Posted on 10/08/2008 8:15:25 AM PDT by TSchmereL
After allegations surfaced in early summer over the ‘New Party’s’ endorsement of Obama, the Obama campaign along with the remnants of the New Party and Democratic Socialists of America claimed that Obama was never a member of either organization. The DSA and ‘New Party’ then systematically attempted to cover up any ties between Obama and the Socialist Organizations. However, it now appears that Barack Obama was indeed a certified and acknowledged member of the DSA’s New Party.
On Tuesday...
(Excerpt) Read more at politicallydrunk.blogspot.com ...
Ah, $58 trillion. That could be.
The problem is that if all the underlying securities went belly up the payout in aggregate would be only the amount of the underlying securities. Because there are layers and layers and circular dealings a single default would make counter-party A pay B pay C pay D pay A pay B pay C. The problem is each payment would be the amount of the defaulted security. So let’s say you are C. You demand D pay you and you pay B. But what if D is in trouble. Then you have to pay B but there is no guarantee that D can you so you cannot pay B, etc.
The Treasury is setting up a market that just clears these things. Everybody sells to the Treasury in the case of the default the Treasury pays once.
I am not concerned about naked short selling as long as the short seller puts up collateral. Naked short selling is a requirement in orderly OTC markets.
Yes, I wouldn’t doubt riots, because of ignorance. Do the ignorant that vote for Obama understand what the electoral college is?
Hi sweetie.
I think it was very tough for McCain to put down Obama in any way....because it’s not McCAins character....he sounded nervous at times. But McCain showed his vast knowledge, leadership and you could tell he was very sincere. Obama was the complete opposite!!
I don’t know why the McCain team should bother showing up for the next debate unless they get to choose the moderator. Otherwise, more of the same. Speeches, but no substance.
And 0bama donated to his campaign and stumped for him right??
Fawn, did you just buy stock in a salmon farm????(LOL)
ROFL - I love it every time he calls Obama a little squirrel. But there is a logic to it. Squirrels love ACORNs.
Odingbat said he is a Muslim and so is Barry.
Hi yourself :)
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/07/acorn-vegas-office-raided-voter-fraud-investigation/
Nevada state authorities seized records and computers Tuesday from the Las Vegas office of an organization that tries to get low-income people registered to vote, after fielding complaints of voter fraud.
Guess. No, really - guess.
...the raid was prompted by ongoing complaints about “erroneous” registration information being submitted by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, also called ACORN. ...through a voter sign-up drive known as Project Vote.
(did she say project vote?)
You guessed didn’t ya?
“Some of them used nonexistent names, some of them used false addresses and some of them were duplicates of previously filed applications,”
response?
“Today’s raid by the secretary of state’s office is a stunt that serves no useful purpose other than discredit our work registering Nevadans and distracting us from the important work ahead of getting every eligible voter to the polls.”
In WA, in 2006, “ACORN submitted just over 1,800 new voter registration forms, and all but six of the 1,800 names were fake.”
More recently, 27,000 registrations handled by the group from January to July 2008 “went into limbo because they were incomplete, inaccurate, or fraudulent,” said James Terry, chief public advocate at the Consumers Rights League.
I have a great idea for a sacrifice. Close down NBC/CBS/ABC and give the money to the poor.
Someone said that Obama had an earpiece in his ear.
Debate thread was wild huh?
Poll results: The American people and Barack Obama agree on nothing
Wednesday, October 08, 2008 11:04:46 AM By Christopher Cook
http://barackobamatest.com/
Americans and Obama disagree not just some of the time, not just half of the time, butapparentlyall of the time.
Earlier today, I was exhorted to take the Barack Obama Test. I was told that this test has enjoyed tremendous traffic, that it has gotten great response (as well as some hate response), and that it has changed many minds.
Excited to know these details, I went to take the test myself: http://barackobamatest.com/
I expected to find a series of question that one answers, followed by an effective statement regarding the degree to which Barack Obama dis/agrees with one’s beliefs and positions.
The test and its results were all that, and not surprisingly, Obama and I are in accord exactly 0% of the time. That’s right, the potential next president of the United States and I disagree on 100% of the issues listed in this test, from taxes to energy, foreign policy to justice, social issues to the 2nd Amendment.
This is an effective tool on its own; when an independent voter finds out that s/he and Obama disagree 60, 70, 80, even 90% of the time, it’s going to give that voter pause.
But that is not the true brilliance of this test!
Below the place where it tells us the degree to which we do or do not agree with Obama is something I did not expect, something far more striking.
It lists all of the questions, this time showing Barack Obama’s position in comparison to the preferences of the American people as a whole. Various different polls are used to show where the American people stand on each of these issues, and that is shown in comparison to where Barack Obama stands. And get this . . .
Out of the 48 questions, a majority or plurality of Americans disagree with Barack Obama on all 48!
In one spoton Obama’s health care planif you separate out just the 30% of Americans who pay no taxes at all, just that cohort agrees with Obama . . . and even then, only by 1%, well inside the margin of error.
The profundity of this situation can hardly be overstated.
Americans are in such a foul moodexactly where the left’s eight-year-long permatantrum™ was designed to put themthat they are willing to elect a leader with whom they DISAGREE 100% of the time. They are convinced that “change” is what is needed, and since Barack Obama represents some form of change, many of them need look no further.
Maybe we need some change here and there. But picking someone with whom we, as a people in aggregate, disagree 100% of the time?
That, it seems to me, occupies the misty twilight regions somewhere between ignorance and madness.
American Dominance on the Decline?
http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2008/10/american_dominance_on_the_decline.html
Nice smackdown via Planck’s
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.