Is Obama even more Dangerous than Bush?

Sixty-nine Million of us voted for President Obama because he promised hope and change from the disasters of the Bush Administration. Countless millions of human beings around the planet joined us in our relief and our elation when he was elected. An unthinking uncritical “Obamamania” among most of his supporters continues to prevail so far. This is dangerous for them, for President Obama and for all of us. Without critical analysis and pressure from his millions of supporters, Obama will stumble into disaster.

We have carefully watched the new President’s first 100 days and we are appalled. We find that Obama has continued Bush policies affecting the abuses of Wall Street banks, and allowing Wall Street wrongdoers to manage our economy and the “recovery.”

Forget the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, the prosecution of Eliot Spitzer for his sexual indiscretion, and Bernard Madoff’s little Ponzi-scheme. What about prosecuting those bankers who profited from the most massive fraudulent swindle in human history?

Reputable commentators such as Michael Whitney, John Paul Roberts, Professor Michael Hudson, and now Professor William K. Black have spelled out the details. The CNBC TV Documentary House of Cards explained in detail with surprisingly candid on camera, guilt free admissions by the wrong-doers how this swindle worked from the borrowers and mortgage salesmen in Los Angeles to the top CEOs of Wall Street and to the Fed. These sources of our information have been relatively diplomatic in tone. It is time to name names and cite the fraudulent acts of those responsible, and the specific violations of law.

As we evaluate all of this, keep in mind what William K. Black said on Bill Moyer’s April 3 program about making risky loans where the ability of the borrower to repay a loan is not vetted: “We know that will produce enormous fraud under economic theory, criminology theory, and two thousand years of life experience.” Both Democrats and Republicans, hand in hand with Wall Street Bankers, by repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, and by enacting The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 specifically to preclude regulation, caused the current extraordinary depression and crisis by ignoring and acting contrary to this accumulated human wisdom. Think of this when you evaluate whether their acts were knowing and intentional and whether they are guilty or innocent.


The legal elements or requirements of the crime or wrong of fraud known to every first year law student are:

   1. An intentional misrepresentation of facts or a false promise
   2. Knowledge of falsity
   3. Intent to deceive
   4. Justifiable and actual reliance on the truth of what was represented or promised
   5. Resulting Damage

President Obama is a brilliant lawyer, top of his class at Harvard Law, and a ten year professor of Constitutional Law. His roots are in Chicago politics. President Obama clearly knows the elements of fraud.

We know the factual details of the wrongdoing from CNBC’s video House of Cards where those involved in the fraud at each level made surprisingly candid admissions of what they had done. At each level, the CEOs involved felt no guilt or responsibility. They would not have changed their conduct in retrospect Each said he had to do what he did to stay in business and to compete with others who were doing the same thing. This was the “justification” at every level from LA mortgage salesperson, to the bankers, the creators of layers of derivatives and credit default swaps to the raters who gave the derivatives that they knew or should have known were not worth their stated values: AAA ratings. All of this was happening in the context of congressionally granted exemptions from regulation, and NY Fed President Timothy Geithner’s failure to supervise and to regulate.

The Wall Street bankers deliberately made and palmed off to others loans that they knew were really bad. They made them because they were so profitable. Among themselves, they called them “liar’s loans” because they did not care if borrowers were unqualified and they encouraged them to lie about their incomes. They created the layers of derivatives based on these pools of liar loans, knowing that they were extremely risky. They pressured the rating companies to give them AAA ratings, and the rating companies complied “because the competition was doing it” when they knew or should have known that the “securities” were really not of AAA quality.

Foreign investors, domestic pension fund managers, and foreign governments and banks justifiably relied on the Wall Street banker’s sales pitch and the AAA ratings. The AAA rating satisfies the obligation of “due diligence” in checking the risk of an investment. These innocent but sophisticated investors had a right to assume that NY Fed President Timothy Geithner was doing his duty of supervising and regulating.

All of these investors were damaged when the house of cards collapsed. The investors have been damaged. We the citizens and voters and generations of our offspring have suffered almost incalculable damage…damage totaling many trillions of dollars that will plague us for generations.

This is the massive Wall Street fraud that President Obama inherited, and is now covering up, and possibly attempting to restart.


President Obama now has the sworn Presidential duty to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Thus he must “faithfully” prosecute financial wrongdoing, avoid conflicts of interest, and specifically, take certain prompt action against wrongdoing Wall Street banks as mandated by the Prompt Corrective Action Law that was enacted just following the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s. This law is found in Title 12 United States Code beginning at Section 1831. ((12 USC Section 1831 o. Prompt corrective action

(d) Provisions applicable to all institutions
(2) Management fees restricted
An insured depository institution SHALL pay no management fee to any person having control of that institution if, after making the payment, the institution would be undercapitalized.

(3) Conservatorship, receivership, or other action required
(A) In general
The appropriate Federal banking agency SHALL, not later than 90 days after an insured depository institution becomes critically undercapitalized—
(i) appoint a receiver (or, with the concurrence of the Corporation, a conservator) for the institution (Emphasis Added) )) There is no exception in the law for “banks that are too big to fail,” and no exception for criminal enterprises even if they are large.

Instead of bailing out wrongdoing banks with Trillions of dollars of our money, President Obama is required by federal law to appoint a receiver for the bank within 90 days after it becomes critically undercapitalized. He must prosecute those bankers who were paid salaries or bonuses while their banks were undercapitalized. There is no question that they are undercapitalized because they require Trillions just to make them function, without complying with legal standards. If “they are too large to fail,” they have seized way too much private “mafia-like” power over all of us. President Obama can and must follow the law.


Obama’ Chief Economic Advisor, Larry Summers one of Clinton’s Secretaries of the Treasury, and Robert Rubin along with Republican Senator Phil Gramm lead the lobbying effort to repeal the Glass Steagall Act thereby enabling Wall Street Banks to invest in derivatives, hedge funds, and credit default swaps, and permitting Wall Street insurance companies to engage in banking.

Then the same three men, Summers, Rubin, and Gramm together with Alan Greenspan lead the effort to persuade Congress to pass a law in 2000 without debate in either the House or the Senate prohibiting the regulation of these newly enabled Wall Street financial giants. It is known as The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, and is found in Title 7 USC Section 2. The exemptions from regulation are found in Sections 2 (g) and 2(h). ((7USC 2(g) provides the “Exon” exception for swaps:

(g) Excluded swap transactions
No provision of this chapter…shall apply to or govern any agreement, contract, or transaction in a commodity other than an agricultural commodity if the agreement, contract, or transaction is—
(1) entered into only between persons that are eligible contract participants at the time they enter into the agreement, contract, or transaction;
(2) subject to individual negotiation by the parties; and
(3) not executed or traded on a trading facility.

