Americans can settle in for a lengthy media overfeeding at the trough of Michele Bachmann, and Rick Perry is cowboy boot-deep in hay, hitting on America. (04:00)
Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry excitement belongs to the ages once media talk turns to Paul Ryan, and Ed Schultz sees racism in Rick Perry's "black cloud."
VS
Because of a 24 hr news cycle one of the problems is that conflict MUST be manufactured to keep viewers...
A PBS investigation about the financial crisis reveals that "Long before the meltdown, one woman tried to warn about a threat to the financial system..."
Introduction from the video:
ANNOUNCER: Tonight on FRONTLINE, long before the economic meltdown, the story of one woman who tried to warn about the threat to the financial system.
MANUEL ROIG-FRANZIA, The Washington Post: She saw something that people either had not seen or refused to see. And she tried to sound the warning. Nobody listened.
Rep. SPENCER BACHUS (R), Alabama: What are you trying to protect?
BROOKSLEY BORN, CFTC Chair, 1996-'99: We're trying to protect the money of the American public.
ARTHUR LEVITT, SEC Chairman, 1993-'01: I was told that she was irascible, difficult, stubborn, unreasonable.
NARRATOR: Before the toxic assets poisoned the economy, she warned of their danger.
RON SUSKIND, Author, The Price of Loyalty: And that made her the enemy of a very, very large number of people.
NARRATOR: She would fight an epic battle with one of the most powerful men in Washington.
DAVID WESSEL, Author, In Fed We Trust: He was, as George Bush put it at the time, a rock star.
JOE NOCERA, The New York Times: It got pretty nasty pretty quickly.
MICHAEL GREENBERGER, CFTC Director, 1997-'99: Greenspan turns to her, she turns to him, his face is red and he's clearly quite upset.
On Alan Greenspan: After several decades of policy making this statement reflects Alan Greenspan's years of 'public' service "Testifying before Congress on the financial crisis, Greenspan admits that his premise that markets could be trusted to regulate themselves was wrong."
Notes:
1. 29 minutes 10 seconds- "this deregulated market is part of the reason we are having this boom" - Alan Greenspan supports the boom bust cycle.
2. 38 mins - Math geniuses thought they had a full proof money making system and this group included people who had won the Nobel Prize. - The foundations of math are based on assumptions or in other words, just because a mathematical model has results that could mean there are other worlds existing right next to us, doesn't make it so (such as multiverse model or the many worlds theory). [ Math has a practical function and a purely theoretical function as every field of knowledge. ] .
3. 39 - 40 mins - 'Many banks had invested in the derivatives believing they were the only ones' i.e. This is like having 15 owners for the same house - basic fraud or scamming being done by a gambling model based on statistical averages of historical financial market fluctuations.
4. 45 mins 20 seconds - 'you keep seeing these regulators saying the market knows best how to regulate' thereby leaving banks free to take on riskier assets (while ignoring the warnings of watchdogs)= Results 45 mins and 36 seconds - 'by 2007 the OTC market was at over 500 trillion dollars and consisted of most, if not all, of a 'boom' - In other words, a recession had begun and was being propped up by over leveraging assets/derivatives (selling one house to 15 people, in full) - followed by a TARP bailout with huge bonuses... wow!
More about how the Bail out money was used:
The big banks make money by taking the bailout money we gave them and lending it back to the government with interest.
The country's best-known financier, Robert Rubin, joins forces with Greenspan. Both men believe the less regulation on the market, the better.Read more.
So far, only regulation allows market transparency(according to our economic structure), therefore...
Procter & Gamble sues Bankers Trust claiming the bank's derivatives deals has cost P&G millions. The lawsuit reveals what's really going on in the completely dark and unregulated derivatives market. Read more
Approx 1 minute - Goldman Sacks uses a monetary device called a 'currency swap' and another 'credit default swaps'. A financial mess created by elite business men in the United States which is not regulated and therefore there is no transparency or accountability.[Dealing with this problem earlier would not have created the need for radical solutions in such a short period of time, such as raising the retirement age etc.]
