trades against their own currency.

    The very same banks, including the ones in Sarkozy’s back yard, see the very nice spike and short the Euro even harder, (correctly) surmising that they have successfully stuck the gun up the nose of the ECB!

    Rinse and repeat until you have all the money.

    Naw, it wouldn’t be that simple, would it? Why of course it would.

    See, lending someone money when they’re bankrupt can’t possibly make them not-bankrupt. It can only make them more-bankrupt. As a consequence the ECB’s action is self-destructive and doomed to fail, and as a consequence there is no reason for these banks to back off at all! Indeed, quite to the contrary – they have (correctly) deduced that they can make billion in bonuses by shorting their own currency to destruction, forcing ever-larger “interventions” by the ECB!

    If you’ve ever seen a meth addict goose himself with his drug of choice to the point where his teeth literally fall out, you know how this story ends.

  50. JanH
    May 11th, 2010 at 8:26 am
    Here he goes again…

    The “Bubble Boy” president is able to pretend that all his slights and dissings are all just some silly misunderstanding, (air kiss), “Who loves ya, baby”.

    But many of the people who voted for him are now really pissed off. He sold them out.

    For many Jews, they don’t forget last week or last month when it was made clear which countries Obama seeks to make inroads with (safe havens for terrorists, anti-Semitic states, oil sheiks) and which allies he’s willing to undo decades of cooperation.

    “Come to the White House. Meet the President. Feel SPECIAL. Please donate.”

    He is a terrible hypocrite.

  51. just got an email from bill clinton with the big HILLARY letterhead looking for donations to pay off her debt! I thought they had done that! wonder what’s up are they testing her email list! So excited just to see the letter head. here reading every day, WAITING PATIENTLY!

  52. Someone hands him a piece of paper. It comes from Summers. It tells him what to say. It says call the leaders of France and Germany. Tell them taxpayer bailouts are a beautiful thing. Tell them that is how I I I I I I I averted similar debacle in the United States. And promise to send them taxpayer money from the Federal Reserve. The dumb taxpayers who cannot see how badly they are being screwed. Even worse the clueless bots with saliva dripping out of their mouths, screaming Bush obscenities, and burning incense for their messiah.

    But take away the teleprompter and the telephone notes written by someone else and what have you got? The man who is so much smarter than the rest of us, according to the Canadian honker goose Maher? No. The great empty. Clueless and controlled, and not not never on the side of the American People. Just a jiggalo.

    Crisis Delayed Not Averted

    They blinked.

    The European Union and European Central Bank stole a play from the wizards in Washington to avert an immediate currency crisis in the EU and the potential ripple effect around the world. Did they do the right thing? For me, the question of addressing the fiscal crisis within the EU is not one of right or wrong; rather, when the crisis comes, how large will it be and how long will it last?

    The trillion dollar package provided by the European Central Bank, the European Union itself, and the IMF is a combination of loan guarantees and quantitative easing. Shock and awe and punish those who would dare sell the Euro short, right? Clearly, the massive injection of capital will squeeze those who have shorted the Euro, but what about the long haul?

    The EU is subverting the very tenets upon which the union was founded. Those tenets precluded this type of financial bailout. Violation of a moral hazard, perhaps? Straight from the Washington playbook. In fact, reports indicate that President Obama himself called on German Prime Minister Angela Merkel and French Prime Minister Nicolas Sarkozy to compel them to implement this plan. What about rules of law and principles of treaties upon which those investing capital make decisions? The ends obviously justify the means for these political leaders.

    The markets will rally today, the shorts will scurry to cover, and the pom-poms will bounce mightily. But has anything really changed? The core of our global economy, and especially the economies of selected nations within the EU, remains gutted by excessive debts. That debt remains. Who will hold the nations within the EU accountable to address these debts?

    Who is holding the political powers in Washington accountable? The markets have always been the mechanism to impose the necessary discipline. Markets can be gamed for a while, but ultimately the bills must be paid. Our political leaders have chosen to pay these bills by screwing future generations while kicking the debt can down the road.

    The charades and shell games being played out in Washington and now the EU are not averting the inevitable economic pain and underperformance, but only delaying it.