7USC 2 (h) (3) provides the exemption from regulation for derivatives so long as they are traded on an electronic trading facility (as they all were and are!)

(3)…, nothing in this chapter shall apply to an agreement, contract, or transaction in an exempt commodity which is—
(A) entered into on a principal-to-principal basis solely between persons that are eligible commercial entities at the time the persons enter into the agreement, contract, or transaction; and
(B) executed or traded on an electronic trading facility. )) President Clinton signed the new law on December 21, 2000.

Obama’s Chief Economic Advisor Larry Summers and his Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner both pushed for the enactment of this law which enabled the ensuing fraud involving mortgages and the layers of derivatives that were known to be risky and worthless.

Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner, President of the New York division of the Fed where all of the major Wall Street banks are located had the following duties according to its own mission statement:

It is responsible for

   formulating and executing monetary policy,
   supervising and regulating depository institutions,
   providing an elastic currency,
   assisting the federal government’s financing operations, and
   serving as the banker for the U.S. government.

In addition to paying his own taxes, Timothy Geithner had a public responsibility and duty to all of us. Timothy Geithner, the man chiefly responsible for avoiding what has happened, instead facilitated the fraud. He did not supervise and he did not regulate.


It is a felony for any person including the President of the United States to cover up a crime. 18 USC Section 4 states:

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Such a cover up is also criminal fraud as defined in 47USC 1001. ((47 USC Sec 1001 states in part: “(a) …whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully –

(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact… shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.))

Such a cover up when done by a President, Vice President or a Secretary of Treasury is also a “high crime and misdemeanor” warranting impeachment under Article II, Section 4 of our Constitution:

“The president, vice president and all other civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of…high crimes and misdemeanors.”

President Obama has also taken the Presidential Oath that he will faithfully execute this cover up avoidance law as well, and not to violate it himself.

80% of the American people, according to a recent poll believe that Wall Street is crooked and is responsible for our current Depression.

Obama, in a recent speech to Wall Street CEOs telling them to “cool it” about justifying their contract rights to bonuses, said

“My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.”

So what is he saying to the 80% of us potentially holding pitchforks who voted for him?

In effect, he is saying in his vague, charming, persuasive and hypnotic way: “I know of no crimes. I want to look to the future I will not prosecute the bankers. I will hire them as advisors. We have nothing to learn from their mistakes. We together will try to restore lending, and restart the economy as it was.”

What are President Obama’s own lawyers, Dawn Johnson Chief of the Office of Legal Counsel and Attorney General Eric Holder advising him? Are they, like John Yoo and Michael Mukasey who advised Bush that he could torture, advising Obama that he has the power to ignore the law created exactly for the purpose of dealing with failing banks because of an economic emergency? What is brilliant lawyer Obama advising himself? Where is there indication of Obama’s own integrity and inner moral compass?


The most immediate, pressing danger is that it will not work at all. Obama may not discover this until it is too late to try another solution. The reason is Obama seeks mainly to restore the lending ability of the Wall Street banks. That will work only if we are willing to fund our purchases by more borrowing. We are not. We will not borrow. We are too frightened. The great danger is of a total breakdown of civilized democratic society.

Even if it “works,” Obama’s plan will never succeed for us. The reasons are:

  • Obama and his advisors see capitalism as a stable system that only got a little off track due to unfortunate lack of regulation. It is in fact in deep trouble even aside from the banking problem due to an overproduction of goods and services that can be produced at a profit. This is the underlying “systemic defect.” Failing to recognize this defect, Obama does nothing to solve it.
  • Obama aims mainly toward providing more credit, restoring the Wall Street banks’ ability to lend money.
  • Obama fails to deal adequately with restoring the purchasing power of consumers from our earned labor.
  • The inevitable result for us will be a vast inflation of our dollars, so that each dollar buys less and less. We will be like frogs placed in slowly heating water. We will notice nothing at first. The “water” will heat slowly until it kills us. It may ultimately “succeed” for the wealthiest 1% in that they will own all of the land, gold, platinum, silver, and commodities and live in guarded gated castles. Those of us who survive will do so as feudal serfs who are permitted to share-crop their land. The result for Obama is that he will lose his bid for re-election in 2012 due to the massive despair and disillusionment of voters.


Although his window of opportunity is very short, if Obama changed course promptly before he has put us many trillions further in debt, there are sound, historically tested things he could do. They are bold. They involve a profound change in his analysis of our problem. He could:

  • Cause our government to be the sole creator of our money supply, our silver coins, our dollar bills, and our “check book” money. Lincoln did this in 1860 to finance the Civil War. The state of Pennsylvania did this successfully for 50 years prior to 1789.
  • Instead of borrowing from private banks and other governments, our government could create and issue money to meet government, business and individual needs, including rebuilding our infrastructure, education through college, and universal health coverage, and to pay our government’s obligations on existing bonds as they fell due.
  • Prohibit “fractionalized reserve banking,” the practice of private bankers lending from 10 to 90 times the asset-reserves they hold. Allow banks only to loan on a 1 to 1 basis, from the dollars they have on deposit.
  • Impose a top limit on interest that could be charged say 8%.
  • Allow the Wall Street banks to go into bankruptcy, but retain enough of the needed staff employees to implement the new way of supplying money where needed.
  • Repeal the Federal Reserve Act and install the needed functions of the Fed as a division of the Treasury Department.
  • Enable local banks and businesses to continue to function as they now do.
Doug Page is a retired lawyer for unions, a former Democratic politician, and a life long observer of government, unions and business. He can be reached at: Read other articles by Doug, or visit Doug's website.

49 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Don Hawkins said on April 6th, 2009 at 8:36am #

    Doug that was some very revolutionary ideas. 2 million to start calm at peace one voice pot’s and spoon’s in front of the Capital no more lies the truth we are real and so is the problems we all face let’s try. Now who out there can get this organized maybe Gore can help or Hansen it has to start somewhere. It looks like high upon the Hill it will be business as usually the same game and again plan’s being made for nobody. Come on how do we start there has to be away. We are out of time.

  2. rg the lg said on April 6th, 2009 at 9:58am #

    Let us assume you are simply trying to make sense of senselessness … by suggesting that any kind of change can really take place in the Empire. If we do so, then an old cynic like me can say, well maybe. But the skeptic – ?

    No way.