May 1998
One Regulator Is Closely Eyeing Derivatives
The new chairperson of the CFTC, Brooksley Born, sees systemic risk in the virtually unregulated, high-stakes derivatives market. She starts a campaign to regulate the secretive, multitrillion-dollar market. Read more.
This hedge fund invented complex mathematical formulas and placed bets using derivatives -- all of it done in secret. LTCM's crisis also reveals how the world has become financially interconnected.Read more.
Dec 1998
No to Born; No to Regulation
Despite LTCM's near-collapse, Congress and top regulators resoundingly reject Brooksley Born's push to regulate derivatives. Read more.
"Because of our inability to regulate financial markets, we have no idea who has the credit default swaps"...
For decades big banks pressed Congress to repeal the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and allow investment banks and commercial banks to merge. It finally happens. The new superbanks are free to make riskier investments. Read more.
March 2000
Tech Bubble Bursts in Late '90s
It had been fueled by the notion that old rules no longer applied (such as, businesses needed to make a profit). Investors and the SEC smell a rat in the way investment banks handled those IPO deals.Read more.
May 2000
Two Boston financial analysts figure out Bernard Madoff probably is running a Ponzi scheme.Read more
2001-2006
Housing Prices Can Only Go Up!
After the Internet bust, and then 9/11, Alan Greenspan lowers interest rates. It fuels a massive housing boom. But by 2007, the party's over. Read more
The lower interest rates, over long periods of time, combined with the above policies hit the housing market together
Note: 3 mins and 30 secs - Says 'we didn't realize housing doesn't go up forever' yet the excuse for the derivatives housing nonsense (triple AAA rated toxic assets) is 'this is the normal financial crises that occurs every 5-7 years'.
Feb 2006
Alan Greenspan retires, replaced by Ben Bernanke. Before leaving office, Greenspan receives the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the country's highest honor. Read more.
March 2008
Bears Stearn Freefall
Rumors fly about Bear's huge exposure in subprime mortgages -- soon to be dubbed "toxic assets." Investors rush to pull their money out of the investment bank. Read more.
Sept. 7, 2008
The U.S. Nationalizes Fannie and Freddie
The crisis is spreading. And the two mortgage giants with $5 trillion in assets, are the definition of "systemic risk." Read more.
1. 2 institutions owned 50% of the mortgage market.
2. Not backed by capital
3. Double dealing with wall street and congress - Mentality: Boom and Bust - Trying to score big off a gamble, very casino movie kinda game play.
4. "Profits get privatized and losses get socialized"
5. Over-subsidy on housing also presented people to own half an 'American Dream' (the other half being hard work to deserve what you get) - Combined with a shrinking public sector job market and consolidation of private firms into conglomerates (reducing private sector job market)- squeezed the job market on two sides.
6. Useful to prevent companies from becoming 'too big to fail' in the first place.
Sept. 12-14, 2008
Lehman Brothers Nears Collapse
But Treasury Secretary Paulson, a free marketer, refuses to have the government bail out Lehman. For him, moral hazard trumps systemic risk.Read more.
Sept. 13, 2008
A Secret Deal
As Lehman melts down, it appears Merrill Lynch, the second-largest investment bank, could be next. Paulson, Ken Lewis, John Thain secretly cut a deal: Bank of America will buy Merrill. Read more.
Sept. 15-16, 2008
Markets Crash, Credit Freezes
The Merrill deal can't stop the meltdown; Lehman was more interconnected than anyone realized. Read more.
AIG had sold credit default swaps -- a type of insurance -- against the collapse of Lehman, assuming it could never happen. Read more.
The Paulson Three-Pager Requesting $700 Billion Economist Simon Johnson's opinion on the document Paulson sent Congress Sept. 18, 2008 asking for the money. Read more.
"As close to a blank check as you can get without asking for a blank check"...
(see 1 minute 30 seconds into video: Paulson requires no oversight or accountability)
...and its all given to all the institutions. Then Congress did some grandstanding while they didn't even attach requirements to the money they gave in the bail outs...
