wpe50.jpg (1913 bytes)     TigerSoft News Service               9/28/2008                 www.tigersoft.com      

           Despite Public Opposition Outnumbering Supporters
          20 to 1,
Obama Fully Supports $700 Billion Bailout for
             Bankers for Their Worthless "Toxic" Mortgages

                                          Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum:
         Predatory Plutocracy Is Safe No Matter Who Wins.

                   Bank Stocks Are Up Enormously In The Last Month. 
        What Financial Crisis?  Clearly Paulson Is Fear-Mongering

Amazingly, there Is No Requirement in New Bill
         That Banks Must Use This Money To Increase Lending.

          Why Should Progressives Vote for Obama?

by William Schmidt, Ph.D.  
wpe4F.jpg (33251 bytes)  

Tiger Software 
   Helping Investors since 1981
       Make Your Retirement Grow
Peerless Stock Market Timing: 1928-1966         
Track Record of Major Peerless Signals
       Earlier Peerless-DJIA charts       
7 Paths To Making 25+%/Yr. Using TigerSoft 

       Index Options            
FOREX trading        
Investing Longer-Term         
Mutual Funds
       Speculative Stocks     
Swing Trading       
Day Trading        
Stock Options          
Commodity Trading

      Research on Individual Stocks upon Request:   Composite Seasonality Graph
of Any Stock for $125.
Example of historical research NEM - Newmont Mining.   Order Here.



                           Despite Public Opposition Outnumbering Supporters
          20 to 1,
Obama Fully Supports The $700 Billion Bailout for
             Bankers for Their Worthless "Toxic" Mortgages

          Why Should Progressives Vote for Obama?

by William Schmidt, Ph.D.  

                         wpe12C.jpg (46958 bytes)
                           (Source: http://citizenchris.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/14/pic. )

                                             Obama Apparently Has No Guiding Principles

Even before the financial crisis stole the headlines last week, Obama was showing
                   a startling duplicitousness and willingness to move to the right, at the slightest challenge.  
                   On June 19, he reversed himself and chose to depend upon private contributions rather
                   than public financing.  Now he is saying that the financial circumstances will prevent his
                   raising taxes on the most wealthy.   He has back-pedaled about the speed with which
                   he would bring troops home from Iraq.  He now does not support restoring normal diplomatic
                   relations with Cuba or the de-criminalization of ownership of less than an ounce of marijuana. 
                   The death penalty, he now says, should sometimes be applied to non-capital crimes.  He
                   supports gun ownership in cities.   Bush's use of domestic wire-tapping is now fine with him. 
                   He has moved away from condemning NAFTA and the loss of American manufacturing
                   jobs overseas.    In August he shifted to supporting off shore drilling.   What does he
                   still stand for?  He's backed away from everything he once stood for.   How is he
                   really different than McCain or Bush?  He's for more regulations, he says.  But where?
                   How?   There are no details.  When John McCain correctly said SEC Chairman Cox
                   should be fired for allowing short sales on down-ticks and without first borrowing
                   the stock, Obama accused McCain of creating more panic in the stock market, instead
                   of recognizing that McCain was exactly right.  Cox should be fired.  His policies have
                   made a bad situation much worse. 
                   http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.com/2008/08/off-shore-drilling-obamas-reversal-and.html   ) 

                                          Behind Closed Doors, Obama, Pelosi and, Paulson
                                         Give Bankers Nearly A Trillion Dollars

Obama has now decided to back the bailout of the very bankers that have created the
                   financial debacle of 2007-2008.  Obama also opposed using the occasion of the bailout to get
                   Bush to accept a massive public works program or accept a change in the bankruptcy
                   law to allow mortgage terms to be renegotiated on primary homes, as are so generously
                   allowed rich people on their second or third homes.  There is no practical difference between
                   the Democrats, Obama and Pelosi and the Republicans, George Bush or Henry Paulson. 
                   Obama has agreed with the White House, against the shouted protests of millions of
                   Americans, that all Americans must now give $700,000,000,000 to these bankers,
                   never mind that most Americans do not work for banks, own stocks in any banks or
                   bear any of the responsibility for bad mortgages, the housing boom or the housing bust. 

                         Never mind, that this bailout amounts to $2333 for every man, woman and child in
                  the country!  Never mind, that this bailout means there will be no money for national
                  health insurance for all Americans.  Never mind, that there will be no money left to
                  repair America's crumbling schools, bridges, water systems and streets.  Never mind,
                  that there is absolutely no guarantee that the $700 billion will ever trickle down to Main Street.
                  Never mind, that there is no assurance whatsoever that such a fix was truly needed or
                  that it will magically make any difference, except that it will allow corrupt, over-paid
                  bankers to go unpunished and continue their rich lifestyle at the expense of millions
                  who have no political clout and must work very hard for very modest wages? 

