AP article: Bush says anxiety feeding market instability

Of course anxiety is feeding market instability.  But what is feeding the anxiety?  That is the million dollar question.  If someone was on “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” and needed to phone a friend for the answer to this question, I would recommend that they just pick a taxpaying American citizen (virtually any taxpaying citizen) to be their lifeline.  Anxiety is feeding market instability.  Government is feeding the anxiety.

People are experiencing high levels of anxiety because their representatives, the people sent to Washington to actually REPRESENT them, in large part voted for this $850 billion bailout despite receiving an overwhelming barrage of letters and phone calls from their constituents urging them to do just the opposite.  Now, people are freaking out about the market, and they are freaking out because they are afraid government is out of control (which it is).

In the article referenced at the beginning of this blog post, Terrence Hunt writes, “President Bush said Friday that the government’s financial rescue plan was aggressive enough and big enough to work, but would take time to fully kick in.”

President Bush is wrong here.  Things may get sorted out eventually, but the reason everything seems to be going to hell in a hand-basket right now is directly because of how aggressive and big this financial “rescue” plan is.  Congress, the one branch put in place to give the people a true voice in government, shirked its most important duty and did exactly the opposite of what people wanted.

So, yeah, anxiety is now feeding the market instability.  Remember when the House voted down the first bailout proposal?  The market saw a dramatic drop, and people freaked out.  But what happened the next day?  It stabilized, and I think it may have actually gone up a little.  At the very least, it didn’t keep plummeting.  What has happened since both the Senate and the House passed the bailout proposal?  The market has continued to drop day after day after day, and now it has actually crashed for the first time since 1987.

Think this anxiety is going away anytime soon?  Think again.

Advertisements

Ohio secretary of state must verify registrations

Thank goodness SOMEBODY finally did the right thing in Ohio.  Terry Kinney of the Associated Press writes:

“Plaintiffs assert, and the court agrees, that it is hard to imagine a public interest more compelling than safeguarding the legitimacy of the election of the president of the United States,” [U.S. District Judge George C.] Smith wrote in his ruling.

Brunner also was ordered to establish a process by which Ohio’s 88 county election boards can access information generated by the checks.

Residents registering to vote must provide their name, address, date of birth and either their driver’s license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number.

But Ohio’s Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner is still trying to weasel around this:

Brunner has said the state matches registration information against data in the Bureau of Motor Vehicles system and the Social Security database. But she also has said federal law doesn’t say what should be done if a mismatch is discovered, and it is up to counties to check the system for flagged registrations and investigate if warranted.

So there will be no state-enforced investigations into mismatches.  By saying that the federal government doesn’t indicate what to do in cases of mismatches, it sounds to me as if she is saying she found a loophole that will allow her to still do whatever she wants in the cases of actual voter fraud.  It should be common sense that if a mismatch occurs, that means something is wrong.  Brunner seems to be playing coy, and it seems like she is willing to play dumb if confronted about not dealing with the situation (e.g. “Oh, was that supposed to matter?  I didn’t realize anything was wrong, and I was never instructed to do anything in the case of a mismatch.”)

Hopefully, state Republicans will continue to pursue this matter and will not allow this to happen.  If it is up to the individual counties to decide what to do with mismatches, then I hope Republicans get out there and make sure they are working at the polling centers and paying attention to what is going on.

Ohio is an important state, a swing state.  If it legitimately goes to Obama, that’s fine.  But those who would use underhanded methods to help secure his victory must not be allowed to succeed.

Under capitalism, the free market has to be allowed to work. People and businesses have to be allowed to fail. Mother Government can’t come in and save the day by using taxpayer money to bail out people and businesses just because it hurts to see this failure. When businesses fail, a hole in the market is left behind. That hole will eventually be filled by some other business who is likely performing the same function and very well might even employ many of the same people who worked at the failed business.

I believe the same thing applies to failed mortgages. I hate that people are losing their homes, but that isn’t my fault and it isn’t your fault. We shouldn’t have to pay for the mortgages that couldn’t be covered by those who owned them.  Personal responsibility needs to be the theme of these times.  If there are consequences people must face as a result of their irresponsibility or ignorance, then they must be allowed to face them.

