The Obamanation

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I am not sure that they treated the Gov of AK with such kit gloves.

What, she was impeached, or something? News to me.

[TheMercenary]

Morris nails another one on Obama.

Obama’s leap to socialism
By Dick Morris

President Obama showed his hand this week when The New York Times wrote that he is considering converting the stock the government owns in our country’s banks from preferred stock, which it now holds, to common stock.

This seemingly insignificant change is momentous. It means that the federal government will control all of the major banks and financial institutions in the nation. It means socialism.

The Times dutifully dressed up the Obama plan as a way to avoid asking Congress for more money for failing banks. But the implications of the proposal are obvious to anyone who cares to look.

When the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) intervention was first outlined by the Bush administration, it did not call for any transfer of stock, of any sort, to the government. The Democrats demanded, as a price for their support, that the taxpayers “get something back” for the money they were lending to the banks. House Republicans, wise to what was going on, rejected the administration’s proposal and sought, instead, to provide insurance to banks, rather than outright cash. Their plan would, of course, not involve any transfer of stock. But Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) undercut his own party’s conservatives and went along with the Democratic plan, ensuring its passage.

But to avoid the issue of a potential for government control of the banks, everybody agreed that the stock the feds would take back in return for their money would be preferred stock, not common stock. “Preferred” means that these stockholders get the first crack at dividends, but only common stockholders can actually vote on company management or policy. Now, by changing this fundamental element of the TARP plan, Obama will give Washington a voting majority among the common stockholders of these banks and other financial institutions. The almost 500 companies receiving TARP money will be, in effect, run by Washington.

And whoever controls the banks controls the credit and, therefore, the economy. That’s called socialism.

Obama is dressing up the idea of the switch to common stock by noting that the conversion would provide the banks with capital they could use without a further taxpayer appropriation. While this is true, it flies in the face of the fact that an increasing number of big banks and brokerage houses are clamoring to give back the TARP money. Goldman-Sachs, for example, wants to buy back its freedom, as do many banks. Even AIG is selling off assets to dig its way out from under federal control. The reason, of course, is that company executives do not like the restrictions on executive pay and compensation that come with TARP money. It is for this reason that Chrysler Motors refused TARP funds.

With bank profits up and financial institutions trying to give back their money, there is no need for the conversion of the government stock from preferred to common — except to advance the political socialist agenda of this administration.

Meanwhile, to keep its leverage over the economy intact, the Obama administration is refusing to let banks and other companies give back the TARP money until they pass a financial “stress test.” Nominally, the government justifies this procedure by saying that it does not want companies to become fully private prematurely and then need more help later on. But don’t believe it. They want to keep the TARP money in the banks so they can have a reason and rationale to control them.

The Times story did not influence the dialogue of the day. People were much more concerned with the death of 21 horses at a polo match. Much as we will miss these noble animals, we will miss our economic freedom more.



Morris, a former adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Outrage. To get all of Dick Morris’s and Eileen McGann’s columns for free by e-mail or to order a signed copy of their best-selling book, Fleeced, go to dickmorris.com.

http://thehill.com/dick-morris/obama...009-04-21.html

[TheMercenary]

On this note Obama should be applauded.

Obama is doing what he said he would do to put science back in business. In response to a Federal court decision, his administration is allowing 17-year-olds to obtain the morning after pill without a prescription or parental consent.
George Bush had refused to approve the use of morning after pills for young women, so this new decision has consequences politically for the Obama administration and at the same time fulfilling a promise to overturn the previous administration’s policies on matters of birth control. While some people will react this encourages promiscuity, others believe that this will in effect reduce the risk of teenage pregnancies. That’s particularly true if the teenager has been a victim of date rape, incest or one of these issues of consequence to young women. Still it is controversial.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/271391

[sugarpop]

I would think moving from preferred stock to common stock would raise more eyebrows because it means taxpayers are less protected, which is bad.

As far as nationalizing the banks, they might should have done that from the beginning, at least until everything is under control. If they have common stock, they have a big say in what is going on, and since the banks aren't doing what they were supposed to be doing with all the stimulus money they received, then I say good for Obama for making a tough choice. Someone needs to be protecting our interests, and if that is the only way to do it then bankers only have themselves to blame, right? After all, all those highfalutin wall streeters brought this hell down on the rest of us.

[Undertoad]

George Bush had refused to approve the use of morning after pills for young women

Because righty knee-jerkers confused it with RU-486, the "abortion pill"...

...thus more actual abortions happened amongst young women who could not get the Plan B pill.

In the culture war, I guess we call that friendly fire. Shooting off your fetus to save your face, or something...

[TheMercenary]

Not sure if this is the kind of publicity that they should be proud of at the moment.

First Lady Michelle Obama steps out in Lanvin sneakers and they're only $540!

http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle...as_lanvin.html

[xoxoxoBruce]

Why not, they're millionaires spending their own money.

[TheMercenary]

I guess I just thought they should be a little more sensitive to the millionis being laid off from work this week. But hey, that's just me.

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I guess I just thought they should be a little more sensitive to the millionis being laid off from work this week. But hey, that's just me.

Because rich people NOT spending money is going to fix the economy.

No, really.

Why do you hate the rich just for having more than you do?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Oh, you're so sensitive.
She was volunteering at the food bank and spending money to get the economy rolling. :p

[TheMercenary]

I found some shoes for her! She can order them and shouldn't have to pay the VAT.

http://www.zazzle.co.uk/obama_world_...55166347623860

[xoxoxoBruce]

That's what UG wears.

[TGRR]

This is why Obama should simply forget that the right exists. They're going to hate him no matter what, so he should allow them precisely zero say in his policies.

Congressional Dems should, too, especially with Specter's defection. If I was in their shoes, I'd be booting republicans off of committees so fast they'd leave skidmarks in the cloakroom.

[TheMercenary]

xoxoxoBruce

That's what UG wears.

Heh. I doubt it.

[TheMercenary]

Shoes for Bush:

http://classicfun.ws/animated-gif-pi...him/2008/12/15