To boost the nation's confidence in the banks and get them lending again, Paulson tells nine CEOs each of their banks will get tens of billions; the government will become a major stakeholder. Read more.
Oct. 23, 2008
Testifying before Congress on the financial crisis, Greenspan admits that his premise that markets could be trusted to regulate themselves was wrong.Read more.
Dec. 2008
Bernard Madoff, head of a prominent Wall Street trading firm -- and an unlicensed investment adviser -- confesses to a Ponzi scheme that's cost investors $65 billion. Read more.
Dec 2008
Government's Message to Bank of America
Bernanke and Paulson tell Ken Lewis: "You cannot pull out of the Merrill deal" -- even though BofA is facing $15 billion in losses on Merrill's balance sheets. Read more.
Jan 2009
The New President's Challenges
Credit markets are frozen, there's rising unemployment and housing foreclosures, two wars -- plus a growing national debt. Read more.
Given that doing something, even taking advice can become a habit to the point where you may trust a source just on habit (which is almost an old wives tale by now, i.e. 'it takes 21 days to form a habit':
Notes: The big 3 - S&P, Moody's and Finch - are the main cause of the 2008 financial meltdown. - 2. They get paid by private companies for private ratings! clear contradiction of interest, especially when a private company is exerting influence on any economy (much less a global economy).
Notes: Investigation into why credit agencies rated mortgage securities as AAA when they obviously weren't. 2. Fintch avoided downgrading US but went after New Jersey!.
Credit rating agencies have become a threat to stability:
But beyond the rights and wrongs of this row lie deeper questions of how much trust should be placed in credit rating agencies and whether the influence they have over sovereign debt markets needs to be curbed. Politicians are right to fear the agencies' red pens. A downgrade sends up the cost of borrowing and can plunge nations deeper into a spiral of indebtedness. The Greek debt crisis laid bare the immense, and some would say unwarranted, power that they wield. Unsurprisingly, the big three – S&P, Moody's and Fitch – have come under fire, with Germany and France calling for their wings to be clipped.
Credit agencies operate in the obscure backwaters of the financial system, but played a major role in the meltdown.
Moody's, Standard & Poor's and Fitch, the world's biggest agencies, have been criticised by the EU and by high-deficit countries for exacerbating the crisis, as a downgrade fuels investors' fears about the ability of any debtor to repay its loans. The discussion started when Greece was downgraded at the height of the market turbulence this year that ultimately pushed the country into a bailout programme.
Ireland's cut, which puts it on the same level as Russia and Lithuania, pushes up its borrowing costs – a burden that a country already in the midst of draconian budget cuts can ill-afford.
The ratings agencies received widespread criticism for their role in the financial crisis after giving AAA ratings to investments made up of sub-prime home loans that subsequently imploded. S&P attracted more heat in August when it downgraded the US's debt. A move that US treasury secretary Tim Geithner said showed "terrible judgement".
The SEC is weighing action over a particular CDO known as Delphinus CDO 2007-1, which was singled out as a "striking example" of what went wrong in the credit crisis by the Senate committee report Wall Street and the Financial Crisis, published in April.
The $1.6bn (£1bn) CDO was downgraded a few months after AAA ratings were issued by both S&P and rival Moody's. The ratings agencies awarded tranches of the investment their top grade in July and August of 2007 but had begun downgrading them by the end of the year, "and by the end of 2008, had fully downgraded its AAA-rated securities to junk status," according to the report.
German government had to actually seek assurances that the credit agencies wouldn't interfere with the tough economic problem the Europeans have:
An EX- Fed guy talks about credit rating agencies:
About credit ranking agencies, "I think they've injected themselves into a situation that is beyond their comprehension" (1 min 40 secs approx).
Also, "Its not like their record has been so distinguished that they deserve precedence in this area" approx 2mins
An ex-credit agency guy says:
Harrington, who worked at Moody's for 11 years until he resigned last year, said ratings agencies suffer from a conflict of interest because they are paid by the banks and companies they are supposed to rate objectively.