What will happen? Well, the market might struggle quite a bit (though, now it looks like that was going to happen with or without a bailout). Housing prices and values may drop significantly. But here’s the thing. They will likely drop to a rate to where average people can start buying homes again.

That, in my opinion, is where a lot of this got out of hand. Everything has been overinflated for so long that it has just been accepted that this how things are supposed to be. The market is down to below 9,000 for the first time in 4 or 5 years, and people are freaking out. What does this mean for the average person? Investments may be struggling a bit and that can hurt, but, otherwise, not a whole lot. Life will go on. And maybe with corrections in the market, life will become more affordable again.

But that likely won’t even be given a chance to work … at least not under the leadership of either of the two main presidential candidates.  They do not seem interested in allowing the free market to do its thing.

Even if this mortgage buyout WAS a good idea in theory, the federal government is one of the worst managed “businesses” in history. Do you really trust them to not bungle up a mortgage buyout? I guarantee that once all of those mortgages are bought up, we’ll just see some other huge mess as a result of it that will cost billions and billions more. Things NEVER run as smoothly as the government tells us they will.

As radio talk show host Phil Valentine always says, “The government should only do what the private sector cannot, will not, or should not do.” The federal government should protect us from foreign enemies and domestic violence. The government should not try to control the economy—at least not on the micromanagement level of owning and controlling businesses. The economy’s ups and downs should be a result of the free market being allowed to work.

But that’s just my opinion.

I saw this on the blog run by my friends Ben and Megan, and I had to post it in my blog as well.  This is seriously hilarious!

In an entry titled Obama is Hiding a Radical Past! on the blog No Quarter, Matthew Weaver tells us about Obama’s ties to and endoresement by a political group called The New Party, which was an offshoot of the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America.  And according to reports, this was not a passive endorsement.  As the conclusion to this article states:

Barack Obama has a long-term and sustained relationship with the Chicago DSA, an affiliate of the Democratic Socialists of America, and with the Chicago New Party. He participated in multiple membership meetings and in DSA-sponsored events, repeatedly sought their endorsement. This does not answer all questions about Barack Obama’s past relationships with multiple socialist groups. What the media need to find out is this: Has Barack Obama broken his ties with them? If so, when and why?

This, I believe, is what really needs to be answered.  The article seems to be well documented and thorough.  Read it and decide for yourself what you think of Obama’s ties to radical socialists.

Tuesday night, I went and stood outside of the Curb Event Center at Belmont University to see if I could catch a glimpse of John McCain, Barack Obama, or anyone else with some degree of fame who might be attending the debate.  Upon my arrival on the scene, I was dismayed by the overwhelming number of Obama supporters marching around with their T-shirts, signs, stickers,  and baked goods (being sold with profits going toward Obama’s campaign).  There were also at least three different booths set up in very close proximity to one another, and while I expected at least one of them to be selling McCain T-shirts and other paraphernalia, that wasn’t the case.  They were all for Obama as well.  And that’s OK, albeit a bit disappointing.  I mean, the enthusiasm for Obama seemed a little maniacal at times (it kind of reminded me of the scene from the movie Independence Day where all of the new age zealots gather in the desert to await the arrival of the aliens like it is some kind of second coming—Obamessiah, anyone?), but I guess some of that is to be expected at times.  For the most part, though excited and sometimes boisterous, the people were respectful and did not do anything that might mar Obama’s image.

Excepting myself and my significant other, I saw maybe about ten to twelve people who seemed to be for McCain.  The McCain supporters were rather subdued and probably just felt a little overwhelmed in that sea of Obama supporters.

Then came those in favor of third parties the crazies.  Now don’t get me wrong.  I’m in favor of people considering third parties.  I, myself, am very interested in the campaign for Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party (though I still haven’t made up my mind how I will vote on November 4th), but being for a third party candidate does not mean you have to act like a lunatic.  Now, it is anyone’s right to act like a lunatic and say whatever he / she wants to say, but I just don’t think doing so accomplishes very much in the way of winning people to a certain cause.  If anything, I think it turns people off.