    Violating rules and principles of economic treaties and unions comes with a price. The EU and global economy still have to pay that price.


  53. jtjames
    May 11th, 2010 at 10:32 am

    This is what politico says…

    Clinton campaign raffles Bill

    Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign committee blasted out a rare email to its list in Bill Clinton’s name today, offering a chance to spend time with the former president in exchange for contributions that could, he says, retire the last of her debt.

    Clinton writes:

    Hillary’s campaign still has a few vestiges of debt that I know she would like to see paid in full. Will you reach out today to help Hillary this one last time? If you enter between now and May 18th, you might join me for a day in New York.

    Click here to help pay down the last of our campaign debt, and we might fly you to New York to spend the day with me.

    Dear xxx,

    During the 2008 campaign I had the opportunity to meet Hillary’s supporters from all over the country. I met so many wonderful people and had so many great conversations.

    A few months ago, I had a chance to do that again, when the campaign flew one of Hillary’s biggest supporters, who won our previous contest, to New York to visit me. We talked about how Hillary’s doing as Secretary of State and the current state of the world, and about the work of my foundation.

    I had such a good time that I’d like to do it again. How would you like the chance to come up to New York and spend a day with me?

    Hillary’s campaign still has a few vestiges of debt that I know she would like to see paid in full. Will you reach out today to help Hillary this one last time? If you enter between now and May 18th, you might join me for a day in New York.

    Click here to help pay down the last of our campaign debt, and we might fly you to New York to spend the day with me.

    I’m so proud of the work Hillary has done as Secretary of State, traveling the world, restoring the country’s alliances, and making America stronger. And as I watch health care reform sweep the country, I can’t help but think about how much she has contributed over the years to make the progress we are making possible.

    I know you share my pride in all her accomplishments, and I know how much your continued support means to her.

    And yes, she still needs your help. That’s why we’re going to choose one supporter who enters between now and May 18th and fly them and a guest to New York, where they’ll spend a day with me.

    Contribute $5 or more today for your chance to join me for a day in New York City.

    Thank you for the wonderful support you’ve shown to both me and Hillary over the years. Our lives are richer for knowing you.

    Bill Clinton

  54. Yes by all means let’s change the message, cover up the responsibility, and pretend we are brillian leaders…

    Tuesday May 11, 2010

    Obama Administration Plans Oil Drilling Agency Split

    By Mark Drajem and James Rowley

    May 11 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama will propose splitting the government agency that administers offshore oil drilling into two sections as part of the response to the spill in the Gulf of Mexico, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

    The Minerals Management Service enforces rig safety rules and partners with companies such as BP Plc and Exxon Mobil Corp. to develop oil and gas reserves and collect royalties. The Obama administration wants to divide those tasks, Gibbs said in a statement on Twitter.

    Interior Secretary Ken Salazar will announce steps to “toughen inspections and oversight” of offshore rigs at 1 p.m. today in Washington, the agency said.

    House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said he supports splitting the duties of the agency, which is part of the U.S. Interior Department. That way, he told reporters in Washington, “you have a vigorous element” to “look at the safety aspects and let somebody else” in the Interior Department collect revenue.

    Republican Representative Darrell Issa of California said in a statement that the mineral agency “has been an agency in crisis” for more than a decade. He said he hoped Salazar’s proposal would be “a first step in what must be a comprehensive effort that will address the entirety of the bureaucratic breakdown at Interior.”

    Independent Agency

    Issa has introduced legislation to separate the Minerals Management Service from the Interior Department and make it an independent agency like the Internal Revenue Service.

    Hearings are starting today in Washington and Louisiana on the explosion and sinking of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, which caused the leak of BP’s oil well.

    “We need to look at what happened, why it happened and what we need to do to respond to that,” said Hoyer of Maryland.

    BP will make another attempt to control the leaking oil well within a week by putting a smaller containment dome over it, Chief Executive Officer Tony Hayward said yesterday in Houston.

  55. JanH
    May 11th, 2010 at 12:09 pm

    May 11th, 2010 at 10:32 am

    I got this email from the Big Dawg today too and was hoping to find a message in the tea leaves.