    Obama said what needed to be said. He suggested ‘change’ because the fact is that what ‘change’ means in this little empire of ours is: get us back on top! It has nothing, really, to do with the sorts of stuff you blathered on about.

    Changing any of that will require a revolution … one of those bloody messes requiring people to believe in something strongly enough to risk their necks. Our revolutions so far, with the exception of the Civil War when the business/corporate elite in the north undercut and destroyed the Articles of Confederations fear of big government because of corporate big business, have been really silly sorts of things. Each has attempted to preserve a status quo.

    I would even go so far as to suggest that the ‘original’ revolution that had thirteen colonies break away from England was actually a very conservative affair … one of the colonial oligarchs refusal to acquiesce to the demands of the empire. Thus, in my opinion (never humble) …

    … the idea of any substantive change by Americans is anathema. Change is, was, and will be, a dirty word unless (as O’Bama used it) the intent is preservation of a greedy, self-inflated notion of ‘goodness’ obviated by the realities of our machinations to the contrary.

    Still, your essay was fun to read … the ‘polly-anna-ish-ness and all!

    In Cynical skepticism …

    RG the LG

  3. Brian said on April 6th, 2009 at 10:33am #

    Nicely reasoned. On point.

    But “us”? Hey, I voted for Nader.

  4. Don Hawkins said on April 6th, 2009 at 11:46am #

    Washington – The United States will push for more restrictions on tourism to the North and South Poles to protect the regions’ natural environment and avoid the worst effects of global warming, US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday. Opening a nearly two-week summit bringing together the two diplomatic bodies that govern the Arctic and Antarctic, Clinton warned that protecting the region was crucial to stabilizing the global climate.
    “The changes under way in the Arctic will have long-term impacts on our economic future, our energy future and indeed again the future of our planet, so it is crucial that we work together,” Clinton said at an opening ceremony at the State Department in Washington.
    The gathering, which brings together scientists and government officials from 47 countries, marks the first US-hosted summit on the environment since President Barack Obama took office in January, and comes as world governments are hoping to reach a new deal by December to curb the pollutants that cause global warming.
    This week’s summit, which moves to Baltimore, Maryland, after Monday’s opening ceremony, will review the latest science, the impact of tourism and protecting the environment and species in the polar region.
    “Strengthening environmental regulation is especially important as tourism to Antarctica increases,” Clinton said, proposing limits on larger ships and increasing safety and environmental regulations.
    Scientists have warned that global warming is already having a significant impact on the world’s polar regions. Melting Arctic ice could cause a dangerous rise in global sea levels, flooding some coastlines and accelerating the impact of climate change around the world.
    A study by US space agency NASA released on the sidelines of the polar summit found that Arctic ice was melting, and thinning, at a faster rate than expected. About 70 per cent of the Arctic’s sea ice now melts over the summer months, up from 40-50 per cent in the 1990s. Only 10 per cent of the ice survives two years or more.
    A separate study last week by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Washington warned that Arctic summers could be completely devoid of ice in 30 years time. Earlier studies forecast that the Arctic ice would vanish only at the turn of the next century.
    The polar conference comes on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Antarctic Treaty. Agreed to by 12 governments, the treaty designated the poles a peaceful “natural reserve” that could not be used by any governments for military purposes.
    Clinton said that past agreements on protecting the poles served as a “living example” of governments’ ability to cooperate on environmental issues, and urged similar cooperation in the lead-up to a crucial Copenhagen summit on climate change at the end of the year.
    “As the world prepares for climate talks in Copenhagen this December, meetings like this are more important than ever,” Clinton said. Earthtimes

    “Strengthening environmental regulation is especially important as tourism to Antarctica increases,” Clinton said, proposing limits on larger ships and increasing safety and environmental regulations, what. Clever get people’s minds off the real problem burning fossil fuels. In a few years I don’t think tourism to Antarctica is going to be a problem. Water and food in China and millions on the move same in India and some parts of the States. Cap and trade will not work it’s time to get real. Limits on larger ships and increasing safety and environmental regulations that should do the trick. Here we go again.

  5. Don Hawkins said on April 6th, 2009 at 1:31pm #

    The United States will push for more restrictions on tourism to the North and South Poles to protect the regions’ natural environment and avoid the worst effects of global warming, US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday. Opening a nearly two-week summit bringing together the two diplomatic bodies that govern the Arctic and Antarctic, Clinton warned that protecting the region was crucial to stabilizing the global climate.

    Yes here we go again. If the ice melts it will come back someday right. Yes that’s right but human’s will not be here well maybe a few in gated communities. Clinton warned that protecting the region was crucial to stabilizing the global climate. No I take that back what she said was even more ridiculous. “Look Dad a piece of ice the size of New Jersey is breaking off.” “Dad how high is that wave.” “You know son maybe it’s time to go home to Florida where it is safe.” “I know next year let’s go to Northern China or Australia and see the desert or maybe we could go to India and watch the glaciers melt that could be fun”

  6. Mr H said on April 6th, 2009 at 2:53pm #

    I don’t get it, you spent 8 years bitching about GWB, and now that Obama has been in office less then 3 months, you’re turning on him. Please tell me, WHAT DO YOU WANT????

  7. rg the lg said on April 6th, 2009 at 6:11pm #

    Bitching about Bush and griping about O’Bama …

    Yeah, to someone who has their head stuck in the sand (or worse) … who swallowed hook, line and sinker the BS taught in our schools about what a great and wonderful nation we are …

    Needs to read some of the stuff by William Blum … or maybe by Joe Bageant (his recent speech before the Adler brain-washing School is a must for a ‘thinking’ person) … or Howard Zinn. Their perspective is that change is more than ‘go back to the Clinton years’ … another epoch when the empire was out of control and led in multiple ways to 9/11 …

    The problem isn’t that there has been change … but that the change is only superficial … and superficiality simply is not good enough. Like the theory of incrementalism, there is more than one-million tiny steps when two or three big ones in the wrong direction wipe out all of that so-called progress leaving us smack dab where we began.

    Finally, if you can’t tell what we want as we criticize O’Bama, as we criticized Bush II, then perhaps the problem is your lack of reading skills?

    RG the LG

    ALL THREE of the above mentioned writers can be found by googling their names … and don’t forget that little southern belle: Missey Beattie.

  8. Tennessee-Chavizta said on April 6th, 2009 at 7:57pm #


    Americans alone and individually cannot fight fascism, and there is a conspiracy of individualism in this country. Individualism has been the tool of the US corporate government to prevent people from overthrowing it.