The Green Party people came along dressed in green hardhats and various other kinds of green attire.  Many wore green T-shirts, but at least one or two guys were shirtless and with only a green cape flowing behind them.  They also had various accessories with them, such as pots and pans, but I do not really know the purpose for these items as I didn’t really see them getting used very much.  The greenies marched around back and forth behind us, chanting and yelling out various slogans, sometimes all of them in unison in a militant kind of way.  Looked a little crazy, but they were relatively tame.  Still, appearing crazy usually isn’t a great way to win people to one’s cause.

A little while after the Green Party entered the scene, a group, seemingly formed in support of all third-party candidates, came marching onto the scene.  They weren’t wearing any kind of a uniform like the Green Party people, but they were much louder, more rambunctious, and on the scene in much larger numbers.  The ringleader pulled out a megaphone and for the next hour and a half or so, he proceeded to very loudly denounce the two-party system and to rail against both of the candidates involved in it.  In a different setting, with people willing to listen to his points, such a thing might not be so bad as there is no harm in trying to change people’s minds.  But the sheer mania and obnoxious tone behind his ranting could not have been anything but a major annoyance to everyone who could hear him.  I am in favor of considering third-party candidates, but I could not not help but wish that the police (who were on the scene en masse at times) would either come and haul him off or at least shoot a little tear gas into the crowd (yes, I would have been hit too, but for the sake of shutting that loudmouth on the megaphone down, I think I would have been willing to take one for the team).

To make matters worse, this group wasn’t just promoting third-party candidates.  In addition to ineffectively promoting the third-party candidates and denouncing the two-party system, a number of the people in this group were also yelling about how our government was directly responsible for causing the 9/11 attacks.  It was at this point that I lost any respect I may have had left for what these people were trying to accomplish.  People are free to believe what they want to believe, but conspiracy theorism usually just makes them look crazy to the general public.  I’ve seen the videos telling about how 9/11 was an inside job, and while they are put together to weave a convincing tale that would make Michael Moore proud, I just don’t buy it.  I don’t believe most Americans buy it.  The people that do believe this almost always are the one who think President Bush is an imbecile, and yet they also believe that he was the mastermind behind the worst attack on the U.S. mainland in our nation’s history.  And of all of the many people who would have to be involved in such a conspiracy, I don’t believe it could be kept a secret for very long.

Then, from this same group, there were the chants of, “ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR—WE DON’T NEED YOUR F%#%ING WAR!”  It continued on to a “FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT” section, but I can’t remember how that one went.  They repeated it over and over again, and when a couple of people asked them to tone it down because they had their kids with them, the group just decided to yell even louder—to the point that you could hear the rasping strain in some of their voices as they were actually yelling as loudly as they could.

Maybe this approach actually works on some people, but I really do not believe it works on the vast majority of people.  At this particular gathering, it really just seemed like virtually all of the people in the crowd to whom they were preaching were completely annoyed by them.  One young Obama supporter couldn’t help but yell back at them about the greatness of Obama every time they would make some kind of a claim about how the two-party system is running our country into the ground, but for the most part the group was not directly confronted.

The third-party movement is a good thing, but radicalism is not the way to move it forward.  While he was still contending for the Republican nomination during the primary process, Ron Paul pleaded with his supporters to be respectful and not do anything that would make him or the cause which he represents to look bad.  Unfortunately, I’m guessing the same people that disregarded his call for respectful representation of the Ron Paul Revolution are the ones now drawing attention to their radical displays of anger toward and rebellion against the two-party system.

It is OK to be angry.  It is OK to stand up against the establishment.  But acting out in a radical fashion in the middle of a public gathering likely isn’t going to do anything but get a crowd riled up, unless those in that crowd are of the same belief as you.  And even then, the radicalism itself could be a turn off (as it was for me).

As Susan Powter used to always say, “STOP THE INSANITY!”

Talk to people.  Don’t yell at them and act crazy.

All in all, as ridiculous and nettlesome as all of it was at times, it was definitely an experience, and one in which I’m glad I was able to participate.  It’s not every day that a presidential debate takes place in one’s city of residence (well, at least, not in mine), so to witness much of what goes along with such an event was definitely interesting.

