“GUE!”

“Thank you, sniper.”

“We just gotta remember all snicker's possible children are washed out of his sweatsocks on laundry day.”

“sum whey Uz Sir Viv'd”

“No way, laundry day!”

“http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100812/el_yblog_upshot/quayles-son-obama-is-the-worst-president-in-history

Embarassing! What a potatoehead.”

“I don't get it....he's right

Obama is definitely the worst president in history”

“Idiots beget idiots...”

“Name calling? That's all you got? Personal attacks? Gee you sure showed me how smart you and how dumb I am.

What a loyal progressive soldier you are!”

“Easy strat. I was talking about the guy from the Quayle gene pool.

But you certainly are defensive. Hmmm...”

“A Partea calling someone else a loyal soldier, What a Fvcking laugh!!!”

“Rosey...all you have to do is list ONE (1) thing the Boy King has been successful at and I am talking major stuff not the BS bribe your buddies stuff.

The Economy is in the Tank, The Debt and Deficit have increased Geometrically, housing is dropping, the War on IslamoFasicism has been surrendered (even though we were winning).

About all he has done is take vacations on the Taxpayer dollar...oh and MEESHAA has gotten some bling out of it.”

“http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/12/new-hampshire-democrat-apologizes-palin-death-wish/

A New Hampshire state representative has resigned his position and announced he will not run for re-election after writing that a dead Sarah Palin is "more dangerous than a live one."

State Rep. Timothy Horrigan stepped down Thursday after posting a Facebook page in which he described the "myth" of the former Alaska governor and 2008 Republican presidential candidate.

His resignation comes after another New Hampshire Democratic candidate apologized the same day for his Facebook post in which he wished Sarah Palin and the father of her grandchild, Levi Johnston, had been on the plane that crashed Tuesday, killing former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens.

"Just wish Sarah and Levy [sic] were on board," Keith Halloran originally wrote in reference to Palin and Johnston, her daughter Bristol's ex-boyfriend.

In his post, Horrigan wrote, "a dead Palin wd [sic] be even more dangerous than a live one...she is all about her myth & if she was dead, she cldn't [sic] commit any more gaffes."”

““Rosey...all you have to do is list ONE (1) thing the Boy King has been successful at and I am talking major stuff not the BS bribe your buddies stuff. "

I'm not sure exactly what it is he's done, but it's got yawl's Signature Sarah Panties in a wad and that can't be bad. All yawl do is post more crap about how bad he is so that's sure proof he's twisting those panties tighter each day.”

“OK so according to sale if a person is screwing up left and right which in turn agners people...He is being successful?

Sale...man you need help, grampy the drugs are not working.”

“Yawl should try the no drug policy, Yaw might like it, looking at things the way they really are instead Neil's, Rush's or Successful Sarah's instructions on how to be a good Cheney Like Citizen.”

“Ah so its the drug addiction angle...thanks for sharing”

“

G.O.P. Monetary Madness

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: December 15, 2011

Apparently the desperate search of Republicans for someone they can nominate not named Willard M. Romney continues. New polls suggest that in Iowa, at least, we have already passed peak Gingrich. Next up: Representative Ron Paul.

In a way, that makes sense. Mr. Romney isn�t trusted because he�s seen as someone who cynically takes whatever positions he thinks will advance his career � a charge that sticks because it�s true. Mr. Paul, by contrast, has been highly consistent. I bet you won�t find video clips from a few years back in which he says the opposite of what he�s saying now.

Unfortunately, Mr. Paul has maintained his consistency by ignoring reality, clinging to his ideology even as the facts have demonstrated that ideology�s wrongness. And, even more unfortunately, Paulist ideology now dominates a Republican Party that used to know better.

I�m not talking here about Mr. Paul�s antiwar views or his less well-known views on civil and reproductive rights, which would horrify liberals who think of him as a good guy. I�m talking, instead, about his views on economics.

Mr. Paul identifies himself as a believer in �Austrian� economics � a doctrine that it goes without saying rejects John Maynard Keynes but is almost equally vehement in rejecting the ideas of Milton Friedman. For Austrians see �fiat money,� money that is just printed without being backed by gold, as the root of all economic evil, which means that they fiercely oppose the kind of monetary expansion Friedman claimed could have prevented the Great Depression � and which was actually carried out by Ben Bernanke this time around.