    Read the following article which explains that people alone are weak, but united in a community or party are strong.

    b) The fact that at the present stage of development men can satisfy their needs only within society, that in general from the very start, as soon as they came into existence, men needed one another and could only develop their needs and abilities, etc., by entering into intercourse[11] with other men, this fact is expressed by Feuerbach in the following way:

    “Isolated man by himself has not the essence of man in himself “the essence of man is contained only in the community, in the unity of man and man, a unity, however, which depends only on the reality of the difference between I and you. — Man by himself is man (in the ordinary sense), man and man, the unity of I and you, is God” (i.e., man in the supra-ordinary sense) (§§ 61, 62, p. 83).

    Philosophy has reached a point when the trivial fact of the necessity of intercourse between human beings — a fact without a knowledge of which the second generation that ever existed would never have been produced, a fact already involved in the sexual difference — is presented by philosophy at the end of its entire development as the greatest result. And presented, moreover, in the mysterious form of “the unity of 1 and you”. This phrase would have been quite impossible had Feuerbach not kat exochn [mainly] thought of the sexual act, the conjugal act, the community of I and you. (For, since the human being = brain + heart, and two are necessary to represent the human being, one of them personifies the brain in their intercourse, the other the heart — man and woman. Otherwise it would be impossible to understand why two persons are more human than one.[ Cf. Ludwig Feuerbach, Grundsätze der Philosophie der Zukunft, § 58] Saint-Simonist individual.[4]) And insofar as his community becomes real it is moreover limited to the sexual act and to arriving at an understanding about philosophical ideas and problems, to “true dialectics” (§ 64), to dialogue, to “the procreation of man, both spiritual and physical man” (p. 67). What this “procreated’ man does afterwards, apart from again “spiritually” and “physically” “procreating men”, is not mentioned. Feuerbach only knows intercourse between two beings,

    “the truth that no being on its own is a true, perfect, absolute being, that truth and perfection is only the association, the unity of two beings that are essentially alike” (pp. 83, 84).

  9. Mulga Mumblebrain said on April 6th, 2009 at 8:41pm #

    Forgive me, but Obama is simply another great Yankee ‘confidence-man’, was always plainly such, as no-one but a kleptocrat’s stooge can even contemplate a successful Presidential campaign, and has revealed himself as such. To hope that Obama will do anything but serve the rulers of the US and the world, the parasitic elite, while peddling the politics of hype for the gullible patsies, is the height of self-delusion. Anyone who has lived in any market capitalist state and believes that any politician allowed within coo-ee of power is anything but a bought and sold servant of the money-power, needs their head read.

  10. Julie said on April 6th, 2009 at 10:03pm #

    12 USC Section 1831 – Prompt corrective action is applicable to banks under the authority of the FDIC.

    The problem is “holding companies” owning both investment banks and commercial banks. Citigroup Inc. and Bank of America own both as a result of the GLBA.

    We are bailing out Citigroup Asset Guarantee, which included the unregulated hedge funds trading of credit default swaps. – not Citibank GLBA

    FINANCIAL REGULATION: A Framework for Crafting and Assessing Proposals to Modernize the Outdated U.S. Financial Regulatory System, GAO-09-216, January 2009 – 107 pages.

    GAO: “The GLBA limits the circumstances under which both holding company regulators and depository institution regulators may examine functionally regulated subsidiaries of “bank holding companies,” such as broker-dealers.”

    The report explains that GLBA of 1999 gave the authority for the holding companies to the SEC and CFTC, but it was voluntary on the part of the holding company – results – little oversight.

    The CFMA of 2000 ensured that credit default swaps would not be regulated.

    On March 26, 2008, Geithner proposed regulations to increase authority – GOP

    “Under current law, no regulator has the authority to essentially take over a troubled bank holding company—conglomerates with a wide range of financial operations—the way the government routinely does with smaller, commercial banks.”

    Both FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke have said that even as the government injects more taxpayer capital into two giant financial institutions, Citigroup (NYSE: C) and AIG (NYSE: AIG) it can’t actually shut them down even if officials wanted to. Citigroup is a holding company.

    GAO: “Although OTC derivatives and their markets are not directly regulated, the risk exposures that these products created among regulated financial institutions can be sometimes large enough to raise systemic risk concerns among regulators. For example, Bear Stearns, the investment bank that experienced financial difficulties as the result of its mortgage-backed securities activities, was also one of the largest OTC derivatives dealers. According to regulators, one of the primary reasons the Federal Reserve, which otherwise had no regulatory authority over this securities firm, facilitated the sale of Bear Stearns rather than let it go bankrupt was to avoid a potentially large systemic problem because of the firm’s large OTC derivatives obligations.

    More than a decade ago, we reported that the large financial interconnections between derivatives dealers posed risk to the financial system and recommended that Congress and financial regulators take action to ensure that the largest firms participating in the OTC derivatives markets be subject to similar regulatory oversight and requirements.”

  11. Don Hawkins said on April 7th, 2009 at 2:33am #

    WASHINGTON, DC, April 6, 2009 (ENS) – “Global warming has already had enormous effects on our planet, and we have no time to lose in tackling this crisis,” U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told the first-ever joint session of the Arctic Council and the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, which opened its two-week conference today.

    “With the collapse of an ice bridge that holds in place the Wilkins Ice Shelf, we are reminded that global warming has already had enormous effects on our planet, and we have no time to lose in tackling this crisis,” she said.

    So you are going to tackle the crisis are you. A little secret number one working together is key here and a good place to start is in the United States. Greed fear and stupidity isn’t going to get. Donald Trump yesterday on Fox said if the government tax’s the big people I guess like him then off shore move to a new country. Well so long good people have a nice day. At first it doesn’t matter about China or India we set the bar. Cap and trade will not work Hansen’s plan will. It’s called using the knowledge. Now the energy people in the States want to be butt heads well nationalize those companies I think you call it National security. In the case of this little climate breakdown the security of about 6 billion plus people is the game. It’s time to get real people. It’s to late for some things any plans for that but plans are one thing action is another. Oh to do that means it’s real well it is real. There are some very good smart people that you don’t see on the Glenn Beck show or Fox news and what are you going to do follow them around change there reports put them in a detention camp if they tell the truth. I am not sure if these people who like a lie instead of the truth realize it yet but they are starting to look and sound a little nut’s. The average person in the States doesn’t think climate change is a big deal, wrong. Just the regular people I talk with don’t think that. How about when El Nino makes a little come back and the sun warms a tad as it will. It’s going to get hot in here. So some people will move to another country so long and have a nice day good people. I wonder what country will they move too? See that question mark that is what many see a big question mark!!

