Hogwash, Mr. President - by Robert Scheer

[kpete]

Published on Wednesday, January 26, 2011 by TruthDig.com
Hogwash, Mr. President

by Robert Scheer

What is the state of the union? You certainly couldn't tell from that platitudinous hogwash that the president dished out Tuesday evening. I had expected Barack Obama to be his eloquent self, appealing to our better nature, but instead he was mealy-mouthed in avoiding the tough choices that a leader should delineate in a time of trouble. He embraced clean air and a faster Internet while ignoring the depth of our economic pain and the Wall Street scoundrels who were responsible-understandably so, since they so prominently populate the highest reaches of his administration. He had the effrontery to condemn "a parade of lobbyists" for rigging government after he appointed the top Washington representative of JPMorgan Chase to be his new chief of staff.

The speech was a distraction from what seriously ails us: an unabated mortgage crisis, stubbornly high unemployment and a debt that spiraled out of control while the government wasted trillions making the bankers whole. Instead the president conveyed the insular optimism of his fat-cat associates: "We are poised for progress. Two years after the worst recession most of us have ever known, the stock market has come roaring back. Corporate profits are up. The economy is growing again." How convenient to ignore the fact that this bubble of prosperity, which has failed the tens of millions losing their homes and jobs, was floated by enormous government indebtedness now forcing deep cuts in social services including state financial aid for those better-educated students the president claims to be so concerned about.

the rest:
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/hogwash_mr_president_20110126/

[Octafish]

1. Wall Street has done well.

It's the truth. Unfortunately, Big Money's prosperity has come at the expense of the nation as a whole.

[Hubert Flottz]

73. LOL

And that's hard for me to do as the country bleeds from every city county and state. The "state of the union" can be summed up in one word...SHOCKING!

[somone]

2. More champagne for banksters and CEOs. To all others: "tough shit"

[bobbolink]

17. yup, turd in the punchbowl time.

[WingDinger]

21. BUT, if it is achieved by closing loopholes, and greater efficiencies, then surely

getting corps hiring is the goal? Yeah, tack on some unemployment act, or actions. He is talking about no offshore corps, and protectionist equalizers. Getting ALL corps paying in. That was throwing down the gauntlet. Not mealymouthed.

[bobbolink]

23. We poor people see the writing on the wall. We now accept that we will be sacrificed for the rest

of you.

It would just be nice if you would go so far as to ensure that we have access to a comfortable and quick exit, rather than suffering even more to get out of your way.

Now, go ahead and retort what other conservadems have said here on DU... that we are whining, playing "woe is me", etc.

Show that good ole' conservative compassion, and see how much you can hit back at me.

We see all of this very clearly, and really don't care anymore. We realize we are trash to be dumped.

[True_Blue]

67. He completely ignored the high unemployment rate, foreclosures, & 99ers in his SOTU

He pretty much declared the recession to be over since Wall Street is doing so well now.

I read an article a few weeks ago that projected the number of 99ers would increase by another 4 million by the end of 2011. I'm simply stunned that a Democratic President would want to cut domestic spending in times like these or at any time for that matter. Those are not core Democratic values.

[fasttense]

77. Who remains to spend in this new economy????

OK, so the corporate aristocracy isn't spending. They are putting their billions in foreign banks, gold and betting on commodities. The middle class and poor are spending as little as possible. The state and local governments are firing workers left and right, canceling projects in order to pay off debt and selling off infrastructure. And now he announced that the federal government will stop spending too.

So, exactly who is going to fuel our economy, our piddling recovery, if no one is spending?????

[bobbolink]

93. He ignored them, because he spent all that time talking about homeless people, and also

disaled people who CAN'T WORK.

[Yuugal]

74. Amen!

[bobbolink]

94. .

:hi:

[xchrom]

3. Recommend

[theaocp]

4. Memo to Obama and the banksters

Keep an eye on what's going on in Africa these days.

[decidedlyso]

5. It was basically a Republican feel-good speech. He his cultivating

a new base, which will probably gain him re-election.

[CrispyQ]

11. Last week a couple of DUers posted that Obama's purpose all along

has been to destroy the democratic party brand - a brand that in the past, has stood for the People, for labor, for the poor, for the oppressed. At first I scoffed, but as I thought about those posts over the next couple of days, it doesn't seem so far fetched.