O.K., a brief digression: the Federal Reserve doesn�t actually print money (the Treasury does that). But the Fed does control the �monetary base,� the sum of bank reserves and currency in circulation. So when people talk about Mr. Bernanke printing money, what they really mean is that the Fed expanded the monetary base.

And there has, indeed, been a huge expansion of the monetary base. After Lehman Brothers fell, the Fed began lending large sums to banks as well as buying a wide range of other assets, in a (successful) attempt to stabilize financial markets, in the process adding large amounts to bank reserves. In the fall of 2010, the Fed began another round of purchases, in a less successful attempt to boost economic growth. The combined effect of these actions was that the monetary base more than tripled in size.

Austrians, and for that matter many right-leaning economists, were sure about what would happen as a result: There would be devastating inflation. One popular Austrian commentator who has advised Mr. Paul, Peter Schiff, even warned (on Glenn Beck�s TV show) of the possibility of Zimbabwe-style hyperinflation in the near future.

So here we are, three years later. How�s it going? Inflation has fluctuated, but, at the end of the day, consumer prices have risen just 4.5 percent, meaning an average annual inflation rate of only 1.5 percent. Who could have predicted that printing so much money would cause so little inflation? Well, I could. And did. And so did others who understood the Keynesian economics Mr. Paul reviles. But Mr. Paul�s supporters continue to claim, somehow, that he has been right about everything.

Still, while the original proponents of the doctrine won�t ever admit that they were wrong � my experience is that nobody in the political world ever admits to having been wrong about anything � you might think that having been so completely off-base about something so central to their belief system would have caused the Austrians to lose popularity, even within the G.O.P. After all, as recently as the Bush years, many Republicans were all for printing money when the economy slumps. �Aggressive monetary policy can reduce the depth of a recession,� declared the 2004 Economic Report of the President.

What has happened instead, however, is that hard-money doctrine and paranoia about inflation have taken over the party, even as the predicted inflation keeps failing to materialize. For example, in February, Representative Paul Ryan, who is somewhat inexplicably regarded as the party�s deep thinker on matters economic, harangued Mr. Bernanke on how terrible it is to �debase� a currency and pointed to a rise in commodity prices in late 2010 and early 2011 as evidence that inflation was finally coming. Commodity prices have plunged since then, but there is no sign that Mr. Ryan or anyone else is having second thoughts.

Now, it�s still very unlikely that Ron Paul will become president. But, as I said, his economic doctrine has, in effect, become the official G.O.P. line, despite having been proved utterly wrong by events. And what will happen if that doctrine actually ends up being put into action? Great Depression, here we come.”

“You gotta admire the creativity of tying Ron Paul to the Austrians.. the fact is the dollar is losing value. It takes a while for these thing to be realized but look at the dollars value since 2000, when we started borrowing massive amounts of money to fund these wars.
[img]

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/currency

The trend is clear. We used borrowed money to bail out GM, do you really think the Fed will allow European banks to fail? Despite promises from Bernanke.. the D's and R's are screwing us for as long as we allow it to happen.”

“"But here’s the thing: Fannie and Freddie had nothing to do with the explosion of high-risk lending a few years ago, an explosion that dwarfed the S.& L. fiasco. In fact, Fannie and Freddie, after growing rapidly in the 1990s, largely faded from the scene during the height of the housing bubble.

Partly that’s because regulators, responding to accounting scandals at the companies, placed temporary restraints on both Fannie and Freddie that curtailed their lending just as housing prices were really taking off. Also, they didn’t do any subprime lending, because they can’t: the definition of a subprime loan is precisely a loan that doesn’t meet the requirement, imposed by law, that Fannie and Freddie buy only mortgages issued to borrowers who made substantial down payments and carefully documented their income."

Paul Krugman Fannie, Freddie and You The New York Times - The Conscience of a Liberal June 3, 2010

...but yesterday:

Daniel Mudd, the former chief executive officer of Fannie Mae, and Richard Syron, ex-CEO of Freddie Mac, were sued by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for understating by hundreds of billions of dollars the subprime loans held by the agencies. …

In the lawsuits, the SEC said Syron, Mudd and others understated the lenders’ exposure to subprime mortgage loans. From 2007 to 2008, Freddie Mac executives said the company’s exposure was between $2 billion and $6 billion when it was actually as high as $244 billion, according to one SEC complaint. From 2006 to 2008, Washington-based Fannie Mae executives said the firm’s exposure to subprime mortgage and reduced documentation loans was about $4.8 billion when it was nearly 10 times greater, according to the regulator.

