Obama Signs Westminster Abbey Guest Book…

[Larry]

Housing numbers just out this week show the fall in housing prices is actually WORSE that during the depression. It said it took 19 for the housing prices to recover that time.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 91491.html#

So we are in a depression, Obama's depression:
- The worst housing numbers including the Great Depression
- the DOW's worst week in many years
- unemployment up to 9.1% with one of the lowest percentage of Americans working ever
- record high prices for food and coffee
- gas at $4.00 per gallon, some places over $5.00

And a $14.3 TRILLION DEBT. With Obama and Geithner demanding to raise the debt ceiling so they can run another 2 or 3 trillion dollar debt.

Hope everyone is enjoying their Hope and Change.

Right now the government has too much power, but it will eventually swing the other way. And when it does, it will go too far.

[Banned]

Housing numbers just out this week show the fall in housing prices is actually WORSE that during the depression. It said it took 19 for the housing prices to recover that time.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 91491.html#

So we are in a depression, Obama's depression:
- The worst housing numbers including the Great Depression
- the DOW's worst week in many years
- unemployment up to 9.1% with one of the lowest percentage of Americans working ever
- record high prices for food and coffee
- gas at $4.00 per gallon, some places over $5.00

And a $14.3 TRILLION DEBT. With Obama and Geithner demanding to raise the debt ceiling so they can run another 2 or 3 trillion dollar debt.

Hope everyone is enjoying their Hope and Change.

Right now the government has too much power, but it will eventually swing the other way. And when it does, it will go too far.

How can you go too far when you give freedom and liberty back to the people? Can you name a time when the people had too much freedom?

[Gallowglass]

We wouldn't, that quote assigns false causality to a pretty complex development and contains quite a bit of assumption built into it.

It seems the majority of voters in that time saw a causality.

And this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause.

+1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNAHjsAnTd4

[Larry]

Housing numbers just out this week show the fall in housing prices is actually WORSE that during the depression. It said it took 19 for the housing prices to recover that time.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/busin ... 91491.html#

So we are in a depression, Obama's depression:
- The worst housing numbers including the Great Depression
- the DOW's worst week in many years
- unemployment up to 9.1% with one of the lowest percentage of Americans working ever
- record high prices for food and coffee
- gas at $4.00 per gallon, some places over $5.00

And a $14.3 TRILLION DEBT. With Obama and Geithner demanding to raise the debt ceiling so they can run another 2 or 3 trillion dollar debt.

Hope everyone is enjoying their Hope and Change.

Right now the government has too much power, but it will eventually swing the other way. And when it does, it will go too far.

How can you go too far when you give freedom and liberty back to the people? Can you name a time when the people had too much freedom?

I appreciate your perspective, for it will lead us toward balance. But taken too far it will lead us to child labor abuse, class inequality, and racism, even though your intentions are pure. As much as all of us wish that we could trust everyone else to do the right thing when given absolute freedom, it just won't (and hasn't) played out that way in practice.

[lonewolf]

And more:

As America grew, industry became a larger and larger part of American life; and, during the term of America's first populist president, Andrew Jackson, economic questions came to the forefront. The economic ideas of the Jacksonian era were almost universally the ideas of classical liberalism. Freedom was maximized when the government took a "hands off" attitude toward industrial development and supported the value of the currency by freely exchanging paper money for gold. The ideas of classical liberalism remained essentially unchallenged until a series of depressions, thought to be impossible according to the tenets of classical economics, led to economic hardship from which the voters demanded relief.

The Great Depression saw a sea change in liberalism, leading to the development of modern liberalism. In the words of Arthur Schlesinger Jr.:

When the growing complexity of industrial conditions required increasing government intervention in order to assure more equal opportunities, the liberal tradition, faithful to the goal rather than to the dogma, altered its view of the state," and "there emerged the conception of a social welfare state, in which the national government had the express obligation to maintain high levels of employment in the economy, to supervise standards of life and labor, to regulate the methods of business competition, and to establish comprehensive patterns of social security.

It should say....

When the growing complexity of industrial conditions caused the President and Congress to extort the Supreme Court into overturning their previous decisions that prevented the federal government from overstepping its bounds as enumerated in section 8 of the Constitution. Threatened with increasing the size of the court by 6 and packing the new seats with Roosevelt socialists, the Supreme Court relented and elevated the welfare clause to more than just a descriptive phrase in the paragraph that is only meant to authorize taxation. This saved the court, but ended up putting the country on life support.