Invite the few remaining sane repubs into the 'democratic' party, so they can disassociate themselves from the teabaggers. As for the liberals, who gives a shit. They haven't had much representation over the past 40 years anyway, & besides, where the hell are they going to go?

They no longer care about trying to maintain the illusion of a two party state.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WingDinger]

15. I thought it brilliant, to lead with a republican hand clapper, and

then lead into things that had them freezing mid clap. Sure, the state of the union is painted prettier than it is. You expect them to tell you the empire has lost it's sway, and we are going to adjust rapidly to also rans?

[decidedlyso]

16. I don't expect a Democrat to extol a tax cut for business while

the common man is unemployed and starving.

[WingDinger]

20. If he can truly tune out bull, and throw that into the kitty, I say GO!

[decidedlyso]

22. Yeah, okay; I don't want to diminish your optimism. If we are both

still here in April, tell me what you think then.

[vssmith]

37. I am still part of his base for one reason

We cannot let a Republican choose any Supreme Court Justices in the near future.

If not for that, I would consider voting for a third party candidate

[decidedlyso]

88. Think again on what you posted.

[Knight Hawk]

80. BINGO!

You nailed it.He was a phony from day one.

[meegbear]

6. Hogwash?? Hey! No need to go all street there Scheer!

[bullwinkle428]

7. "Platitudinous" - pitch perfect! As I was watching the speech,

I felt like I was being a fed a big bowl of the equivalent of political Lucky Charms..."it's magically platitudinous!"

[progressoid]

8. Robert Scheer must be one of those fucking r@&^$%ed professional leftist 12 percenter types.

Why should we listen to him?






:sarcasm: & Rec.

[Mimosa]

63. He is. Limbaugh despises Scheer!

First time I heard of Scheer was 9 or so years ago while listening to Limbaugh on radio.

[progressoid]

70. He's a cool guy.

I sent him an email back in about 2003 and he even replied.

Coincidentally, it was about an article he wrote that pissed off Rush!

[Loge23]

9. Wars? What wars??

There was cursory mention only last night about the gigantic black hole of war into which untold trillions are being poured.
Along with free pass to the Quant set, accurately pointed out in this article, our government continues to ignore the root causes of our dire situation.

[Overseas]

10. Sad K&R.

This is closest to how I felt about the speech. Seemed like it was for the Wall Street crowd.

[woo me with science]

13. K&R x1000 nt

[DirkGently]

14. Buying into the "spending" distraction is dangerous & destructive.

Republicans and Tea Partiers have successfully changed the subject in a way conservatives have done for years. After running up a ludicrous, Reagan-style, defense industry-driven deficit themselves, they now wish to pretend that the worldwide economic crisis brought on by systemic financial de-regulation was somehow the result of "too much government spending," or that Obama himself somehow caused the problem by bailing out the auto industry.

We do have too much government spending, perhaps, but Republicans have no intention of reigning in the big dollars going to the defense industry corporate tax loopholes. Instead, it's an excuse to attack social and infrastructure programs, and give cover to states reneging on pension benefits, while they quietly gut financial regulation reform and clear the way for the next speculative bubble to pound more wealth out of the middle and working class for their rich friends.

The President knows none of this is true, but seems to have bought into the theory that corporations now sitting on mountains of cash, but not hiring anyone, need to be reassured and petted and soothed about how "pro-business" the administration is, and how nothing will come out of Washington that might riffle the waters in the slightest bit.

It's disingenuous and disturbing, and it again supports a false Republican narrative, putting Democrats in the role of simply sanding the rough edges off of the knives Republicans have planned for non-Wallstreet, non-oil company Americans.

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. I wish we could stockpile recommends.

"Platitudinous hogwash" exactly.

[realFedUp]

19. But did he mention the name Clinton in there?

LOL. What's a good Scheer screed unless he mentions one or both of the Clintons.

I am glad he's cleaned the lenses of his glasses finally.

[ProSense]

24. "How convenient to ignore..."

The SOTU isn't suppose to be a forum to call out fraud.

The FCIC just issued it's report on the causes of the crisis.

The President did emphasize that there have been significant job losses and the need to create more jobs was mentioned.

<...>

Many people watching tonight can probably remember a time when finding a good job meant showing up at a nearby factory or a business downtown. You didn’t always need a degree, and your competition was pretty much limited to your neighbors. If you worked hard, chances are you’d have a job for life, with a decent paycheck, good benefits, and the occasional promotion. Maybe you’d even have the pride of seeing your kids work at the same company.