Critics argue that the rating agencies were compromised in the decision making on the banks after it was discovered by shocked policymakers that financial product providers paid the agencies to assess their wares.
The agencies owned up to their mistakes in the wake of the crisis. They agreed assessments made of derivatives at the heart of the crisis were flawed.
But they have maintained that their assessments of government economic policies and the effects on government debt remain relevant and robust.
The following quotes in italics are an extract from Republican Platform of 1856 (The original and True Republican Party Platform):
Resolved, That the highwayman's plea, that might makes right," embodied in the Ostend Circular, was in every respect unworthy of American diplomacy, and would bring shame and dishonor upon any Government or people that gave it their sanction.
Resolved, That a railroad to the Pacific Ocean by the most central and practicable route is imperatively demanded by the interests of the whole country, and that the Federal Government ought to render immediate and efficient aid in its construction, and as an auxiliary thereto, to the immediate construction of an emigrant road on the line of the railroad.
Resolved, That appropriations by Congress for the improvement of rivers and harbors, of a national character, required for the accommodation and security of our existing commerce, are authorized by the Constitution, and justified by the obligation of the Government to protect the lives and property of its citizens.
The above two points are about infrastructure development projects. Without good roads you can't have reliable transportation for goods or even mobility between the states. In other words, good economic development projects not only provide temporary jobs and local economic boosts but provide an opportunity for business to grow and economic development to occur - All factors remaining constant that is or as it's called in economics 'ceteris paribas' [ Read more about government spending to develop infrastructure (if you haven't already) here.]
If you are aware of Republican politics of our times then you know that the above platform of 1856 is an obvious contradiction to today's modern "Republican" platform.
I call this new Republican party fake because it is controlled by a very small group of people with a great number of resources similar to Oligarchs. [Relevant article - Examples of Echo Chambers Part 1 ]
The following interview helps provide some perspective of the modern "Republican" party:
Daily Show: MSNBC's Michael Steele discusses the GOP's movement toward institutionalization and wants establishment Republicans to stop trying to widen the presidential field.
Note in particular: About elections, 'establishment republicans', change in republican party from the 1850s (from individuals to institutions). When you focus is an institution, which is obviously controlled by a small group of people then ONLY a small group of people can benefit. This new "Republican" stance is best expressed by Mitt Romney with his "Corporations are people my friend." comment (Which really pissed off Stephen Colbert). Also note that Michael Steele is a completely new person.
The following video is about Scott Walker (note: The prank caller is impersonating the Koch brothers which have been noted here, here and here.)
The following interview is the new Scott Walker after getting done with new Republican party campaigning. Makes me wonder what kind of governor he would be without Koch Brother or, as Michael Steele delicately phrases it, "institutional" influence.
Definition of Fundamentalism: For fundamentalism to exist you have to take a side so completely that the 'other' side (whatever that side may be) MUST be beaten at all costs for survival.
Definition of FUNDAMENTALISM 1 a often capitalized : a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching b : the beliefs of this movement c : adherence to such beliefs 2 : a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles
–noun
1.
( sometimes initial capital letter ) a movement in American Protestantism that arose in the early part of the 20th century in reaction to modernism and that stresses the infallibility of the Bible not only in matters of faith and morals but also as a literal historical record, holding as essential to Christian faith belief in such doctrines as the creation of the world, the virgin birth, physical resurrection, atonement by the sacrificial death of Christ, and the Second Coming.
2.
the beliefs held by those in this movement.
3.
strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles: the fundamentalism of the extreme conservatives.
1min 50 seconds in : A:We were all just muslims and not aware that we were muslims -
S: So there was no sense of 'Us' and 'Them'
A: us and them was all about communism and the rest (i.e. cold war politics)
The following video shows how angry rhetoric has always been able to bias society AND there is always someone who thinks violence is the only answer and takes action on such beliefs [ It also reminds me of the following quote "Naturally, every age thinks that all ages before it were prejudiced, and today we think this more than ever and are just as wrong as all previous ages that thought so. How often have we not seen the truth condemned! It is sad but unfortunately true that man learns nothing from history." - Carl Jung ].