    I thought the debt was paid off, and why NOW would it come up?
    Anyone know the details of debts and future running for office?

    Could it be a Bat signal????

    I am going to donate a little bit to let them know I am waiting in the wings for Hillary to run again.

  56. #
    May 11th, 2010 at 12:03 am

    Shadowfax– we can even learn from Obama. For example, we can learn how to lie with impunity; how to polarize a society; how to throw supporters under the bus; and how do Rezko deals with the same lobbyists he promised to drive out of Washington when he was campaigning. But in order to learn from Obama we must train ourselves to ignore his words–they mean nothing, and focus instead on his actions, because that is where you will learn the truth.

    You’re preaching to the choir here, dude!

  57. Shadowfax, that is something…I just woke up darnit. I can’t sleep at night like a normal person again. I was up playing those stupid facebook games again wishing I could find some morsel of evidence that either Hillary is running again or that Obama was going to follow Gordon Brown into “Never Never Land”. One can wish, can’t they??

    Wow, I would love to spend the day with Bill in New York…but I am on a fixed income now thanks to Odummer. I will have to look and see if I got that email…I might could squeeze out $5.44 if admin is still doing that and if he still has paypal… LOL!

  58. Confloyd, I am flat broke too and will be sending a tiny bit… $4.50 to pass on my bat signal. 🙂

  59. confloyd
    Update on the donation…no paypal on the site so you need to use a debit/credit card…

    And $5 is the min. you can donate, so I had to change my bat signal to $5.45 😆


    “As we take the next steps in our journey, I know you’ll be right there with me, as always, in my heart and by my side.

    Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless America”

    – Hillary Rodham Clinton

    Contact Information:
    Friends of Hillary
    1825 K Street NW, Suite 1000
    Washington DC, 20006

    Email Us
    Help Retire Hillary’s campaign debt

  60. Well, don’t have any of that, but thanks for sending the address I will send it via the post office…I did that the last time too…it gets there, just not as fast!

  61. confloyd

    Slow is good, you can slip in a note for Hillary. 😉

    I sent her a message to run again, too.

  62. I someone has already posted this…Obama again!

    11 May 2010
    * Euro slips, Asian stocks down 1 pct after Monday’s rally

    * Concerns over euro zone’s debt challenge come to fore

    * IMF says Greek debt sustainable, but plenty of risks

    * Moody’s says may downgrade Portugal, Greece

    * Japan’s minister warns its high debt may unsettle markets

    TOKYO, May 11 (Reuters) – Excitement over the euro zone’s mammoth $1 trillion rescue package gave way on Tuesday to doubts whether its weakest economies can meet their end of the bargain and deliver drastic debt cuts, driving the euro and stocks lower.

    The emergency plan — the biggest since G20 leaders threw money at the global economy following the collapse of Lehman Brothers (G03.SI – news) in 2008 — impressed markets with its sheer size and sparked a spectacular rally in world stocks and the euro.

    Yet financial markets turned cautious when they reopened for business in Asia on Tuesday, with investors concerned that the plan was not a long-term solution to problems plaguing the 11-year old single currency area.

    In a sobering note, the International Monetary Fund said that even though Greece’s public debt was sustainable over the medium term, the nation whose debt woes spurred the unprecedented euro zone action, faced plenty of risks. [ID:nN10120683]

    Moody’s credit ratings agency also warned it might downgrade Portugal’s debt rating and further cut Greece’s to junk status, noting the contagion effect of Greece’s crisis on other euro zone members. [ID:nN10227186]

    “Contagion has spread from Greece — historically a weaker credit in the context of the euro zone — to sovereigns with stronger credit metrics like Portugal, Ireland and Spain,” Moody’s said.


    Stock markets started with modest gains, but turned negative with Tokyo shares down 0.9 percent and markets elsewhere in Asia-Pacific (002790.KS – news) down 1 percent , a far cry from a nearly 4 percent jump in Wall Street blue chips overnight.

    The euro slipped 0.5 percent against the yen and traded 0.2 percent down from late U.S. trade against the dollar after it climbed as much as 3 percent on the rescue news.