  12. Don Hawkins said on April 7th, 2009 at 3:08am #

    I know maybe these good people who think moving off shore to another country is the answer will start there own country. They could call it “The People’s Republic Of Capitalism”. Not a bad idea at least they would all be in one place easer to keep an eye on them. Then when you go into Wal Mart instead of made in China it will say TPRC yes the old TPRC. Anyway how is the NCAA championship going who is winning and who is losing but that is not the way to look at it. It’s how you play the game. Please by all means move off shore that will show us who’s boss.

  13. Toriach said on April 7th, 2009 at 5:08am #

    An excellent article. Personally while I do not believe that Obama is worse than Bush, he clearly is not going to be as revolutionary and transformative as people hoped. But we should have learned an important lesson from his campaign. We can make things happen. We have the tools. Now all that we have to do is reject the systems false choices (Obama vs McCain) and insist on true transformation. It will not be easy but it can happen.

  14. bozh said on April 7th, 2009 at 7:05am #

    tennessee, yes,
    add to that the fact that humans use language, further bolsters the idea that we are a community where each person depends on each other person; or in short, we function better when interdependent.

    it is anexellent observation that cultivation of individualism and saviors like ghandi, king, lincoln, stalin, jesus, a god, et al is just a tool to keep us divided.

    we’ve had thousands of heros and saviors but interpersonal relationship appears the same as the one millennia ago. tnx

  15. bozh said on April 7th, 2009 at 7:20am #

    don, you’re right,
    ‘protecting’ arctic may be just a ruse. after all, nature had protected it for eaons. OK, ‘protection’ sounds nice and it is a +.
    but as you say, fossil fuels ares till being burned. i’d also add that we still use and waste too much so that the ‘protection’ = near-zero protection of the planet. tnx

  16. mistah charley, ph.d. said on April 7th, 2009 at 7:30am #

    Some people might want to go to demonstrations being organized in various “A New Way Forward April 11. I first heard of these when William Greider recently appeared on Bill Moyers PBS show.

    The aims are:

    “NATIONALIZE: Experts agree on the means — Insolvent banks that are too big to fail must incur a temporary FDIC intervention – no more blank check taxpayer handouts.

    REORGANIZE: Current CEOs and board members must be removed and bonuses wiped out. The financial elite must share in the cost of what they have caused.

    DECENTRALIZE: Banks must be broken up and sold back to the private market with strong, new regulatory and antitrust rules in place– new banks, managed by new people. Any bank that’s “too big to fail” means that it’s too big for a free market to function. ”

  17. bozh said on April 7th, 2009 at 8:08am #

    beware of all saviors! and especially ‘saviors’ who make “promises” or issue commands.
    one of the greatests “saviors” presented to the world, had been a mere man [probably a schizzo]. he issued a number of commands and “promises” and yet the world may be severely damaged.

    and 95% of the jesus’ worshippers approbate killing people all over the world and the right of the lords to govern us like sheeple.
    and to add insult to injury, priests ‘teach’ or command people “to be with us and not of us”
    in short, shamans advocate kommunism for own flock and fascism for the rest of us. does not bailout prove it? tnx

  18. Max Shields said on April 7th, 2009 at 9:01am #

    Mr H,
    you’re kidding, right?

    Obama has 3 months to continue the Bush program. It is not just what O has done (or not done) in 3 months, it is the entire campaign.

    Tell me ONE thing that really difference in substance from what a President McCain would be doing right now in foreign policy. Just ONE.

    The difference(s) between McCain and O are just about nill as well. A little, ever so slightly rhetorical difference. That’s it.

    It’s true NOW and was back 12 months ago.

    The reason why this guy Obama is “dangerous” isn’t because we need to hold his “feetsies” to the “fire”; but because he is of and for the very system that plunders the world. Stylistical there are some slight differnces, but whethers it’s dones dropping 1/2 meg bombs or some other carrier, is neither here nor there.

    Obama has made DECISIONS and these are what we’re talking about H.

  19. Max Shields said on April 7th, 2009 at 9:35am #

    rg the lg,

    Add Chris Floyd to your list of “getting it real” writers.

    Counterpunch article by Floyd illustrates why Obama is more dangerous than his predecessor.

    Eight years of Bush has numbed some to critical thinking (as Doug as put it). A little flash, an articulate lofty speech and they (Juan Cole) think they’ve just fallen deeply in love with the messiah….

    That’s friggin dangerous!!

  20. rg the lg said on April 7th, 2009 at 10:21am #


    I have a rather long list of possibilities to add to the three I mentioned. The reason I selected them is simple … they happen to be my favorites. I am aware of Chris Floyd and believe that his stuff is excellent. I simply did not include him.

    On the right … libertarian right … there is some good stuff coming out of the Future of Freedom Foundation regarding foreign policy. Their perspective on social policy is anathema … in my opinion … but I see them as allies of a special sort regarding what we do overseas and with the military-industrial-(congressional-)complex at home.

    RG the LG

  21. Max Shields said on April 7th, 2009 at 10:53am #

    Yes, there is little mentioned foreign policy agreement, and with a libertarian right that needs to be built on. It ready to go.

    On the MIC it’s so clear why that is sustained, every state in the union is dependent on building weapons of mass destruction. They’ve spread the war/defense spending largesse to the point whereby many of our so-called “working class” is wed to the empire’s endless war machine.

  22. Askjel said on April 8th, 2009 at 11:00am #

    Golly gee Folks, the ONLY issue we should be considering is restoring the “Republic”. Neither the Republicans or Democrats will give us that. Same Crap different piles! You all seem like a bunch of Children needing their Mommy. No wonder criminals run the country.
    Grow up! Govern Yourself!
    Restore the Republic!

  23. HR said on April 8th, 2009 at 6:44pm #

    Another case of buyer’s remorse. When are web sites gonna stop posting the blubbering of pseudoprogressives who didn’t bother listening to what the snake-oil salesman was actually saying during the campaign?

  24. HR said on April 8th, 2009 at 6:50pm #

    By the way, it was 69 million of YOU who voted for the guy.

  25. Deadbeat said on April 8th, 2009 at 10:24pm #

    T-C writes…

    It easy to believe that the reason for the lack of solidarity is “individualism”. It is much deeper than that. The conservative movement really didn’t gain its legs until Reagan. The Left came apart well before Reagan. It pretty much began right after WWII. I’d suggest that you dig deeper into the reasons why the Left came apart after WWII.

  26. Max Shields said on April 9th, 2009 at 4:52am #

    DB I agree that the “left” in the US came apart well before Reagan, but I’d start in the run up to WWI with Wilson at the helm.