That world has changed. And for many, the change has been painful. I’ve seen it in the shuttered windows of once booming factories, and the vacant storefronts of once busy Main Streets. I’ve heard it in the frustrations of Americans who’ve seen their paychecks dwindle or their jobs disappear – proud men and women who feel like the rules have been changed in the middle of the game.

They’re right. The rules have changed. In a single generation, revolutions in technology have transformed the way we live, work and do business. Steel mills that once needed 1,000 workers can now do the same work with 100. Today, just about any company can set up shop, hire workers, and sell their products wherever there’s an internet connection.

link

Still, most people are likely aware of the unemployment situation. It's not like the President can hide it.

Other reaction to the speech here and here.

[Rex]

25. He showed his true colors during/after the BP oil spill.

Left the region and said everything was back to normal, when nothing could be further from the truth. We need someone in charge that isn't a corporate suit or owned by JPMorgan Chase. I fear corporations now control everything and we little people get to vote on the next millionaire.

[glinda]

48. It will take more than just "someone". It will take many.

[Major Hogwash]

26. Well, there's no sense in Robert Schneer dragging my family's good name into it!

I can dig it, but not truth dig it, get it?

By the way Bob, the Rethuglicans fought against Obama for the last 2 years tooth and nail, or did you not notice that?

[ima_sinnic]

27. so "yes we can" really meant

"no we can't because those mean old Republicans won't let us"?

:rofl:

whatever ...

[librechik]

28. ha n/t

[sabrina 1]

33. Let's hope Democrats will take a lesson from the minority

party and fight 'tooth and nail' against any Republican ideas now that they are in the minority.

And here I thought we struggled for eight years to get control of Congress and the WH, only to find out that the minority party has more power. It's been a very rude awakening, IF you buy it.

So, we have the WH and the Senate, far more than those all powerful Republicans had when they 'fought tooth and nail' to get what they wanted. How do you think Dems will compare with a minority in only Congress?

'Fought tooth and nail'. See, that's why they get what they want. They don't cave to appease anyone. Dems did not fight back, they capitulated even with the power the people gave them.

What will the excuse be now? 'Oh, Dems couldn't get anything done because they don't have Congress'?? How come Republicans could do it, as you stated so clearly?

[treestar]

29. He's not a negative person, like Mr. Scheer is

Negative people would never like Obama's speeches.

[libmom74]

30. people with

critical thinking skills are the ones who tend to have a problem with Obama's meaningless speeches.

[Sadie5]

78. Well well well

I see the same trolls are here acting as Democrats to get the repug agendas spoken of. The truth is that this country was pushed into ruination per the Bush agenda when the SC decided to place an incompetent idiot president into office. If that wasn't enough they immediately started a plot to destroy the middle class and if that still wasn't enough they decided to jump onto the 'Clinton did it' band wagon. Let's blame Obama to save Bushs' sorry hide. What Bush and the Repugs did to destroy this country happened over 8 years and Obama will not be able to clean it up in 2 years. You might keep this in mind as you complain about Obama.

[dflprincess]

96. What has been done to ruin the country and destroy the middle class

started with 30 years ago with Reagan and continued unabated right up until today - including during the Clinton administration.

[Sadie5]

97. It might have started 30 years ago

But during the Clinton administration this country enjoyed peace and prosperity. Under Clinton there were plenty of jobs and the middle class was going strong. Like it or no, Clinton looked out for this country.

[dflprincess]

98. Yeah, NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagall

was really a blessing for all of us. :sarcasm: And then there was doing away with welfare "as we knew it".

[Smashcut]

31. People with a grasp on reality generally dislike Obama's speeches

[Fuddnik]

51. Robert Scheer was speaking truth to power before Obama was born.

Reality is not negativity.

[woo me with science]

81. ROFL!

Yes, all you outsourced workers need to turn that frown upside down!

:headbang: :yourock:

[deutsey]

83. Power to the Positive-Thinking People!

:evilgrin:

[woo me with science]

87. Just visualize a paycheck!

[Forkboy]

100. Oy vey

:eyes:

[Vidar]

32. K&R.

[mzmolly]

34. So, a President should never lay out a forward thinking vision in a state of the union

address? I guess Bachmann isn't the only person rewriting history of late.

