Showing posts from January, 2009

The Plot Thickens - The Federal Reserve's Evil Twin Surfaces!

There is serious talk these days of forming a Bad Bank of the United States . Yes, you heard me right, a "bad" bank. Because bank's are being pulled under the water by the rip currents of the toxic assets they were "asked" to assume, the suggestion on the broiler is to create a federally authorized institution to assume them and manage them in the best way it can, freeing financial institutions like Bank of America which has been dragging in an almost lethal way since acquiring Countrywide and Merrill Lynch. A "bad bank" is not such a bad idea, really, for there is an equivalent of one in the real world. It is quite elaborate, actually, having different levels. The first is the 99 cent store, outlet shops, discount centers. The second is the swap meet, flea market. The third is the yard, garage, or rummage sale. The fourth is the thrift store or downtown mission. There is even a fifth level, it is called the dump. Those things are perfectly fine operat

Barack Obama is Qualified

On the eve of Barack Obama's inauguration, I wanted make a blog entry here mostly to direct you to my good friend Ben Bush's excellent post from a few months ago. Most would never know that there are some rather legitimate challenges to Obama's constitutional qualifications to be U.S. president, but I am certain they will be quite fruitless. Certain authorized powers that fewer can identify have already coronated Mr. Obama, and as you can see from Ben's insightfully veritable words that all forms of clever causistry and provocative sophistry will be employed to buttress his reign. It doesn't much matter. It is all show. Obama is really just a Hollywood creation, following the dictates of those powers. What those powers do is quite significant, for their job is nothing other than managing the sinful conduct of those who ask them to do that. Obama is just a boffo character everyone can look at, an archetypal superhero fiction upon whom they may put their trust. His

Where'd the Attorney General Get That Idea?

Last month I blogged on a Los Angeles Times front page that featured the lead story: the Attorney General of California, Jerry Brown, arguing that Proposition 8-- officially declaring marriage between a man and woman-- should not be put into the Constitution. His case was basically that same-sex couples have a right to do anything and everything that opposite-sex couples may do. I'd written something regarding this situation that I am correcting here in this blog post. I'd asked the question, something like, "From where does Brown and those who support his cause get their ideas?" Here is where I made my mistake. I said "From nowhere," implying that endorsing, supporting, condoning, or favoring homosexual behavior was some figment of their imaginations. I could not be more incorrect. Indeed, the truth is They get their ideas from somewhere . As a reforming Catholicist myself I still find myself caught in the trap of saying things like "That's irrati

Any Value Enhancement Going to Happen in the New Year?

Much of the new year forecasting has to do with whether or not the economy will rebound from an unsightly tanking in '08. World prevaricators--oh, wait, that's not the right word-- prognosticators, sorry--World prognosticators will blab about this or that happening-- maybe , if this or that also happens and then if... If if if... The simple fact is that as long as people are habitually out to hack off value from others to allay their fears about whatever , then the economy will either be awful or what looks like the economy will fool them. Indeed I didn't exactly use prevaricator there by accident, for the word is just a fancy way to say liar . Addressing the massive Bernard Madoff rip-off, Los Angeles Times business writer David Lazarus refered to a scene in the film Hannah and Her Sisters . A character played by Max von Sydow had been bewildered by those who wonder how something like the Holocaust can happen. He says, “‘How can it possibly happen?’ is the wrong question.