Boys & girls, that's how we got Social Security...essentially at gunpoint.

http://constitutionalawareness.org/genwelf.html

[Banned]

Right now the government has too much power, but it will eventually swing the other way. And when it does, it will go too far.

How can you go too far when you give freedom and liberty back to the people? Can you name a time when the people had too much freedom?

I appreciate your perspective, for it will lead us toward balance. But taken too far it will lead us to child labor abuse, class inequality, and racism, even though your intentions are pure. As much as all of us wish that we could trust everyone else to do the right thing when given absolute freedom, it just won't (and hasn't) played out that way in practice.

I don't see how more personal freedom can lead to child labor abuse. There are not enough jobs for adults these days. There are always going to be rich and less rich. Government cannot spent its way to prosperity. Look at how many trillions of dollars have been spent in the War On Poverty. It was not won. It ended up giving us another depression.

Racism has a better chance to be changed by a person to person approach than a authoritarian governmental approach. The Civil Rights Act is going to be 50 years old in 3 years. Yet all agree there is still racism. Making huge oppressive legislation that affects everyone because a very few are bad is the worst thing to do.

As much as I would like to try absolute freedom, that will never happen. I just want to get back a lot more of the freedoms and liberty that this country was founded on.

[lonewolf]

James Madison, when asked if the "general welfare" clause was a grant of power, replied in 1792, in a letter to Henry Lee,

"If not only the means but the objects are unlimited, the parchment [the Constitution] should be thrown into the fire at once."

[Larry]

How can you go too far when you give freedom and liberty back to the people? Can you name a time when the people had too much freedom?

I appreciate your perspective, for it will lead us toward balance. But taken too far it will lead us to child labor abuse, class inequality, and racism, even though your intentions are pure. As much as all of us wish that we could trust everyone else to do the right thing when given absolute freedom, it just won't (and hasn't) played out that way in practice.

I don't see how more personal freedom can lead to child labor abuse. There are not enough jobs for adults these days. There are always going to be rich and less rich. Government cannot spent its way to prosperity. Look at how many trillions of dollars have been spent in the War On Poverty. It was not won. It ended up giving us another depression.

Think back to the days when we had children working in our personally owned factories, where there was no government rule against it and the owners were free to do it. Now they just do it in other countries.


Racism has a better chance to be changed by a person to person approach than a authoritarian governmental approach. The Civil Rights Act is going to be 50 years old in 3 years. Yet all agree there is still racism. Making huge oppressive legislation that affects everyone because a very few are bad is the worst thing to do.

True, but at least the practice of racism has been lessened. The solution is not to just let people be free to practice open racism.

As much as I would like to try absolute freedom, that will never happen. I just want to get back a lot more of the freedoms and liberty that this country was founded on.

It's good to remember our roots, but there were unforseen injustices that are being tweaked over time. They did have to amend the Constitution, and I wouldn't throw out the Bill of Rights.

[Larry]

And more:

As America grew, industry became a larger and larger part of American life; and, during the term of America's first populist president, Andrew Jackson, economic questions came to the forefront. The economic ideas of the Jacksonian era were almost universally the ideas of classical liberalism. Freedom was maximized when the government took a "hands off" attitude toward industrial development and supported the value of the currency by freely exchanging paper money for gold. The ideas of classical liberalism remained essentially unchallenged until a series of depressions, thought to be impossible according to the tenets of classical economics, led to economic hardship from which the voters demanded relief.

The Great Depression saw a sea change in liberalism, leading to the development of modern liberalism. In the words of Arthur Schlesinger Jr.:

When the growing complexity of industrial conditions required increasing government intervention in order to assure more equal opportunities, the liberal tradition, faithful to the goal rather than to the dogma, altered its view of the state," and "there emerged the conception of a social welfare state, in which the national government had the express obligation to maintain high levels of employment in the economy, to supervise standards of life and labor, to regulate the methods of business competition, and to establish comprehensive patterns of social security.

It should say....

When the growing complexity of industrial conditions caused the President and Congress to extort the Supreme Court into overturning their previous decisions that prevented the federal government from overstepping its bounds as enumerated in section 8 of the Constitution. Threatened with increasing the size of the court by 6 and packing the new seats with Roosevelt socialists, the Supreme Court relented and elevated the welfare clause to more than just a descriptive phrase in the paragraph that is only meant to authorize taxation. This saved the court, but ended up putting the country on life support.