Oh, and I never did see McCain or Obama.  They must have gone in another entrance (can’t imagine why, what with the crowd’s behavior—I’m still surprised we didn’t get teargassed).  We did catch a glimpse of Nashville’s mayor Karl Dean, Tim McGraw, and Faith Hill rolling up for the event, however.

What a wretched excuse for a debate last night.  Neither candidate really said anything worthwhile in what could possibly be the most boring presidential debate I’ve ever seen.

All things considered, I think McCain probably lost this debate.  While neither candidate really gave us anything to make us feel good about how they can make America better, it was McCain who had the more urgent need to really stand out.  He is down in the polls and needed to make up some ground.  Based on his performance last night, I doubt that will happen.  He was too laid back, and he didn’t go after Obama when he needed to.  By not clearly winning this debate, I think he lost.

In addition to all of that, McCain also proposed a $300 billion plan to force the federal government to buy all of the bad mortgages in this country and allow financially troubled homeowners to keep their homes.  So instead of admitting he made a mistake by voting for the $700 billion bailout plan, he wants to spend MORE taxpayer money to pay for people’s bad choices.  Unbelievable.  I wish he would stop calling himself a maverick and actually BE a maverick.  The Republicans are on par with the Democrats in the wasteful spending category now.  The maverick thing to do would be to return to conservative ideals by getting the government out of our lives and wallets.

McCain’s handlers better get a grip and tell him he needs to actively go after Obama if he wants to win this election.  If he is as passive during the third and final debate as he was in the one last night, it’s over.  He also needs to care more about what matters to his conservative base.

I’m still conflicted.  I’m less enthusiastic about McCain now than I was before the debate.  That new $300 billion plan really made me angry.  But I still see him as the best chance for keeping Obama out of office so that we can at least avoid all-out socialism.  And I still like Palin and wish I could vote for her instead of McCain.

I just wish she could consistently pronounce the word “nuclear.”

(UPDATE: According to Michelle Malkin’s blog, the $300 billion proposal is part of the $700 billion proposal.  Not that that soothes my soul any.  It’s still, as she calls it, a “crap sandwich.”  I recommend you read the whole blog, as it is good information.

Also, as promised in one of my comments on this blog, I have the information showing how McCain’s proposal isn’t exactly original except for the fact that he put an actual price tag on it.  He said that it is not Obama’s or Bush’s idea—it is his idea.  If you read to the end of this AP article, however, it says:

In fact, at a news conference on Sept. 24, Obama said, “we should consider giving the government the authority to purchase mortgages directly instead of simply purchasing mortgage-backed securities.”

Days later, in a news release, he said he would “encourage Treasury to study the option of buying individual mortgages like we did successfully in the 1930s.”

“Senator Obama has been consistently calling for policies that would buy up mortgages and restructure them so that families can stay in their houses,” Obama economic adviser Jason Furman said. “He continues to support that and believes Treasury should use its authority in whatever way it can to bring about that goal, including buying mortgages directly.”

Welcome to the Republicrat / Democlican party.)

  • RSS Bible Gateway Verse of the Day

    • 2 Corinthians 13:14
      “May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”
  • September 2017
    S M T W T F S
    « Nov    
     12
    3456789
    10111213141516
    17181920212223
    24252627282930
  • Archives

  • Categories

  • $700 billion 2008 election abortion antwaan randle el back pain bailout barack obama belmont belmont university bengals biden bush christian cincinnati congress conservative conservatives constitution party debate democrat democratic party Democrats election election '08 fantasy football football funny george bush homeless house jennifer brunner jesus joe biden john mccain karl marx liberal liberalism liberals marx mccain murder nashville neck pain news obama ohio pain palin paul politics president president bush radical republican republicans ron paul sarah palin second presidential debate secretary of state senate senators shoulder pain socialism socialist socialists spread the wealth state fair steve slaton stock market subprime mortgages supreme court tennessee third party candidates titans voter fraud
  • Recent Comments

    Levitigus on Do you approve of slavery? Wou…
    vino blanco on Biden’s Bloopers and Pra…
    Maura on Biden’s Bloopers and Pra…
    Tim on My thoughts after election…
    meggo on My thoughts after election…
  • Blog Stats

    • 8,169 hits
  • Meta