:nopity:

[dflprincess]

42. A continuation of supply side economics is neither forward thinking nor visionary n/t

[mzmolly]

86. You must have missed the part where he noted our "Sputnik moment?"

You know, the need major government investment, on several fronts, to bring us into the future? I'm looking forward to high speed rail, personally. ;) He also said we can't afford to sustain the upper income tax cuts, which is anti-supply side.

[dflprincess]

91. Tax cuts he just extended

Says one thing, and apparently expects us to forget that he did just the opposite. I'm sure this time he means it when he says we can't afford them and will do away with them in 2012 - right before the election.

And just where is the government investment going to go? To more private companies that send jobs to other countries - I look at his financial & jobs advisors and I have a hard time believing he every gives any thought to the working and middled classes.

[mzmolly]

92. Thank goodness he did. He'd have a difficult time displaying Republican

hypocrisy and preventing cuts to SS if he hadn't. As for Government investment and where it will happen, I'll refer you to the speech. Doesn't sound like you watched it?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/25/obama-state-of-the-union-_1_n_813478.html

[dflprincess]

95. I watched it

but I've reached the point where I don't believe anything he says. His actions have pretty well made it clear that he's more concerned with Wall Street and the banksters. He's quite clearly not losing any sleep wondering what can be for the 99ers.

As Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit it shouldn't have been too hard for him to call the Republicans out on that without giving in on tax cuts - instead he went along with lowering the payroll tax which does help put SS at risk. If he was really concerned about Republican hypcrisy there are plenty of things he could call them out on.

[Raine]

35. On point nt

:thumbsup:

[ncteechur]

36. Few care what Mr. Scheer thinks.

Maybe Mr. Scheer should put his money where his mouth is and run for president. Then he can spout all the negative speeches he wants to. I don't think the seriousness of the problems in the US are lost on Mr. Obama but I also think there comes a time when he should be upbeat and positive and I think it was a damn fine speech.

[scarletwoman]

40. For the record, I care what Mr. Scheer thinks.

And I trust him a helluva lot more than Obama.

Obama is a tool of the Plutocrats, and his SOTU last night simply confirmed it -- again.

[Agony]

44. Exactly! Just like few care that Reagan and Co. got away scot free with Iran Contra.

Oh crap... wrong keyboard.

[woo me with science]

82. Au contraire,

many are relieved to see SOMEONE speaking the truth about what is happening to them.

[Forkboy]

101. You should probably just speak for yourself.

[Poboy]

38. recommend.

[Oilwellian]

39. Kick

Robert Scheer is a treasure. He's one of the few.

[SHRED]

41. kr

[bhikkhu]

43. "mealy-mouthed"? "platitudinous hogwash"?

...why are there only two places where one can predictably find our president, his intentions, and his efforts, tossed in the crapper with extreme prejudice? And why is one of them here?

[immoderate]

47. Because we value truth?

Because we're waiting for him to do something that's not a favor to the plutocracy?

The other place puts him down to give him an excuse to move to the right.

--imm

[ProSense]

50. "Because we're waiting for him to do something that's not a favor to the plutocracy?" Here's

something related to this point made by Scheer, from the OP article:

<...>

That the financial meltdown at the heart of our economic crisis was “avoidable” and not the result of long-run economic problems related to education and foreign competition is detailed in a sweeping report by the Democratic majority on the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission to be released as a 576-page book on Thursday. In a preview reported in The New York Times, the commission concluded: “The greatest tragedy would be to accept the refrain that no one could have seen this coming and thus nothing could have been done. If we accept this notion, it will happen again.”

Just the warning that Obama has ignored by continually appointing the very people who engineered this crisis, mostly Clinton alums, to reverse its ongoing dire consequences. As the Times reports: “The decision in 2000 to shield the exotic financial instruments known as over-the-counter derivatives from regulation, made during the last year of President Bill Clinton’s term, is called ‘a key turning point in the march toward the financial crisis.’ ”

<...>

Yes, it's possible to value truth and believe that the President's speech was excellent. Who does Scheer believe created the commission?

[immoderate]

53. Creating a commission?

Maybe I should have been more specific. He has done nothing to stem the flow of money to the plutocracy. Bush had his neocons; Obama has his bankers.

--imm

[ProSense]

55. Yes, what's the problem? Are you

saying it's OK for Scheer to cite the commission's report in criticizing the President, but it's not OK to credit the President with establishing the commission?