    “Even though one of the worst scenarios — a Greek default — has been avoided for now, in many ways solving the bigger problems have simply been postponed and new issues could emerge in places such as Portugal and Spain,” said Nagayuki Yamagishi, a strategist at Mitsubishi UFJ Morgan Stanley Securities.

    In another sign of market caution, safe-haven U.S. Treasuries stabilised in Asian trade after Monday’s plunge.

    Markets initially cheered the rescue plan as a sign that for the first time in the six months of a deepening debt crisis, European leaders appear to have got ahead of the curve with decisive action.

    But the deal left many longer-term questions about whether Europe’s weakest economies can manage their debt and how the European Union can develop more coherent economic and fiscal policies to underpin the single currency.

    With many nations saddled with record deficits after they pumped trillions of dollars into their economies during the global crisis, officials from Washington to Beijing applauded Europe’s efforts to keep the crisis contained within its bounds.


    In Japan, the world’s most indebted industrialized nation, government officials warned Tokyo could no longer take investors’ willingness to bankroll its spending for granted.

    Japan so far has had no trouble financing its deficits, even as its public debt is forecast to reach 200 percent of GDP within a year or so, thanks to a vast pool of domestic savings and reliance on domestic investors to foot the bill.

    But this could change, Strategy Minister Yoshito Sengoku warned, saying financial markets may start taking note of Japan’s debt burden, while Finance Minister Naoto Kan said next year’s new borrowing should not exceed this year’s new bond sales.

    “Japan needs to draw a lesson from Greece’s problems and to take steps on fiscal discipline with a stronger sense of crisis than before,” he told a news conference on Tuesday. European leaders sprung into action and cobbled together a package that dwarfed the 110 billion euro rescue for Greece after interbank lending started freezing up on Friday in an ominous reminder of the Lehman crisis.

    With memories still fresh of how the U.S. subprime market’s collapse spiralled into a global financial and economic crisis, Europe acted out of concern that after pummelling profligate Greece, markets could take aim at other fiscally weak nations, threatening the stability of the whole euro area.

    Concerns that credit markets could freeze again also appeared to have forced the European Central Bank’s hand, which joined the rescue with a pledge to buy government bonds — a “nuclear option” it had resisted for months.

    Euro zone central banks immediately began implementing the ECB’s part of the deal, buying government bonds in the open market.

    The move impressed analysts just as much as the size of the 750 billion euro package of standby funds and loan guarantees that could be tapped by euro zone governments shut out of credit markets.

    That amount includes 250 billion euros that the IMF could contribute, even though its No. 2 official John Lipsky said his institution had not earmarked any money for euro zone countries and help would be provided on a case-by-case basis.

    Fears that the crisis could spread well beyond Greece, helped overcome initial resistance in Germany and other nations to a bailout after Athens had for years misled its EU peers about the true state of its finances.

    “This package serves to strengthen and protect our common currency,” German Chancellor Angela Merkel told reporters in Berlin. [ID:nLDE6490RE]

    Germany and the Netherlands, sticklers for budget discipline, insisted the rescue programme was linked to the same kind of draconian austerity measures already imposed on Greece.

    Dutch Finance Minister Jan Kees de Jager told parliament Spain and Portugal had made a commitment to cut their budgets substantially in 2010 and 2011 as a condition for the safety net. EU Monetary Affairs Commissioner Olli Rehn said both states must commit themselves to further savings this year too.

    Spain said it had no intention of drawing on the funds. (Additional reporting by Elaine Lies, Masayuki Kitano, Leika

  63. Gordon Brown is resigning by 8 pm tonight per Fox and Sky News…please can he come and get Obama too…they both can go live with Soros in Switzerland. LOL!

    WOW! Looks like they ran him out of town on a rail! LOL!

  64. OT: but very inspiring…

    Touted as the next Susan Boyle

    Britain’s Got Talent – Jany Cutler

  65. wbboei, where are you?? I have a question on a conservative I found in one of my moms books, he’s dead but hoping to find those that have his same vision…his name is Jessie Helms. Do you know anything about this guy???

Comments are closed.