    Eugene Debs ended up in prison, all communication (socialist/progressive/labor newsletters, news papers) were confiscated, people of German heretiage were lynched by vigilantees with complete immunity from the law. It was a police state and anyone who was against going to war was a threat to the government. Fascism has always been integral to the American system.

    Unions quickly became institutionalized, reflecting the organizational structure (semi-democratic) of it’s rival – corporations. A little spunk remained but faded, and was easily trounced when Reagan simply fired the air traffic controllers who went on strike – Reagan only had the power to sink unions because they, and their members had long forsaken the struggle.

    But, it was just before WWI, when the “left” was at its absolute strongest in the US that it was shredded by the US government, never to be anything more than an occasional “boogeyman” (McCarthy era) or shelved in academa. It’s force, the solidarity that existed faded most completely during FDR’s period, when it was appeased. The appeasement was slight, but enough to fracture what was left of the movement. It gathered some adolesent steam (barely united with the civil rights movement) in the 60s, but was more fad than real, deep and enduring. The baby boomers got older and became neoliberals and quasi-workers (thinking of themselves as “middle class” with eye on the American “dream” and upward mobility fueled by consumption). Since US’s primary manufactured items are military in nature, most of what’s left of the “working” class sees its “livelihood” associated with military bases and building of components or assembling weapons of mass destruction (which is why this country does not have a real anti-empire labor movement.)

    That’s what we’re working with DB. Yes, there are some real progressives with a head on their shoulder out there, but they’re a tiny minority as far as the so-called “working” class. It takes trauma to change this picture. We are embarking on just such a picture.

  27. HR said on April 9th, 2009 at 2:13pm #

    The greatest insight of kaputalists has been in recognizing that keeping a population divided against itself is the best way of controlling that population. This is evident in their conditioning of us in the myth of rugged individualism as the highest form of human existence. If I believe it’s all about me, in competition with every other individual, then the chance for unified movements against the status-quo becomes greatly reduced. This myth can only go so far, though, because of the communal nature of the species. Something further is required for more complete control.

    That something came in the form of exaltation, glorification even, of the nuclear family as the proper and most desirable sociological unit. Brilliant! Allegiance to ones immediate family satisfies, to a great degree at least, the tendency of the species to communalism, while at the same time, placing each of these “independent” sociological units at odds with all other such units, in competition with them, for food, for shelter, for goods, for jobs. Scabs who cross the union picket line have to provide for their families, after all, as do the cops whose jobs are dependent on protecting the interests of the bosses, irrespective of how they might sympathize with the striking workers. And, if there is major illness in someone “else’s” family, well, that’s a shame, so let’s have a bake sale, or a raffle to “help” them with a few dollars to defray tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills. After all, he was overweight, or she smoked too much, or “their family” always had heart problems. Similarly when “others” lose their jobs, their homes.

    As I said, brilliant. Politicians bellow about saving, or maintaining, the family. Editorial writers trumpet its importance as the foundation of greatness. The Chamber of Commerce touts the line regularly. Christian preachers thunder its importance from their pulpits – odd given that Christ himself appeared to live and to espouse a more sharing and caring way of life … witness the loaves and fishes story, or that his “family” consisted mostly of people unrelated to him. Teachers in our schools educate us to the importance and wonder of the nuclear family.

    By the early 90s, we were assaulted everywhere we were with propaganda that babbled about some wondrous, yet nonexistent, notion called family values. Families are nothing more than aggregations of humans related more closely genetically to each other than to other such units, and all are “dysfunctional” to one degree or another. Oddly (not really), coincident with this indoctrination, kaputalists went on a rampage of theft and greed unmatched in its history, one that put the robber barons of the 19th Century to shame … while we went merrily on a spending spree, also unlike any that had come before.

    Wake up folks. You’ve been had. If you don’t start acting more cooperatively with each other, you will find yourselves enslaved by law. The only reason you’re not already is because some kaputalists still remember that slavery in the U.S., which tore nuclear families of those enslaved asunder more often than not, resulted in slaves coming to view themselves and all other slaves as interconnected. That interconnectedness among the descendants of slaves, manifested through real caring and support, irrespective of genetic relatedness, continued long after slavery was abolished, though kaputalists have been gradually wearing it down.

  28. Brian Koontz said on April 9th, 2009 at 4:31pm #

    Nice reply, HR. The mantra of common Americans displaying their complicity with imperial and other forms of domination is “feeding the family”. Uncle Sam and his corporate cronies write the paychecks, which “breadwinner” must obtain through obedience in order to have a family.

    Women should become more involved in politics only partly for feminist reasons. The other reason is to start breaking down their negative and conservative influence on men.

  29. Max Shields said on April 9th, 2009 at 6:35pm #

    Is Obama more dangerous than Bush? YES and here’s another example of why:

  30. Deadbeat said on April 9th, 2009 at 9:55pm #

    Max writes…

    That’s what we’re working with DB. Yes, there are some real progressives with ahead on their shoulder out there, but they’re a tiny minority as far as the so-called “working” class. It takes trauma to change this picture. We are embarking on just such a picture.

    Max that was one of your best responses. I appreciate the historical accounts. I would add that McCarthyism, the betrayal by Liberals and racism.

    It is true as you say that the current crisis is the “trauma” that may get workers to reassess the adherence to the “American Dream”. Even DatelineNBC got into the act recently with a segment featuring Elizabeth Warren on Debt and Debt Collectors.

    Seeing Obama bailing out the banks is enormously disgusting (especially for a Deadbeat like myself) and leaving ordinary folks to wallow in a sea of debt (health, education, consumer, housing, etc) is in your face class war. And despite the Daily Kos Klowns who only care about Obama’s approval ratings, a recent survey by Rasmussen has a declining number of Americans “embracing” Capitalism. In other words there are an increasing number of American citizens who are now willing to listen to alternatives to Capitalism.

    This can be an important opportunity for the Left that I hope doesn’t get squandered — if only the Left can achieve solidarity.

  31. bozh said on April 10th, 2009 at 6:46am #

    in respect,
    we need more than the Left and its solidarity, we also need the Right and its solidarity for free higher education/healthcare, more freedom, and end to serial wars/killers.

    let us be one people and not center, left, right, libertarians, greens, et al.
    we probably need to get at least 90% usans to vigourously ask or demand the FOUR pillars or staffs of life. tnx

  32. joed said on April 10th, 2009 at 8:06am #

    in respect and admiration
    what you guys need is some balls! you need to hit the streets and hit’em hard. that is the only way real change will ever come about. obama is one of the bad guys only he is good lookin’. he belongs in prison with bush/cheney etal. the murder of palestinians, pakis, iraqis, afghanis, etc. goes on and on. wont you guys please make it stop.