                         If there was ever any doubt about how Wall Street controls both politcal parties,
                  it is now removed.  In particular, despite his fancy words and perfect syntax, it is now
                  crystal clear that Obama stands for nothing solid.   Everything is for sale to the highest
                  bidder.    He is as quickly disloyal to his constituents who want to curb the role of special
                  interests, as Nancy Pelosi has been since 2007, as she has backed each and every
                  Iraq War appropriations bill, despite the clear will of her voters that wanted the
                  Iraq war ended and George Bush to be impeached.  Obama is, for all practical purposes,
                  every bit as much a puppet for Wall Street plutocrats as John McCain or George Bush, 
                  But he is worse.  They straightforwardly stand for "trickle down" and the rule of the
                  rich and powerful.  Obama shamelessly cultivated the support of the powerless.  He has
                  deliberately mislead them.  At every opportunity, he has fooled them into hoping he
                  represented them and that he stood for change.  He does not.  When faced with
                  any challenge from entrenched s[ecial interests,  he has repeatedly caved in and
                  yielded to the powers that be and their perverted priorities.  He is a backbone-less
                  jellyfish.    Why should we trust him or vote for him?

One of Obama’s chief economic advisers is Robert Rubin, former chairman
                   of Goldman Sachs (where Bush's Treasury Secretary Paulson hails from).  Rubin
                   was head of the U.S. Treasury Department under Clinton.  He was the one in Clinton's
                   cabinet entourage which sold that President on the deregulation of banks and the
                   desirability of allowing commercial banks to become investment banks.  This fateful
                   change led directly to the banks packaging mortgages and selling them to investors
                   and then taking that money and making riskier and riskier loans.  In this way, they
                   built a highly leveraged houses of cards and had no incentive to admit the dangers
                   of defaults or ask questions about the safety of making riskier and riskier home loans
                   as housing prices rose higher and higher in true bubble fashion.

Gramm and the Republicans couldn't have done it without the support of leading
                        Democrats. The most egregious of Gramm's legislative favors to the financiers took the
                        form of legislation named in part after him -- the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (pof 1999),
                        which became law only after then-Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin prevailed upon
                        President Clinton to sign the bill.  The bill's immediate major effect was to legitimize the
                        long-sought merger between Citibank and insurance giant Travelers. Rubin's critical
                        support for the bill was rewarded with an appointment, within days of its passage, to
                        a top job at Citibank (later Citigroup) paying more than $15 million a year.  That is
                        the same Rubin with whom Democratic candidate Barack Obama met, along with other
                        influential advisers, on Tuesday to figure out what to do about the sorry state
                        of our economy. But what in the world did he expect to learn from Rubin?

                              "After all, Goldman Sachs, where Rubin spent 25 years of his business career before
                        entering the Clinton administration, has been one of the prime corporate villains in the
                        financial shenanigans that led to the subprime mortgage scandal. As co-chairman of the
                        firm, surely he had knowledge of the financial hanky-panky that would prove so disastrous
                       down the road. Indeed, as Treasury secretary, he favored an extension of the deregulation
                       that enabled this explosion of banking avarice. Not surprisingly, the current Treasury
                       secretary, Henry Paulson, also previously headed Goldman.

                             "When Rubin assumed a top position at Citibank after his stint at the Treasury, he was
                       not above influencing his former employees in the government. In one notorious instance
                       during the fall of 2001, when Enron was going down the tubes Rubin telephoned a Treasury
                       undersecretary and asked him to consider intervening with credit-rating agencies to hold off
                       downgrading Enron's ratings. When the story was leaked, some media accounts noted the
                       possibility of a conflict of interest because Enron owed Citibank $750 million, which it
                       could not pay if bankrupt.

      (Source: http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/93318/obama_and_mccain_suck_up_to_the_bankers/  
      Additonal Source )


                   "This is scare tactics to try to do something that’s in the private but not the public interest. It's terrible."
                   -- Allan Meltzer, Carnegie Mellon School of Business   

                   "It's a straight subsidy to financial institutions. You're essentially giving them money. --
                  Martin Baily, former Clinton Administration Council of Economic Advisers

                   "This administration is asking for a $700 billion blank check to be put in the hands of Henry Paulson,
                   a guy who totally missed this, and has been wrong about almost everything." -- Dean Baker Center for
                   Economic and Policy Research

                   "If Wall Street gets away with this, it will represent an historic swindle of the American public --
                   all sugar for the villains, lasting pain and damage for the victims
." --William Greider, The Nation       

                     Angry?   Go to http://www.nowallstreetbailout.com/ and protest.


