Posted by
Nee on Friday, September 26, 2008 11:23:44 AM
Okay people. I’ve officially had it with all the sheisse. It's nothing but a Ratfuc*! Parentheses mine.
Let’s review a few things, shall we?
The US in by definition, NOT in a recession. A recession is defined as two consecutive quarters of negative growth. Um, to my knowledge, we are not there. Because last Q, there was 3.3% GROWTH and before that, 2.4%.
Growth is slow- if you consider unemployment is up from 5.7 to 6.1%. Consider that if new housing starts are down, that construction workers are down as well. And then trickle that with the mortgage brokers. We could go on and on…
The US is the largest market when it comes to anything…housing, banking, industry.
So, are we going down like all these other countries and the leftist media would like you to believe? In my own BNC banter- No fukking way!! Those representing us may sell us down the river, but we are NOT going down. Other countries are suffering much more than we are if using real estate to define horrible economic situations globally.
Did you know that the commie countries who produce oil have maintained production while Norway and The UK have slowed? How do you think that effects prices? Why is this happening?
Carter started it, and Billy Jeff enhanced it, that pesky CRA. Looks like all the Wall Street companies/investors sure donated a lot to the Dem campaigns compared to the Republican side. Anyone care to expound on that? Wait, no… let me via this web.
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed092408a.cfm
At Bear Stearns, 157 investment bankers, managing directors, senior managing directors, and other financial sophisticates contributed over $264,000 to Democratic candidates. In contrast, 77 of their colleagues sent about half that amount — $122,000 — to the Republicans.
At JP Morgan Chase, the Democratic advantage, at 3 to 1, was even larger. Contributions to Sens. Obama, Clinton, Dodd, Biden, and Edwards totaled $275,000 from 238 elites in that firm. Republican presidential aspirants had to make do with $93,000 from 83 equally important-sounding people. (Maybe the reps are giving more to charity than the dems?)
The story was much the same at Lehman Brothers. There, the Democratic field swept up over 560,000 pre-bankruptcy dollars from 272 former Lehman employees. Republican candidates received less than half that — $256,000 — from 145.
This Democratic advantage in both total contributions and number of employees contributing also holds at the latest casualties on Wall Street, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. Goldman employees cut checks to Democratic candidates totaling an astounding $789,000. At Morgan Stanley, the generosity was even greater: $818,000. Goldman Republicans contributed less than a third the amount of their Democratic colleagues; those at Morgan Stanley less than half
But someone must have spiked the water coolers at Merrill Lynch. Alone among Wall Street's storied firms, Merrill Lynch's workforce favored the Republicans ($490,000) over the Democrats ($399,000). I'll leave it to others to decipher why the ideological leanings of Merrill's employees stand apart from the rest of the Street.
Employees at now-defunct American International Group also voted overwhelmingly Democratic with their dollars. According to FEC records, 118 AIG executives contributed $104,000 to the Democrats, about three times the $33,000 sent to the Republicans. AIG's Democratic tilt, moreover, mirrors the Democratic presidential field's strong performance in the insurance industry as a whole, as a review of contributions from employees of Met Life, New York Life, Prudential, The Hartford, Liberty Mutual, Nationwide, Geico, Allstate, and State Farm reveals.
The donation disparity is even more pronounced at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, those hybrid creatures of power politics that touched off the whole messy shebang.
Overall, 152 Fannie executives airdropped $146,000 on Democrats this presidential cycle, more than 7 times what Republicans received ($19,700). The contrast between Sens. McCain and Obama was even greater. Sen. McCain received slightly over $7,500 from 9 Fannie employees while Sen. Obama raked in 13 times as much (about $96,000) from 97 employees. At Freddie, the Democratic advantage was less overwhelming, but still daunting. Democratic candidates enjoyed a 4 to 1 edge, receiving $64,400 (Obama has received about $23,500) and Republicans $16,300 (of which McCain gets roughly $9,0000).
Okay, our liberal friends may say, the barons of Wall Street and titans of insurance may be overwhelmingly Democratic, but surely the old stereotype still holds true in the oil industry, right? "If my colleagues want to do something interesting," Rep. Anthony Weiner (D., N.Y.) said last week on the House floor, "go to opensecrets.org. look at the donations of ExxonMobil, look at Texaco, and look at the R's next to all the people who got it."
Weiner has a point when it comes to third party PAC contributions from firms such as Exxon Mobil and Chevron, which tilt decidedly to Republicans in the House and Senate. But, at the presidential level, the same left-of-center political and ideological culture seems to hold sway among employees in the oil sector. The Democrats' long march through America's elites did not stop at Wall Street. It even extends to Big Oil.Here's the scorecard from the oil fields:
Chevron
: Dems: over $69,000 from 90 employees. GOP $25,500 from 28 employees.
British Petroleum:
Dems: nearly$42,000 from 48 employees. GOP: barely $15,000 from 16 employees.
Royal Dutch Shell:
Dems over $44,000 from 53 employees. GOP: $12,600 from 17 employees.
Even the liberals' favorite petroleum-based piñata, Exxon-Mobil, preferred the Democrats in their employee-giving. Ninety-one Exxon-Mobil employees sent $94,000 to the Democratic field; 62 sent checks totaling $60,700 to the GOP contenders.
As the blame game takes shape, it should be noted that the corporate denizens enmeshed in this mess were far from rabid free-marketers. Rather, the elite members of this corporate culture are overwhelmingly enamored of a distinctly left-of-center approach to markets, the role of government, and risk.
Do my readers and fellow taxpayers have some ideas other than Paulson’s crony bailing? Cause that ain’t working for me? Is it working for you? Initially, I agreed with the AIG bailout because they did have assets for liquidity to make good on the defaults…but now, we are just being fukked over one more time. And, he who inherits this mess…God help us!!
And lest anyone have questions...go here and see this.
Although McCain may be self-serving, I can’t necessarily blow off his show of concern for his senatorial duties. Obama really should have followed his lead.