[immoderate]

58. I generally consider a commission as a way of not doing anything.

Why doesn't Obama appoint a commission to study ways of relieving income disparity?

--imm

[ProSense]

59. Does that make sense? n/t

[immoderate]

61. The cause of all our socil and most of our economic problems?

It bears some study.

--imm

[bhikkhu]

52. I value truth and sincerity, and see both of them in the president

particularly in the speech the other night, along with the best of intentions and a good heart. What was untrue, or unreasonable in the context of the intents and traditions of the event?

Leading with "mealy-mouthed" goes nowhere with me, or with any other thinking person, in my book. If you want to call our well-elected and popular president a liar, let's have specifics. How about a quote and a source?

[immoderate]

56. I see a slick operator. What do the good intentions get us?

He's popular, well-elected, but he works for the banks.

It's more what he left out. Some presidents have announced major initiatives at SOTU. He didn't talk about jobs, unemployment, he was so happy that his rich friends are doing well.

--imm

[ProSense]

57. "It's more what he left out." It

was a speech.

"Some presidents have announced major initiatives at SOTU."

There were no major initiatives?

I guess one could claim "he works for the banks" if one ignores everything the President has done ((here, here, here and here).

[immoderate]

60. There are few things he does that don't favor the plutocracy.

So he put restrictions on the credit card companies. They were chopping up the golden goose. But people are still underpaid and have to live off their credit cards. So they pay what -- 20% now?

He will present lots of "investment" initiatives to the congress. Clean energy. High speed rail. Guess what? They won't pass. How convenient.

On some of those administrative thing you list, he is better than Bush.

--imm

[ProSense]

62. "He will present lots of "investment" initiatives to the congress....Guess what? They won't pass."

Well, I guess his Presidency is over. Why bother pushing for anything?

[immoderate]

65. Good question.

I certainly hope he does. He may get another shot to do something after 2012. If there's anything left by then.

BTW, I see lots of your posts and I do enjoy your optimism. I don't share it, but I like hearing when our side wins. Still I would like to see something that relieves the wealth disparity.

--imm

[dotymed]

79. "Well, I guess his Presidency is over. Why bother pushing for anything?"

The problem is, President Obama will (supposedly) "cave", in the name of bi-partisanship, as we have witnessed many times.
The Presidents most effective tool is his "bully pulpit" in which he can convince the American people to pressure their (?) representatives into doing things that actually, help the people not the elite.

[swilton]

45. Thanks kpete!

He's right on!

[immoderate]

46. K&R

--imm

[DesertDiamond]

49. Echoes of the Reagan years. Things are fine! The rich are doing well, so what else matters?

[Tripod]

54. k&r

[ermasdaughter]

64. I disagree.

What he said was not an effort to ignore those "truths". But rather to tell us that IN ADDITION to those problems we need to find truly innovative solutions to these problems. Moreover, his speech advocated a smart and legitimate move to the "CENTER":

High-Speed Broadband across the country
High-Speed rail

You know the list.... this is the role of government and he needs to be pushing these initiatives!! And we need to be supporting him!!! We can't save those who are tied to dying industries. He even called the oil industry "Yesterdays Energy" - that's extraordinary!!!
No koolaide here.... Just simple analysis....

IMO This is more of my beloved liberals shooting ourselves in the foot.... We can keep griping about what he hasn't done OR set our sites on making sure some of the goals he outlined are achieve and make damn sure that the republicans do not take back the senate and the presidency in 2012.

[dreamnightwind]

69. The ball is in his court

so to speak. He truly has done very little so far that is progressive or that represents the interests of regular people (not billionaires) in this country or in the world for that matter.

He knows how, in speeches, to seem right-hearted and does make some great statements, like those that you pointed out.

To your list, I would add his call to no longer allow bogus offshored corporations to avoid paying US taxes by just opening a P.O. Box in the Caymans.

But this is not liberals shooting themselves in the foot. This is a President who has consistently spoken to the public as though he were their advocate, then he steps behind the curtain with his 100% corporate cabinet and their lobbyist friends and comes up with policies that represent only the wealthy.

So the ball is in his court. If he wants us back, if he wants us to believe in him again (we once did!), he needs to truly deliver for us, or fight like all hell trying to.