The above video is an example of tax fundamentalism - Where no matter what the economic situation is OR how much tax rates have already been dropped, 'they must never rise again' [This pledge has been signed by several top Republicans, who are now stuck between a rock and a hard place - On one side is the economy and on the other a tax fundamentalist probably chase them for any tax increase for the rest of their lives.]
An article on the spread of hate groups in USA (The part of Hitler planning an invasion is a joke but the idea that such intelligent people can influence a certain segment of the population isn't - Also, they would accumulate money over time and probably have enough to make some politicians seek out their donations by promoting issues that appeal to such individuals). [Note: In the comments section of this post will will find this quote: “Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.”
Adolf Hitler].
Conclusion:Modern trends in terrorism, or violent fundamentalism, is one of either being an individual and connected to a small hate group OR an individual nutcase with hate over personal grievances.
For example: The Virginia Tech massacre is an example of personal grievances, the Norway massacre is an example of an individual who is influenced by extreme rhetoric who decides to take violent action - there may be another but the point is the group is extremely small ) [comparison: the Pakistani terrorist attack in NY with the useless bomb fits the 'one individual' connected to a small hate group pattern - same as Timothy McViegh (the Oklahoma City bomber)] .
[Note 4th Jan '12 - More information on Christian fundamentalism (and a 'born again' attempt) at this link. (read all links for info)]
Stephen readers/writers are first mentioned here then here... (Also, maybe coincidentally, I did make a big deal out of death here and here)... and now...
[First posted the above video (tongue in cheek) here.]
Fox News using stuff I mentioned to attack me. It's what has been going on since I lived in Oklahoma. If you watch Fox News over the last few months (and even probably back in the day, 2-3 years ago) you;ll find allot of such use of people and negativity to accomplish various goals (me being one of them). That's Ok. I've always been impressed by the creative ways in which white people have insulted me and have learn't allot from them. Thank you white people.
For history buffs:
I first posted about Cheney's treason in December of 2008. I used a video from The Daily Show and extracts from the author of the book in that video (after posting an introduction to the book itself). Sometime after that post, I saw this...
As for the Huffington post. I don't like them. They banned me from commenting there even though I have never commented on that site before. I think it was because of my use of one of their links (or many of them) but particularly this one. (Does Arianna know David Rockafella?)
I first posted above Joseph Campbell here - His "Power Of Myth" videos has an image of certain caves in France that Stephen found attractive and used in his "Raging Art On" video [ideos placed side by side for comparison below]...
[Note: There is allot more evidence of superstars (or their readers) reading my blogs - I have scattered the evidence all over my blogs... for those who can see... and can read.]
Sigh! Stephen is copying me again. I first made a comment on April 21 on my friend Dan's facebook page.
Extract:
Dan Gaylinn - The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.
Abbas Abedi - Sounds complicated. My interpretation is that struggling against power (evil power) is also a struggle to keep the reason for the struggle in peoples memories as they get distracted so easily. HGey look! A little birdie!
April 21 at 12:53pm · Unlike · 2 people
(look at the video, about 2 min and 21 secs into it...)
The bulb in the above video was developed with the help of Thomas Edison and seems to have the ability to last longer than any modern bulbs (if true, this should be a complete humiliation to the light bulb industry).
... is because the American people, for the most part, feel absolutly helpless so they occupy theselves with important things (such as survival/family which is necessary) and trivial things like gossip and sex scandals and
Media has to follow the trends of society for ratings (without ratings they would lose viewers) and so they give the viewers what they want. Yet you can see one major difference in the video above... the hot CNN anchor actually tells us what the real stories are before submitting to the will of public demand (yup, sex sells). I think such warnings/overviews should be a regular part of telecasts as they will make people more aware and as a consequence more real issues will be discussed.
Thank you, CNN, for the overview as outlined in the 'moment of zen' above.
Bill Moyers has been doing journalism for many decades on PBS. His website is here. In his archives there is some very useful information on stuff like democracy. Studying his archives should probably be one of the requirements for journalists.
