New Game..Populist goes the Weaselist…READY?

Weaselist..

Phil Gramm…Enron/UBS “Modernization” Boy..Thanks for All your good work, You are a Patriot.

Bill Clinton….$100 Million in “Speaking Engagements”..THIS IS A PROBLEM

George W. Bush…Somebody’s Kid stole Dad’s Car…

Christopher Cox…The Aliens are among Us.

Dimon, BlankCheck, Fuld, Cayne….HedgeFund or Bank? Pick One…Only One Please…

Bernanke..Bank Boy…

Hank Paulson the Bird Watcher….Revolving Door Must Be Stopped..NOW

Paulson Begged for “Net Capital Rule” in 2004 for 33 to 1 Leverage…Cox was enabler…Many Thanks to Both of You..Can’t wait to read your book, baldy.

In my opinion any failure by governments to address the the collapse of the middle class will see the return of the historical response to the level of inequality that is the bi product of the deregulation financialisation of the economy – fascism or military dictatorship.

Arguing that one party is The Cause of All That Ails US is ridiculous. BOTH parties are EQUALLY to blame, whether it be by commission or omission.

1 : a member of a political party claiming to represent the common people; especially often capitalized : a member of a United States political party formed in 1891 primarily to represent agrarian interests and to advocate the free coinage of silver and government control of monopolies
2 : a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people

I would be happy to be called a “populist”. The country exists to express the will of the people, the vast majority of which are “common people”, thus the pyramid of power in the country should be complete inverted. If that is a “populist” ideal, so be it!

I’m also a liberal who is unafraid of using socialism where appropriate too. Let’s not give them the power to convert these words into something that vaguely mirrors the “n-word”.

Robber baron is a term that revived in the 19th century in the United States as a reference to businessmen and bankers who dominated their respective industries and amassed huge personal fortunes, typically as a direct result of pursuing various anti-competitive or unfair business practices. The term may now be used in relation to any businessman or banker who is perceived to have used questionable business practices or scams in order to become powerful or wealthy

I don’t know what country you think you still live in, but we will not see that sort of justice here in the US.

We have a serious problem with the elite in this coutnry, specifically the financial elite. They are running the system in a way that harms 99.5% of the people.

Popoulism brings the insight and power of “we the people,” “government of the people, by the people, and for the people” to bear on insoluble problems and solves them rather easily.

It’s sad because the politicians who will replace them are also owned by Wall Street. The Republican administration bailed out the banks. They got thrown out of office. The new Democratic administration turned around and bailed them out even more. So now what? There’s no one left to vote for.

I have to admit I had no hope even before the 2008 presidential election. How could anyone have any hope for the future when BOTH McCain and Obama voted for TARP? The only thing left to do was vote for Bob Barr (the libertarian candidate). A completely and pathetically useless exercise.

In 2010 there will be a bi-partisan passage of a window dressing, deck chair rearranging ‘reform’ bill. And fervent agreement by both parties that the ‘tough’ new laws will protect us from any possibility of another meltdown.

Since both the Republicans and the Democrats are conspiring TOGETHER to rip off the American people, there isn’t even anyone left to vote for.

In a recent American history class I thought a good starting point for teaching about the debate between Hamilton and Jefferson over the value of having a national bank would be to have a brief discussion about TARP and the many other government programs implemented over the past year or so to assist the country’s troubled financial institutions. I figured explaining that a frequent rationale put forward for the bank bailouts is the necessity of having a strong functioning financial sector to facilitate the flow of capital would take about ten minutes. I was then going to spend another ten minutes or so presenting a critique of this view before transitioning into how Hamilton and Jefferson had a very similar debate two-hundred years ago. What I found was that nearly a whole one hour period was necessary just to cover the most basic background information. Not a single student knew who the Secretary of the Treasury is or what he does. Same for the Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Many were not even aware that there was a bailout of financial institutions last year. Of course these are just teenagers I’m talking about here, but in my experience if a student lacks basic political awareness chances are so does his or her parents. This is why I’m skeptical using the bully pulpit to “pick a fight with Wall Street,” will lead to anything constructive. There is ample historical precedent to show that if there isn’t education or understanding to go along with it, populist anger can be channeled into some truly despicable acts.