Boys & girls, that's how we got Social Security...essentially at gunpoint.

http://constitutionalawareness.org/genwelf.html

So how do we get rid of it now? Can I have all of my money back that I put in there over the years? What will my Grandma live on when it's gone? She going to have to pay me the extra she drawn over what she contributed - the free loading bitch.

[Banned]

Larry, there are not enough factories for adults to be abused in. lol I think there are millions of Americans who love to go to work in a factory, but there are no openings. That Obama depression thing.

You wrote this sentence:

"The solution is not to just let people be free to practice open racism."

So to stop what a few do you would not let people be free. Sounds a bit authoritarian, totalitarian and oppressive to me.

I would always say more freedom is the answer, not taking away freedoms.

[lonewolf]

It should say....

When the growing complexity of industrial conditions caused the President and Congress to extort the Supreme Court into overturning their previous decisions that prevented the federal government from overstepping its bounds as enumerated in section 8 of the Constitution. Threatened with increasing the size of the court by 6 and packing the new seats with Roosevelt socialists, the Supreme Court relented and elevated the welfare clause to more than just a descriptive phrase in the paragraph that is only meant to authorize taxation. This saved the court, but ended up putting the country on life support.

Boys & girls, that's how we got Social Security...essentially at gunpoint.

http://constitutionalawareness.org/genwelf.html

So how do we get rid of it now? Can I have all of my money back that I put in there over the years? What will my Grandma live on when it's gone? She going to have to pay me the extra she drawn over what she contributed - the free loading bitch.

Sadly, it is no longer practical to simply undo Social Security. 2 things can happen with it: we can pare it back and change it from the forced ponzi scheme that it is or we can watch it go bankrupt and eliminate itself. Same with Medicare/Medicaid. Eliminate Bush's Medicare prescription plan before it gets too far along.

That is not true for all the 2nd tier socialist subsidies, including corporate welfare. I wouldn't even look at the budget from a cutting perspective. I'd build a new one from scratch and not include hundreds upon hundreds of programs that only benefit a few at great cost to the many.

According to the Federalist Papers, most of the federal socialist programs are the constitutional responsibility of the states anyway. Let the states handle them and make their own rules with a gradual elimination of federal funds.

May the best state idea win.

Aside from socialist programs, we need to eliminate the military-cold-war-complex-mentality and completely revamp the military for the needs of the 21st century. This would place more emphasis on espionage and real-time intelligence gathering than brute force power. I'd love to know what we are guarding in places like Germany?

Bring most of our military back home to deploy a new military base. This new base would consist of a highway from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean along the Mexican border. There would be 20' fence on each side of the highway with a platoon barracks every 5 miles or so. Each platoon would monitor the 2-1/2 miles on each side of their barracks. There would be larger developments at larger intervals to support brass and different training environments.

[Larry]

Larry, there are not enough factories for adults to be abused in. lol I think there are millions of Americans who love to go to work in a factory, but there are no openings. That Obama depression thing.

You wrote this sentence:

"The solution is not to just let people be free to practice open racism."

So to stop what a few do you would not let people be free. Sounds a bit authoritarian, totalitarian and oppressive to me.

I would always say more freedom is the answer, not taking away freedoms.

Remember in "High Plains Drifter" when Clint raped that girl? Back in the day guys could do that, and they did. Now we know it's wrong, so why do we need a rule from the government against it? Besides, it doesn't work. It's been in place longer than the Civil Rights Act and guys are still raping women. We should get rid of it since the majority of people wouln't rape women anyway.

I'm going to get out of the weeds now, and just reiterate that I believe there must be a balance of power. Unfortunately, it is not consistent and the pendulum shifts back and forth. Niether extreme is a good place to be, and you can not correct it by making a blanket statement, then clinging to that statement on every circumstance. Everyone wants a simple solution, but these issues are not simplistic.

[Larry]

It should say....

When the growing complexity of industrial conditions caused the President and Congress to extort the Supreme Court into overturning their previous decisions that prevented the federal government from overstepping its bounds as enumerated in section 8 of the Constitution. Threatened with increasing the size of the court by 6 and packing the new seats with Roosevelt socialists, the Supreme Court relented and elevated the welfare clause to more than just a descriptive phrase in the paragraph that is only meant to authorize taxation. This saved the court, but ended up putting the country on life support.