Bill Moyers says news organizations undermine journalism by relying on opinion rather than reporting. (04:53)
There is another solution. Just ignore the situation like is done with India and Kashmir. CNN talks of rape used as a weapon but don't look at the rapes that the Indian army has done to the citizens of Kashmir? I remember a story as a child where women from 11 to 65 were taken and laid out on mattresses and raped repeatedly by the Indian army. Sorry. I don't buy your fake righteousness. Ya'll are nothing but heartless hypocrites.
Notice at approx 7 minutes and 40 seconds into the above video Karl Rove says, "The fact that Obama was not born in Hawai".
Before he says the above statement he drones on for a while until I was half asleep (forgot the proper hypnosis name for that, lets call it the 'boring the listener technique' for now). And right after saying this he talks as if it's absolutely nuts for anyone to doubt Obama's birth record BUT The fact, that he said 'the fact', reminds me of a hypnosis fact which makes me a little suspicious. In hypnosis that statement is called something along the lines of a 'command sentence' where you 'install' a belief unconsciously. And the fact is, is that that's a fact.
If I were involved with The Colbert Super Pac I would use money to figure out if this sort of thing actually affects all people or just the base that supports the sayer of the statement unquestioningly or has no effect at all.
Sigh! I'm tired of constantly having to point out the obvious. I used to think that that was the job for journalists. Apparently I was wrong.
Check out Glenn Beck's latest patsy...
Tell you what guys, I'm going to give ya'll a lead in to figure this one out...
Back in the 1700's people traveled by horse, by wagon, by mules and by foot. There were 13 colonies (?) of which were essentially on the level of 'towns', with villages and homesteads sprinkled across the country side.
At the time no roads existed in the country. By comparison the silk road has been around for hundreds of years.
Large construction projects, like roads, take a large number of workers to complete.
Roads made by private companies exist in our age (about 200 years after the Independence) but imagine what it would be like with no roads but private ones with tollbooths. (Hint: Ever heard of the phrase "robbers on the highway"?)
I ignored the news for over a decade and its a good thing that I did as its allowed me enough peace of mind to learn about culture and society. But now things are different. With the Republican policies of breaking down the entire fabric of society... from education, to social services such as health care (called medicare in the States) and even the police and firemen!
With no social services the country will go mad (it's already unbalanced), just compare the News media in America to BBC World News and the differences become glaringly obvious.
[Remember: Causing fear that causes your country to break up and possibly move towards a civil war is treason.]
Journalists have responsibilities as well. To let such obvious sophistry go over the airwaves without putting it in context reflects bad on you. Well, it's not like ya'll seem to know what ya'll are doing (unless ya'll are all shills selling your integrity, your country and the future of your children to the highest bidder?)
What's worse is that ya'all know I can prove ya'll were involved in the cover-up over 9/11. I've done it before. I can - and will - do it again.Last time I used, what amounted to an 'atomic bomb'(allegorically speaking), in attacking the traitors (shut down all schools, I think...it was scary). This time I'm using a wooden spear from 10 feet away. I know who the real rulers of America are (hint: it's called an 'oligarchy'). There will be no collateral damage this time. Can ya'll handle the backlash of people knowing the truth with video and science...a decade later...from me? I think not. You have to make a decision now.
As the Great George Bush said..."You're with me or against me". Keep in mind, he wasn't a cowboy. Choose carefully.
Since ya'll have obviously decided to ignore all real knowledge (except for a few individuals) and focus on crap theories, I thought I would make a point. Here is a video from a Harvard Professor from 1946 for all you uneducated fools who still havn't figured out the difference between democracy and despotism.
Tips: Watch the video carefully then write down every word said and draw out the images. Then watch the video again and write down everything said (do this at least 4 time....[Note: this is for those retarded news media people out there who never got an education...no wonder they want to cut education and teachers....what if the American public ever got smart enough to see through the crap on the air....that would destroy somebody...who? you? decide which side you are on now, your time for dithering is over].
Warning: If ya'll force me to explain anything in this post or the above video in a step by step manner, the gloves are coming off.
