Is this any real surprise? Of the 19 major banks undergoing so-called government “stress tests”, none will be allowed to fail if the recession worsens. The Fed has effectively promised to print as much money as it deems necessary to prop up the banking system. Most banks are considered to be well-capitalized, or at least claim to be, but some banking giants may be facing further deterioration due to increasing unemployment, falling GDP & home prices, surging credit defaults, and a potential commercial real estate crisis on the horizon.
The Fed has already printed, loaned, spent, and guaranteed almost $13 trillion to rescue the financial system. Since January, the value of the US Dollar has already dropped about 1.5%.
Some claim the Fed is laying the foundation for a future surge in inflation. Others maintain the Fed is preventing the onset of the Great Depression II. Some believe the “too big to fail” philosophy will prevent a catastrophic meltdown. Others hold that the “too big to fail” philosophy will merely extend the crisis.
Rumors are running rampant that the US Government may fire Citigroup’s CEO, just as it fired GM’s CEO last month. Last year, the Bush administration injected $45 billion into Citigroup, and the Obama administration raised the federal government’s stake in Citi to a whopping 36% in February.
Some define fascism as state-controlled capitalism. If the government fires the Citi CEO, would this be yet another example of economic fascism?
Or, since Citi accepted $45 billion of taxpayer money, does the government have the right to dictate its corporate policy?
The Obama administration, as well as the House and Senate, is looking to enforce tougher standards on credit card companies. They seek to protect consumers from sudden fee hikes and unintelligible fine print, as well as enact stricter industry standards. The banking industry is concerned that excessive government regulation could actually hinder credit lending. On the other hand, many Americans feel government must reign in an out of control credit card industry that has bamboozled consumers for years. Some Americans cringe at the thought of more government intervention and believe citizens must take greater, personal responsibility when it comes to utilizing credit cards. Others question whether or not the federal government has the constitutional authority to intervene in such a way. What do you think?
In a recent interview with Keith Olbermann, self-proclaimed intellectual, Janeane Garofalo says “let’s be very honest about what this [the tea party movement] is about. It’s not about bashing Democrats, its not about taxes, they have no idea what the Boston Tea Party was about. They don’t know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the white house. This is racism straight up. This is nothing but a bunch of tea bagging rednecks.”
First, Janeane, you are right. This isn’t about bashing Democrats. Second, Janeane, you are right. This is not about “taxes”.
Now, on to everything else you are wrong about.
Janeane, in December of 1773, the British government gave special tax incentives to the East India Company. In effect, the British government created a monopoly in the tea market that local merchants could not compete with. As a reaction to British legislation, the original American patriots protested the unfair treatment by dumping several crates of tea into the Boston Harbor.
Janeane, if you read the most important historical document in our Nation’s history, you would know that our Constitution was written very precisely: To restrain the power of government and protect our inalienable rights of life, liberty, and our ability to pursue happiness.
So, assuming we don’t know our history, is it a mere coincidence that hundreds of thousands of people are protesting, now that we have lost habeas corpus? Is it just coincidence that most of us are protesting, now that FISA legislation allows our government to spy on us? Is it just coincidence, that we are pissed off that big banks and business are receiving the fruits of our labor, so they don’t face the consequences of their own recklessness? Is it just coincidence, that we are upset that our federal taxes eat up our paycheck to support a federal government that has: a) tripled in size in the last ten years, b) run up 12 figure deficit, mortgaging the labor of “free” Americans and their posterity, and c) demands that we grant them powers designated to the united States of America, by the historical document you claim we don’t know anything about?
Or, Janeane, is it possible that you are the racist, unable to see beyond your own biases. Unable to grasp that those who oppose your faith in those who give eloquent speeches may have legitimate objections. Janeane, is it possible that the real racists are those who make racism an issue, when it has nothing to do with the problem.
And Keith Olbermann, by the way, I’ve respected a number of wonderful Constitutional arguments you made against both Bush and Obama policies. And shame on you for not challenging Janeane, as she spewed her racist garbage.