  33. Gregory Scott said on April 10th, 2009 at 8:10am #

    I can not understand the stimulus bail out to help any thing more than the banks, big 3 vehicle makers, wall street and more bigger gov.
    The change of tax on taxes etc… has slowly creeped up on every American, The US dollar doesnt go as far as it use to/buy what it use to.
    If the stimulus bill is going to stimulate our economy wouldnt they divide it up and send it to every legal tax paying American that has been ripped off by over taxing in the first place.
    In turn the the tax payer gets the money and pays off bank loans, vehicles, buys new vehicles, the money has to be spent buying American made products when possible, its to be spent in America, it cant be saved it all has to be spent with in short amount of time.

  34. Max Shields said on April 10th, 2009 at 9:55am #

    joed, with all due respect, who is “you guys”? That and the “doll face” (unless you’re into that kind of shit) Obama talk is just so fuck’n beside the point.

    But to more serious matters, I agree with bozh, it is not a “left” that needs solidarity, it is a movement with clear values and dynamic attractors that need to connect and build, and connect and build.

    I completely agree that solidarity is lacking, but “you guys” isn’t going to make that happen.

  35. Vi said on April 10th, 2009 at 10:09am #

    I think the whole bankruptcy thing got ruled out when they allowed Lehman Brothers to go under and a Tsunami resulted….
    so I am reluctantly hoping the current strategy is more effective and am expecting an “FDIC like” method of legally seizing financial institutions in the future…to end these “bailouts”, basically corporate welfare, which have been going on for decades.

    I personally blame the Bush administration for refusing to protect home owners who began going under a full three years ago…if that had been addressed it might have headed off the worst of this mess
    but we were not his constituents….he was running an Oligarchy

    I think Obama is trying to be the president of a Republic….
    and as in any good divorce ….I expect no group will be 100% happy but I hope all will get what they most need…

    I believe the perp walks are ahead…
    just because Obama is keeping these gluttons afloat now doesn’t mean they will be immune later…unfortunately much of the disaster came from laws that were repealed…
    so we’ll have to see if any of these moral criminals can actually be legally prosecuted..
    if being a soulless bastard were a crime much of the human race would probably be behind bars, not just wealthy CEOs…

    I guess I’m more pragmatic…I’ve changed systems (quite small systems) in my time…and I know it takes time…inertia is a B*&%h….it’s hard to get humans to change direction…

    and Obama is no over lord…he’s got to get congress, lefties and righties (all of which have fed upon juicy pork for 8 years), on board…Dems are fighting cost cutting in the military budget DEMS!!!!!….he’s got a big mess…

    Dissenting voices, left and right, are essential to a free nation
    but I hope the left doesn’t make the same mistake as the right…
    much of this country is still centrist…and they live here too…

  36. bozh said on April 10th, 2009 at 1:02pm #

    joed, i am not an american; i’m a canadian. i support NDP. we do marching and rallying against serial wars; unfortunately, the organizers have not been able to get the conservatives to protest.

    people on the Right see us as leftitsts; thus promoting our politics but we do not talk about politics. at one time we had to oust an org. that kept complaining about us being silent about many issues.
    eventually, we had to bar them from our meetings.

    in the main we oppose solving int’l disputes by warfare. we also support indigenous people and a few other matters. tnx

    our platform is very narrow one: we support indigenous people, health care. we are against ‘solving’ int’l disputes by wars.

  37. joed said on April 10th, 2009 at 1:35pm #

    well, some one has to say it so here goes; what goes on here at dv is nothing more than a FREE SPEACH ZONE that amerikan govt allows.
    it is all just words isn’t it. sacrifice and hardship are the keys to real change. words are worse than nothing because words make you feel that you are doing something to cause change. words are worse than nothing.
    hit the streets and hit’em hard kids. it’s the only way now to get change, even in canada.
    bozh, i have followed your input here and elsewhere and i must say you are most enlightening. most reasonable. i do look forward to reading you more.

  38. Garrett said on April 10th, 2009 at 1:45pm #


    Please be more specific. What exactly do you mean when you say “hit the streets?”

  39. joed said on April 10th, 2009 at 2:00pm #

    garrett specifically; civil-disobedience.
    why don’t nobody ever ask about FREE SPEACH ZONE and internet.

  40. joed said on April 10th, 2009 at 2:06pm #

    … and, what would you kids do if the govt closed down the comment sections of internet. what would you do with all that energy. well, i know you wouldn’t hit the streets. you would probably take up ping-pong to get rid of your blog energy.

  41. Garrett said on April 10th, 2009 at 2:12pm #

    I was hoping you’d offer some specific suggestions.

  42. Don Hawkins said on April 10th, 2009 at 2:38pm #

    Two million people in front of the Capital with candles singing “Tomorrow, tomorrow it’s only a day away”. Calm at peace. Of course a few speech’s before the song. I will put one name James Hansen would give a good one. Who else? There’s that darn question mark again

  43. Don Hawkins said on April 10th, 2009 at 3:07pm #

    I see Fox News is going for it with this tea party rallies around the Country. First if Fox news is behind this the man behind the curtain comes to mind. I guess the whole thing is no new tax’s. So twentieth Century and will do nothing to solve the problems we all face that’s all face. At these rallies will they be yelling USA USA drill baby drill climate change is a hoax don’t listen to scientists or these so called thinkers listen to us we know best after all we are number one in the ratings. Fox News and truth solders on the march and I just listened to Glenn Beck on Fox forget Socialism Glenn say’s we are moving into Fascism now. From what I understand he has good ratings now, strange.

  44. joed said on April 10th, 2009 at 4:08pm #

    garrett, i don’t know! get a bunch of people and walk onto the freeway and shut down the traffic for a few weeks. those ladies that keep geting arrested with blood on their hands have the right idea. but basically garrett, i am just an old fat guy that has did my turn on the streets and in jail for disobeying the pigs so i guess that stuff dont matter any more and the pols and bankers can keep running the country and you guys get buy as best you can. if your not doing anyhting illegal then what difference does it make if the govt listens to your phone calls and tracks your movements and knows what you gave your outside squeeze for xmas. so what if your vote hasnt counted for 8+ yeasrs. so fuckin’ what if bush/cheney/obama can murder millions and retire to the good life. as long as you guys can speak freely in thre FREE SPEACH ZONE (aka DissidentVoice) then you sure wont be blamed for allowing your country govt to murder, murder, murder. it wasn’t you blokes, hell you guys were yelling and screaming (in the FREE SPEACH ZONE) to try and make the killing stop. it wasn’t you, hell, there is nothing you can do, nothing. except maybe keep on whining and crying and complaining that somebody has taken over your country and you can do anything about it.
    and thats about as specific as an old fat disabled Dissident can get. but you know i did fuck with the pigs and they slobbered all over themselves trying to figure out what was going on.