Boys & girls, that's how we got Social Security...essentially at gunpoint.

http://constitutionalawareness.org/genwelf.html

So how do we get rid of it now? Can I have all of my money back that I put in there over the years? What will my Grandma live on when it's gone? She going to have to pay me the extra she drawn over what she contributed - the free loading bitch.

Sadly, it is no longer practical to simply undo Social Security. 2 things can happen with it: we can pare it back and change it from the forced ponzi scheme that it is or we can watch it go bankrupt and eliminate itself. Same with Medicare/Medicaid. Eliminate Bush's Medicare prescription plan before it gets too far along.

That is not true for all the 2nd tier socialist subsidies, including corporate welfare. I wouldn't even look at the budget from a cutting perspective. I'd build a new one from scratch and not include hundreds upon hundreds of programs that only benefit a few at great cost to the many.

According to the Federalist Papers, most of the federal socialist programs are the constitutional responsibility of the states anyway. Let the states handle them and make their own rules with a gradual elimination of federal funds.

May the best state idea win.

Aside from socialist programs, we need to eliminate the military-cold-war-complex-mentality and completely revamp the military for the needs of the 21st century. This would place more emphasis on espionage and real-time intelligence gathering than brute force power. I'd love to know what we are guarding in places like Germany?

Bring most of our military back home to deploy a new military base. This new base would consist of a highway from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean along the Mexican border. There would be 20' fence on each side of the highway with a platoon barracks every 5 miles or so. Each platoon would monitor the 2-1/2 miles on each side of their barracks. There would be larger developments at larger intervals to support brass and different training environments.

My company laid off most of the old timers before their pension kicked in, then reduced the plan for those left. All new hires aren't elegible for a pension. Social Security will likely be gone by the time my generation reaches retirement. It will be interesting to see how the many who didn't account for this will live. I just hope my investments don't crash right before I need them. By the way, in a stock market crash, who ends up with all of that money? I know it doesn't just disappear.

[Hawk]

How many I.O.U.s are in Social Security ? I heard it is over two trillion dollars ?

[Banned]

So how do we get rid of it now? Can I have all of my money back that I put in there over the years? What will my Grandma live on when it's gone? She going to have to pay me the extra she drawn over what she contributed - the free loading bitch.

Sadly, it is no longer practical to simply undo Social Security. 2 things can happen with it: we can pare it back and change it from the forced ponzi scheme that it is or we can watch it go bankrupt and eliminate itself. Same with Medicare/Medicaid. Eliminate Bush's Medicare prescription plan before it gets too far along.

That is not true for all the 2nd tier socialist subsidies, including corporate welfare. I wouldn't even look at the budget from a cutting perspective. I'd build a new one from scratch and not include hundreds upon hundreds of programs that only benefit a few at great cost to the many.

According to the Federalist Papers, most of the federal socialist programs are the constitutional responsibility of the states anyway. Let the states handle them and make their own rules with a gradual elimination of federal funds.

May the best state idea win.

Aside from socialist programs, we need to eliminate the military-cold-war-complex-mentality and completely revamp the military for the needs of the 21st century. This would place more emphasis on espionage and real-time intelligence gathering than brute force power. I'd love to know what we are guarding in places like Germany?

Bring most of our military back home to deploy a new military base. This new base would consist of a highway from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean along the Mexican border. There would be 20' fence on each side of the highway with a platoon barracks every 5 miles or so. Each platoon would monitor the 2-1/2 miles on each side of their barracks. There would be larger developments at larger intervals to support brass and different training environments.

My company laid off most of the old timers before their pension kicked in, then reduced the plan for those left. All new hires aren't elegible for a pension. Social Security will likely be gone by the time my generation reaches retirement. It will be interesting to see how the many who didn't account for this will live. I just hope my investments don't crash right before I need them. By the way, in a stock market crash, who ends up with all of that money? I know it doesn't just disappear.

I am REALLY surprised people in their 20's, 30's, and 40's aren't marching with pitchforks on DC. You guys are paying with every paycheck into Medicare and Social Security. You will get nothing when you need it when you hit retirement age.

Am I missing something here?