                       Bank Stocks Are Up Enormously In The Last Month. 
                What Financial Crisis?  What's The Great Hurry?

                    Amazingly, there Is No Requirement in New Bill
         That Banks Must Use This Money To Increase Lending.

              Paulson Is Fear Mongering...
             Just as Bush Did before Starting The Iraq War.

              That Blunder Will Cost America $3 Trillion/
              This Is Another Terrible Blunder.

Stock Performance for The Last Month
                           ZION Bankcorp  +73%
                           Wintrust Financial + 44%
                           Centura Banks    +43%
                           Associated Banc Corp  +38%
                           Private Bancorp      +36%
                           JP Morgan    +29%
                           Wells Fargo  +29%
                           Capital One +28%
                           MB Financial  +25%
                           1st Source Corp  +25%
                           First Midwest Bankcorp  +24%
                           Bank of America  +23%
                           Great Southern Bancorp  +23%
                           Barclays    +23%

            Tell me again, Mr Paulson, What's the hurry?

   Bank of America is not in financial trouble!

wpe115.jpg (64541 bytes)

    JP Morgan is not in financial trouble!
wpeF7.jpg (75475 bytes)

                  Consumer advocate Ralph Nader. Nader calls
      Democratic claims of White House concessions to the
      Paulson Plan “wish fulfillment” and says the bailout
      might not be needed in the first place. The Paulson
      Plan is a "historic swindle".  
               Read Nader's insights. They are refreshing.   

            "A serious intervention in which Washington takes
      charge would, first, require a new central authority to
      supervise the financial institutions and compel them to
      support the government's actions to stabilize the system.
      Government can apply killer leverage to the financial
      players: accept our objectives and follow our instructions
      or you are left on your own--cut off from government
      lending spigots and ineligible for any direct assistance.
      If they decline to cooperate, the money guys are stuck
      with their own mess. If they resist the government's
      orders to keep lending to the real economy of producers
      and consumers, banks and brokers will be effectively
      isolated, therefore doomed. "


                                        Obama and The New Bailout Law

                        In his campaigning, he set forth
"several principles that he said should be included
                   in the bailout to ensure that troubled financial firms and their executives don't take advantage
                   of taxpayers. Companies that take financial aid from the government must slash their executives'
                   salaries, he said. Taxpayers must be treated like investors who can share in any Wall Street
                   recovery, perhaps with an ownership stake in the companies that are bailed out, and a new fee
                   on financial services should be created to repay the government aid
                   Unfortunately, this was more empty Obama campaign rhetoric.  The final bill
                   will likely offer little protection to tax payers and give mere lip service to public
                   ownership of the banks that get all this money or place loose and hollow limitations
                   on their executive pay. 

                       National protests have erupted over the Bailout Plan.wpeF7.jpg (6701 bytes)
Protesters want the Congress to protect millions of U.S. citizens who are on the verge
                      of losing their homes due to bad lending practices of creditors instead of doling out public money
                      to big investment firms responsible for ruining the economy.  "People are up in arms about this,"
                      Matt Holland of the TrueMajority.org, an advocacy group comprising 700,000 members that
                      played a major role in organising the protests in 170 cities in the US.   "Our members are livid.
                      They're hitting the streets."

                           Of more than 400 NY Times Blog comments, those opposing the bail out ran 20 to 1.

                       Progressives are very upset with Obama.  He are some quotes from the

This is crap! We are expected to carry Wall Street's bad debt at the expense of desperately needed social programs. I thought government was supposed to protect the people not exploit them. If we are going to nationalize Wall Street's debt, then we need to nationalize the profits. People in this country are in desperate need of a responsive government."

"Obama says the bailout will delay health care reform, but just watch. He'll support the bailout like the good little republican-lite that he is. It's pathetic. The people have no representation. Both parties are owned by the plutocracy."

"Why do we let these bastards screw us like this? 45 million Americans do not have health care."

"The Democratic Party always has an excuse" for forgetting what they promised the working class.

"I am not convinced that this bailout is necessary or even a good idea. But, the fact is, it does look like it will be passed in some form. If that happens then neither candidate will be able to make good on all their campaign promises."