He needs to enact real financial services regulations, written by those representing the public interest, not by Goldman Sachs' all-star alumni. He needs to either deliver on his stated goal to eliminate the corporate offshore tax loopholes (truly the right policy, so it's good that he brought it up) or he needs to raise the corporate tax rate, though that's somewhat symbolic since 2/3 of US corps apparently no longer pay any taxes at all. He needs to greatly shrink this insanely bloated military, and end these insane and insanely expensive wars before we waste another dime of our Chinese money fighting them. He can use the money from that to finance his goals of high speed internet and trains.

My money says he won't really fight for any of that, it's all just the kind of things the public would like to happen, so he puts some of it in his speech to make us think he's working on our behalf. He can always use the rabid right wing as foils to absolve himself of responsibility for not delivering on these initiatives, which he'll never even seriously fight for.

Cynical? You bet! I say to Obama, "make me take it back".

[olegramps]

71. He fully revealed he was a compromiser in his books.

He certainly hasn't surprise me with his overt bipartisanship philosophy. It was a major theme of his "Audacity of Hope." His State of the Union speech clearly reflected this approach to governing. I don't believe that he is capable of comprehending that the majority of Republicans actually despise him. He appears to desperately want to be universally liked and this prevents him from taking a firm unbending stance on a number of issues. I don't see Obama as a bull dog Winston Churchill who wouldn't abandon his principles and didn't give a damn if you liked him or not. Obama's nostalgia for a return to days of civility and cooperation isn't in the foreseeable future. The extreme right wing propagandists are not going to stop until they have totally destroyed any chance of compromise and have totally polarized the citizens into armed camps of arch-enemies. The real State of the Union is that it is hopeless deadlocked and the congress is unable to effectively govern. The latest crop of total incompetent nitwits that have been sent to congress should be enough to concern even the most apathetic of our citizens. The situation appears to be so hopeless that if not corrected it will lead to total implosion. That is the real State of the Union.

[dreamnightwind]

102. I agree this country is barely governable

We definitely have a right-wing problem. They and their lizard brains can't wait to get to the violent part of this movie.

I can understand and even appreciate the need, and the art, of compromise and bipartisanship. What I didn't expect was that Obama would appoint people hardly to the left of W's people, and in some cases they're the exact same people. Meanwhile the right has moved even farther right, a concerted effort to move everything that direction. So we're left with a POTUS who advocates what I consider to be centrist corporate Republican policies, compromising from that position with a rabid right wing that would just as soon nothing get done anyway.

Obama needs to articulate and back an alternate vision, the country truly needs it after the ruinous Republican policies of recent years. He needs to strongly and articulately make the case for actual reforms, perhaps (gasp) even ones Wall Street and billionaires wouldn't like. Then he can compromise from that position.

He doesn't do this, so I don't believe in him anymore. I just don't think he's truly on our side.

[BigBearJohn]

66. K&R!

[Enthusiast]

68. Why do you hate the President?

:sarcasm: Actually I agree with every fucking word.

[florida08]

72. when POTUS says

the economy is growing again why do I feel he's talking about Wall Street? I was really moved by his call to end the rise of poverty in this county..no wait..wasn't in there. But the part about stopping predatory lending and banking deception was great..ooops that wasn't in there either. Didn't he mention the foreclosure fraud crisis? Oh yes..he will veto earmarks.

But I was really inspired by the Vince Lombardi metaphor
:eyes:

[dotymed]

75. "The stock market has come roaring back."

"Corporate profits are up."
Wow, I guess everything is hunky-dory, for the ruling elite.
Then it is obviously time to reinstate the progressive tax structure that created the "great generation", so that the huge majority of PEOPLE can prosper also.
People before profits.

[kenny blankenship]

89. Asset Bubbles R Us.

The US Govt exists now mainly to back the gambling debts of Wall St. tycoons with tax money heisted from the wages of grocery clerks, secretaries and plumbers. Call it "income redistribution" or else "market stabilization", if you think it needs a veneer of liberal policy credentials. The Govt also does a good turn these days securing oil and gas concessions for Exxon-Mobil, Conoco-Philips, and Chevron.

[MissDeeds]

76. Platitudinous hogwash indeed

K&R

[deutsey]

84. K&R

[SHRED]

85. It's our fault...we didn't git an egumacation

[lonestarnot]

90. Too late to recommend, but doing it anyway.

[shanti]

99. k&r! n/t