[lonewolf]

My company laid off most of the old timers before their pension kicked in, then reduced the plan for those left. All new hires aren't elegible for a pension. Social Security will likely be gone by the time my generation reaches retirement. It will be interesting to see how the many who didn't account for this will live. I just hope my investments don't crash right before I need them. By the way, in a stock market crash, who ends up with all of that money? I know it doesn't just disappear.

That is most unfortunate. I "retired" early from a company that sold out to another and now the pensions are underfunded. I am concerned that many of my former co-workers will get short-changed. I am not eligible for the pension until 55, but the way things are going, it won't be there.

As far as the stock market crash, the people who get the money are the ones who sold at the peak prices before the crash and also sell short or buy puts while the market is in decline. It is also a boon for those who have cash positions when the market hits bottom and they "load up the truck". I have been a member of this group for the last 2 crashes in 2000-02 and 2008. I intend to be in this group for the next one as well. Depending on what the Fed does, it may not be too long from now. It will probably affect bonds more than stocks, but who knows?

I have a theory that "big money" creates "bubbles" and gets people to invest their retirement money during the last stages of the bubble. Once the big money sells their shares to the 401K people, they abandon or sell the market short to perpetuate a market crash. With all the gold commercials you see on TV, we may soon see this with gold.

[onegunguitar]

[Banned]

Remember in "High Plains Drifter" when Clint raped that girl? Back in the day guys could do that, and they did. Now we know it's wrong, so why do we need a rule from the government against it? Besides, it doesn't work. It's been in place longer than the Civil Rights Act and guys are still raping women. We should get rid of it since the majority of people wouln't rape women anyway.

If you were a democrat senator from Massachusetts, you could get away with killing a girl. We have a rule against it, but democrat Senators trump those silly laws, I guess. Should we get rid of laws killing girls? (My example really happened, yours is from a movie)

I am for local and state laws. We have more of a voice to argue local and state laws. When the federal government creates blanket laws that limit freedoms, I feel that just leads to oppression. Federal law is very hard to change.

BTW, I feel the Civil Rights Law should have been done the right way. It should have been voted on or not as an amendment to the Constitution.

That is how the founders set up the Constitution. There is an amendment process and they should have gone that way in 1964.

[Banned]

My company laid off most of the old timers before their pension kicked in, then reduced the plan for those left. All new hires aren't elegible for a pension. Social Security will likely be gone by the time my generation reaches retirement. It will be interesting to see how the many who didn't account for this will live. I just hope my investments don't crash right before I need them. By the way, in a stock market crash, who ends up with all of that money? I know it doesn't just disappear.

That is most unfortunate. I "retired" early from a company that sold out to another and now the pensions are underfunded. I am concerned that many of my former co-workers will get short-changed. I am not eligible for the pension until 55, but the way things are going, it won't be there.

As far as the stock market crash, the people who get the money are the ones who sold at the peak prices before the crash and also sell short or buy puts while the market is in decline. It is also a boon for those who have cash positions when the market hits bottom and they "load up the truck". I have been a member of this group for the last 2 crashes in 2000-02 and 2008. I intend to be in this group for the next one as well. Depending on what the Fed does, it may not be too long from now. It will probably affect bonds more than stocks, but who knows?

I have a theory that "big money" creates "bubbles" and gets people to invest their retirement money during the last stages of the bubble. Once the big money sells their shares to the 401K people, they abandon or sell the market short to perpetuate a market crash. With all the gold commercials you see on TV, we may soon see this with gold.

Herbert and Marion Sandler reported made 2 or 3 BILLION dollars when they sold their toxic asset filled mortgage company to Wachovia Bank. A perfect example of getting out of the failed mortgage business just in time for them to make a fortune for life and leave a huge mess behind.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/25/busin ... ndler.html

This is all covered in a new book looking into the bank and mortgage failure.

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/06/02/li ... bankers-he#


NOT ONE PERSON HAS BEEN INDICTED OR CHARGED IN THE BANKING AND MORTGAGE FAILURES.

[Larry]

My company laid off most of the old timers before their pension kicked in, then reduced the plan for those left. All new hires aren't elegible for a pension. Social Security will likely be gone by the time my generation reaches retirement. It will be interesting to see how the many who didn't account for this will live. I just hope my investments don't crash right before I need them. By the way, in a stock market crash, who ends up with all of that money? I know it doesn't just disappear.

That is most unfortunate. I "retired" early from a company that sold out to another and now the pensions are underfunded. I am concerned that many of my former co-workers will get short-changed. I am not eligible for the pension until 55, but the way things are going, it won't be there.