  45. Garrett said on April 10th, 2009 at 4:23pm #


    You seem to be making an unfair assumption that those posting comments on this site aren’t also working for peace, economic justice and sustainable communities. As if those things are mutually exclusive somehow.

    It’s easy to say “hit the streets.” What I want to hear/read are specific suggestions, which have a specific purpose that is attainable.

  46. Garrett said on April 10th, 2009 at 4:24pm #

    “i don’t know!”

    Then stop throwing around insults. Please.

  47. joed said on April 10th, 2009 at 4:38pm #

    garrett, if i knew any more that what i suggested then you wouldn’t have to ask me, i would be telling and doing it. i guess this is why leaders can be sooo necessary. perhaps a big big step would be for you guys to just admit you are in the FREE SPEACH ZONE at DissidentVoice and then see what happens from there. as it is you may feel better after venting on DV or elsewhere but you guys are totally ineffectual. like i said, your words in the FREE SPEACH ZONE are worse than nothing,
    “sacrifice and hardship are the keys to real change. words are worse than nothing because words make you feel that you are doing something to cause change. words are worse than nothing.”
    anyway, thank garrett for the opotunity to do some venting of my own. keep up the good fight how ever you perceive it.

  48. spinpolitico said on April 10th, 2009 at 9:38pm #

    Who Am I?

    I was born in one country, raised in another. My father was born in
    another country. I was not his only child. He fathered several
    children with numerous women.

    I became very close to my mother, as my father showed no interest in
    me. My mother died at an early age from cancer.

    Later in life, questions arose over my real name.

    My birth records were sketchy and no one was able to produce a
    legitimate, reliable birth certificate.

    I grew up practicing one faith but converted to Christianity, as it
    was widely accepted in my country, but I practiced non-traditional
    beliefs & didn’t follow Christianity, except in the public eye under

    I worked and lived among lower-class people as a young adult,
    disguising myself as someone who really cared about them.

    That was before I decided it was time to get serious about my life and
    I embarked on a new career.

    I wrote a book about my struggles growing up. It was clear to those
    who read my memoirs that I had difficulties accepting that my father
    abandoned me as a child.

    I became active in local politics in my 30’s then with help behind the
    scenes, I literally burst onto the scene as a candidate for national
    office in my 40s.

    They said I had a golden tongue and could talk anyone into anything.
    That reinforced my conceit.

    I had a virtually non-existent resume, little work history, and no
    experience in leading a single organization. Yet I was a powerful
    speaker and citizens were drawn to me as though I was a magnet and
    they were small roofing tacks.

    I drew incredibly large crowds during my public appearances. This
    bolstered my ego.

    At first, my political campaign focused on my country’s foreign
    policy. I was very critical of my country in the last war and seized
    every opportunity to bash my country.

    But what launched my rise to national prominence were my views on the country’s economy. I pretended to have a really good plan on how we could do better and every poor person would be fed & housed for free.

    I knew which group was responsible for getting us into this mess. It
    was the free market, banks & corporations. I decided to start making
    citizens hate them and if they were envious of others who did well,
    the plan was clinched tight.

    I called mine “A People’s Campaign” and that sounded good to all people.

    I was the surprise candidate because I emerged from outside
    the traditional path of politics & was able to gain widespread popular

    I knew that, if I merely offered the people ‘hope’, together we could change our country and the world.

    So, I started to make my speeches sound like they were on
    behalf of the downtrodden, poor, ignorant to include “persecuted
    minorities” . My true views were not widely known & I
    needed to keep them unknown, until after I became my nation’s leader.

    I had to carefully guard reality, as anybody could have easily found out what I really believed, if they had simply read my writings and
    examined those people I associated with.

    I’m glad they didn’t. Then I became the most powerful man in the world. And the world learned the truth.

    *Who am I?*


  49. angie said on April 22nd, 2009 at 12:08pm #

    The disasters of the bush admistation? 1994 when NAFTA was passed into law the clinton administration was in the white house. Our jobs have been leaving ever since going to other countries for cheaper labor. So when we speak of disasters in administrations we can add bush but dont leave clinton out one of the main players in the economical crises plus one of the main players in the moral decay on this society. Common sense should have kicked in by now NAFTA has destroyed our economy but book smart harvard educated people are absentent of common sense. Companys can pay workers in mexico $2.00 an hour as oppossed to $15.00 an hour in the united states. Did that ever cross clintons mind? Will it ever cross obamas mind? His first order of business was our economy, but the first thing I heard was that he had overturned bush’s ban on federal funded abortions, why not NAFTA? No one world government is on his mind, read revalations rather you believe it or not the end is near and obama will lead us to our destruction. He even had ministers so called men of god vote for him put his sign up in their yards to campainge for him, after he said that redicoulous bull shit!!! “I know you all think I was born in a manger but I wasnt I was born on the planet krypton and my father the great grizel has sent me to save the world” a presidental canidate for the united states of america should know how many states is in the union but this man got up there on a platform and said ” we have been to 57 states and have one more to go” America voted for him. America still want to blame bush amd morals for america’s destruction no deal it out to all at fault and no one is saying bush is innocent. Im saying americans with our greed always looking to get something for nothing and suing over minor bullshit and we need disability reform along with welfare reform. some of the ones drawing disability can work at doing something. Im not talking about the ones truley disabled, but the ones that can run their mouth use their hands lay on their back and continue to have and raise kids Can get a job and take a hell of a lot of the burden off tax payers. Our government spends alot of money on a lot of stupid thing s and ideas. If we are in an economic crises why do we continue to send our hard earned now hard to get tax dollars to other countries. Mabie obama had a plan he wanted to bring up in that meating the one he cancelled to watch a tv show but america thought that was so cute. America would still be talking about mrs bush is she had touched or hugged the queen (Elizabeth) You are not suppose to touch her america, you are suppose to curtsee the queen. but its ok america has the immoralist in office , Just what America wanted. An Imoral nation where right is wrong and wrong is right!! so lets please be fair to the administrations just because you have what you want doesnt mean he is good.