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac executives told the world that their subprime exposure was substantially smaller than it really was,” Robert Khuzami, director of the SEC’s enforcement division, said today in a statement. “These material misstatements occurred during a time of acute investor interest in financial institutions’ exposure to subprime loans, and misled the market about the amount of risk on the company’s books.”

The defendants and/or their attorneys are denying wrongdoing.

Peter Wallison, a member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, explains why these misleading reports were so important:

[B]y 2008, before the financial crisis, Fannie and Freddie were holding or had guaranteed 12 milllion subprime or other risky loans but had not reported that fact to the markets. This made it extremely difficult for risk managers at banks, investment banks, rating agencies, and other financial institutions to understand the risks of securities backed by subprime and other weak loans, and this was one of the major causes of the financial crisis.

The lawsuits certainly lend credence to the argument, which I and many others have made, that Fan and Fred greatly exacerbated the housing and financial crises. They don’t absolve other bad actors, including the lawmakers who created incentives for banks to make risky loans, the regulators who were asleep at the switch, the ratings agencies that rated risky financial instruments as safe, the Federal Reserve for keeping monetary policy too lax for too long, and the banks themselves that in any event were over-leveraged.

That said, understating the GSEs’ exposure to subprime loans by factors of roughly ten and sixty, respectively, undoubtedly would have had a material effect on those other actors’ ability to properly gauge what was going on in the housing market in the mid-2000s.

I hope these lawsuits are contested in court until the very end, with all the facts and evidence presented in full, because they could be crucial to our understanding what really happened in the lead-up to the financial panic and crash, and the resulting recession.

– By Kyle Wingfield

http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/2011/12/16/sec-accuses-ex-execs-at-fannie-freddie-with-understating-subprime-exposure-by-tens-of-billions-of-dollars/?cxntfid=blogs_kyle_wingfield


Ooops! I hope somebody drives by to check on Paul today..”

“"You gotta admire the creativity of tying Ron Paul to the Austrians."
- 1camper

I guess Krugman faked these:

click on image to read

Ron Paul - Discussing Austrian vs. Keynesian Economics

Ron Paul teaches Bernanke Austrian Economics 11/18/08

Ron Paul Slams FEMA & Explains Austrian Economics”

“You can try to focus this on Austria if you want but your first clip proves Ron Paul was right in 2003 and my link proves that hack Paul Krugman was still in denial of what happened in 2010. Epic fail.”

“Hayek, Krugman, Keynes, Bernanke are all talking theory to lessen the damage truth can do to this country.

The truth is so simple, you can burn all the books and high minded schools.

Poor tax policy and gov't overspending into the hands of the too few rich, tears away any sanity in the economy, forcing the less than .1% top, to borrow in mass to maintain the trend that always leads to bubbles. Japan did the same in the late eighties.

The same people who took advantage of these crazy markets are now doing the same thing in the "For Profit School System and the Gold Market". Get out of their way, TODAY!”

“Here ya go ;) http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DiR6oVlTdU_8&v=iR6oVlTdU_8&gl=US

I'm no expert on things economic but after Krugman wrote "Fanny, Freddie and You" he should never be listened to again.”

“None of them should be allowed on any of the media.
I've heard the poor Pope is tired being on the phone night and day trying to talk his idiot Mewt into returning to the Blabtist Church.”

“Yep and what nobody on the right likes to mention is that we already EXPORT tons of gasoline! This was from CNN....Dec 5th, 2011.

Gasoline: The new big U.S. export

"The United States is awash in gasoline. So much so, in fact, that the country is exporting a record amount of it.

The country exported 430,000 more barrels of gasoline a day than it imported in September, according to the U.S. Energy Informatio­n Administra­tion. That is about twice the amount at the start of the year, and experts and industry insiders say the trend is here to stay.

The United States began exporting gas in late 2008. For decades prior, starting in 1960, the country used all the gas it produced here plus had to import gas from places in Europe.

But demand for gas has dropped nearly 10% in recent years. It went from a peak of 9.6 million barrels a day in 2007 to 8.8 million barrels today, according to the EIA."”

“Oh my...lol!”

“Wtf happened to my posts!?! They were amazing! Who deleted them and why?”

“[img] ”