As far as the stock market crash, the people who get the money are the ones who sold at the peak prices before the crash and also sell short or buy puts while the market is in decline. It is also a boon for those who have cash positions when the market hits bottom and they "load up the truck". I have been a member of this group for the last 2 crashes in 2000-02 and 2008. I intend to be in this group for the next one as well. Depending on what the Fed does, it may not be too long from now. It will probably affect bonds more than stocks, but who knows?

I have a theory that "big money" creates "bubbles" and gets people to invest their retirement money during the last stages of the bubble. Once the big money sells their shares to the 401K people, they abandon or sell the market short to perpetuate a market crash. With all the gold commercials you see on TV, we may soon see this with gold.

Herbert and Marion Sandler reported made 2 or 3 BILLION dollars when they sold their toxic asset filled mortgage company to Wachovia Bank. A perfect example of getting out of the failed mortgage business just in time for them to make a fortune for life and leave a huge mess behind.

http://www.cutimes.com/2009/01/14/sandl ... ouches-crl

This is all covered in a new book looking into the bank and mortgage failure.

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/06/02/li ... bankers-he#


NOT ONE PERSON HAS BEEN INDITED OR CHARGED IN THE BANKING AND MORTGAGE FAILURES.

And Ken Lay, who was Co-Chairman of the President Bush Re-elect Committee, dumped all of his Enron shares as he encourage his employees to buy more. I don't see this as a liberal vs conservative issue. They are all examples of the greed pervasive in every area of society and why we need checks and balances.

[Banned]

There were at least 19 people indicted over the Enron financial scandal. Why has the Obamination administration failed to indict or convict a single person, despite the near collapse of the banking and mortgage industry?

[Larry]

My company laid off most of the old timers before their pension kicked in, then reduced the plan for those left. All new hires aren't elegible for a pension. Social Security will likely be gone by the time my generation reaches retirement. It will be interesting to see how the many who didn't account for this will live. I just hope my investments don't crash right before I need them. By the way, in a stock market crash, who ends up with all of that money? I know it doesn't just disappear.

That is most unfortunate. I "retired" early from a company that sold out to another and now the pensions are underfunded. I am concerned that many of my former co-workers will get short-changed. I am not eligible for the pension until 55, but the way things are going, it won't be there.

As far as the stock market crash, the people who get the money are the ones who sold at the peak prices before the crash and also sell short or buy puts while the market is in decline. It is also a boon for those who have cash positions when the market hits bottom and they "load up the truck". I have been a member of this group for the last 2 crashes in 2000-02 and 2008. I intend to be in this group for the next one as well. Depending on what the Fed does, it may not be too long from now. It will probably affect bonds more than stocks, but who knows?

I have a theory that "big money" creates "bubbles" and gets people to invest their retirement money during the last stages of the bubble. Once the big money sells their shares to the 401K people, they abandon or sell the market short to perpetuate a market crash. With all the gold commercials you see on TV, we may soon see this with gold.

I agree on gold. It seems headed for a bubble, but how high will it go before it pops, and when it does, where is the bottom? If you have nailed the last couple bottoms, please post when it's time to sell and buy. I've discovered that I suck at timing the market, so I just let the 401K ride through the ups and downs. I guess I get the benefit of dollar cost averaging though.

[Larry]

There were at least 19 people indicted over the Enron financial scandal. Why has the Obamination administration failed to indict or convict a single person, despite the near collapse of the banking and mortgage industry?

Are you calling for government action?

[Banned]

There were at least 19 people indicted over the Enron financial scandal. Why has the Obamination administration failed to indict or convict a single person, despite the near collapse of the banking and mortgage industry?

Are you calling for government action?

If bankers lied and cheated, yes I want the law followed. I also want all the politicians who enabled this mess to happen to face the law.

Lehman Brothers was wiped out in that mess, Goldman Sacs strongly benefited. Notice how many ex Goldman Sacs CEOs and others are working in the Obamination White House.

Libertarians are not against laws. We do not like vast oppressive laws that restrict personal freedom. Lying and cheating to make billions and destroy the mortgage banking industry is not liberty.

[f.sciarrillo]

I was wondering the same thing about the bank collapse. We bailed them out and the ceos get a job at the white house. It makes me wonder how much of a campaign contribution they made.