"NO BAILOUT! The failure of AIG and Lehman are business failures. Millions of business have failed in our nations history. Mine is failing at this very moment. I'm a licensed real estate inspector in a market (South Texas) that has not been hit hard at all, but it is certainly declining and I've been having to augment my income with savings for the past sixteen months. I'm sixty and there are no job opportunities for me in my only field of expertise (real estate and construction). I could easily loose my home in the coming months. Who is going to bail me out? Nobody!"

"Obama shouldn't go for this kind of bullying from the Republican party! This is a strategy to prove that he doesn't care about Americans and we'll see McCain/Palin launch ads. The Democrats need to hold steady and not give in to the GOP. If they do, so much for the upcoming election...."

"Since the upper income groups are going to be the chief beneficiaries of the bail out, their taxes should be increased by more than Obama had originally intended, so that the money to finance his programs, or at least part of it, will be there."

"Not only are they gonna STOP the winds of change from blowin. They are going to further demolish our US Constitution and strengthen the grip of facisism."

"Obama: the Corporate Candidate. We can't be having health care and education when we've got all of these needy billionaire bankers and oil barons who need bailing out of their gambling debts! And forget about that cushy retirement we had planned - we'll be competing for courtesy clerk jobs down at Wal-Mart until they throw our carcasses in the dumpster.  Total Corporate Control"

"We, the 99% of the People, must once again sacrifice everything for the uninterrupted comfort of the 1% who stole the wealth of the nation under Reagan and the Bush Crime Family. And Obama is here to help us make that "compromise".

"Seize the ill-gotten wealth of the Iraq profiteers, the oil barons, the bankers with their golden parachutes, all of their stolen mansions and swindled secret offshore bank accounts. Seize Cheney and Bush, Halliburton, KBR, the Carlyle Group, Karl Rove, Nancy Reagan, Bill Kristol, Sandra Day O'Connor, all of the rotten stinking capitalist thieves who have been lining their pockets with our labors, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Blackwater, Bechtel, DynCorp, George Tenet, every last Bush, Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, all of the useless crooked Republican thugs. The money didn't disappear, it went into their hands, pockets, and bank accounts."

The quotes above and many mor elike them can be found in

"If you ever doubted the ultimate crookedness of the U.S. political system, doubt no more. It exists to profit the plutocrats who run everything. When they win, they get more billions. When they lose, the middle-class taxpayers are forced to bail them out, either with tax increases or inflation, which is another form of tax increase. Heads the plutocrats win, tails you lose. This isn’t the free market or capitalism, but “crony capitalism.” It’s crooks in power controlling us, profiting from us.
...Both Obama and McCain are part of this corrupt system."
( )

"Bernanke had the unbelievable impudence to recommend that the government buy the bank's devalued assets at their maturity values (par) of 100, when they currently are thought to be in the range of 35 down
to 0.  He had the insulting insolence to attempt to sell this additional and outright wealth transfer from taxpayers to banks by telling the Senate Banking Committee that it was accounting rules that was making them value the assets at a fire-sale price. This is a BIG LIE and/or Bernanke is a total idiot when it comes
to finance. I think it's a BIG LIE. I also think he knows no finance. He does not think that the existing prices are accurate reflections of their true values. But there is no better measure of what they are worth than
what they can fetch in the market, which is near zero for much of the toxic paper. If the FDIC sold the assets at auction, they'd fetch what they are worth. As we learn the details of the Paulson-Bernanke approach, we can see that what they propose is far worse than an FDIC procedure. Congress should scuttle the whole thing, and Bernanke-Paulson should be turned out to pasture where they belong. "
(   )

"Public outrage over bailout     I can understand the outrage. I sympathize with it, because as I have pointed out, it is bailing out some capital-suppliers who should not be bailed out and supporting managers and executives who should not be rewarded for their speculative errors....The outrage should be directed
against the financial structure itself, from the central bank on down. It should be dismantled. We should
usher in a new era of monetary freedom. "  Source.

    wpe115.jpg (38448 bytes)         

      wpe12A.jpg (20456 bytes)
           "I agree the bailouts are mainly targeted at banks, and it pisses me the f@ck off.
       How to stop corruption, moneyed interests and influence peddling’s power over government? If you can find a
       practical solution to that, please nominate yourself for a Nobel Prize in Economics. There are a few things we
       might try *short* of outright revolution, like 100% publicly financed elections. But honestly, sometimes you just
       gotta hit the *reset* button on government to get any real “reforms” through.




Hit Counter