I guess some people like Howard enjoy being screwed.
Since, three or four of the posters decided to throw rocks at my post, without even considering my statement. Here is the main article from the link I posted earlier. Again, its speculation driving most of the price increases, not only oil but other commodities – call it a unified field theory of why prices are increasing.
The Fort Worth Star-Telegraph’s orientation is rather liberal.
ICE, ICE, Baby, conclusion
"Too cold, too cold"
SPECIAL TO THE STAR-TELEGRAM
"What’s been happening since 2004 is very high prices without record-low [oil] stocks. The relationship between U.S. [oil] inventory levels and prices has been shredded and become irrelevant."
— Jan Stuart, Global Oil Economist, UBS Securities
"What you have on the financial side is a bunch of money being thrown at the energy futures market. It’s just pulling in more and more cash. That’s the side of the market where we have runaway demand, not on the physical side."
— Tim Evans, Senior Oil Analyst, IFR Energy Services [From testimony: U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations’ report, "The Role of Market Speculation in Rising Oil and Gas Prices," June 27, 2006]
The Love of Money
Record high prices without record low oil inventories, analysts saying that so much money flows into oil commodities that it gives the impression of shortages, when in fact no shortage exists. That mirrors the situation in the commodities market for food, as Bloomberg pointed out in its April 28 article, "Wall Street Grain Hoarding Brings Farmers, Consumers Near Ruin": "Commodity investors control more U.S. crops than ever before, competing with governments and consumers for dwindling food supplies." That’s right; food, oil and gasoline have become an "asset class." No longer are you fighting a neighbor at the supermarket over the last box of Cheerios®; now you’re fighting the futures traders, who are actually determining what you will pay for that cereal.
We started as a society that worships hard labor and the basic business ethic of building value into the goods you create. How’d we get from there to worshiping Wall Street’s billion-dollar boys — who create nothing, build nothing, own nothing and deliver no goods, and yet can throw so much money into products made by others that they determine what we consumers will pay for those goods?
It wasn’t always this way.
In the past, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission acted as the cop on the beat, ensuring that buyers in the market were not distorting or manipulating prices beyond what supply and demand normally dictate. Certainly, if a hard frost hit Florida and cost growers an orange crop, then bidding up the price of the remaining oranges was both a wise investment and allowed under the trading rules. Right now investors know that if they borrow and invest huge amounts in commodities futures, they can create a shortage on paper – which drives prices up just like an actual shortage of any given product would. What kept traders from cornering the market that way in the past were the government’s anti-manipulation rules.
Lay, DeLay, Gramm, Gramm & Clinton
The late, infamous Enron head, Ken Lay, realized in the eighties that he could make more money bidding up energy in the futures market than by actually creating and selling energy. But, under then-current rules, how much you could make swapping paper was limited. Fortuitously, Lay had excellent Texas political connections; and in November of 1992, the head of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission moved to exempt energy-derivative contracts and related swaps from any government oversight.
A vote was hurriedly put together before the Clinton White House would take over, and so Lay could finally start "dark" – unregulated – futures trading. The head of the CFTC was Wendy Gramm, wife of Texas Senator Phil Gramm; five weeks after she left, she became a board member of Enron in Houston.
Fast-forward to late 2000 and H.R. 5660, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, sponsored by Republican Congressman Thomas Ewing of Illinois. That bill went nowhere, even though Tom Delay’s wife Christine was then working for a Washington lobbying firm, Alexander Strategies – which Enron had paid $200,000 to push through legislation for permanent energy deregulation in these "dark" markets.
Six months later came Senate Bill 3283, also named the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. This time around the sponsor was Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, and now Phil Gramm was listed as one of the bill’s co-sponsors. Like it had in the House, this bill was destined to go nowhere until, late one night, it was attached as a rider to an 11,000-page appropriations bill – which was signed into law by President Clinton.
Now traders had an officially deregulated market for energy futures. Worse, that bill also deregulated many financial instruments – including the collateralized debt obligations that are at the center of today’s mortgage crisis, which may well cost us more than $1 trillion before it’s over.
Everybody Was Warned!
As USA Today wrote of this fiasco in January of 2002, "But, as a power marketer, [Enron] could buy enough energy-futures contracts in a region to create a virtual monopoly." That’s right: As early as the winter of 2002, it was widely known that the 2000 Commodities Futures Modernization Act had created a monster, capable of running up energy prices outside of the normal law of supply and demand. Worse, our government had been warned this was going to happen. Representatives of the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the CFTC had already told Congress not to deregulate energy because "the market was ripe for manipulation." Everybody was warned; that’s why this deregulation bill was stealthily inserted into that appropriations bill without a floor debate.
Phil Gramm’s office denied that he had anything to do with writing the section of that bill that actually deregulated energy. And yet Prof. Michael Greenberger, formerly a CFTC board member himself, said that Gramm’s wife Wendy, along with a few lobbyists and Wall Street attorneys, had rewritten it. When Robert Manor of the Chicago Times wrote about this situation on January 18, 2002, neither Gramm could be reached for comment.
Kill It Before It Multiplies
When Enron failed and took its private, unregulated energy exchange to the grave, another rose to take its place. The Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) was the brainchild of Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, British Petroleum, Deutsche Bank, Dean Witter, Royal Dutch Shell, SG Investment Bank and Totalfina. In 2001 ICE purchased the International Petroleum Exchange in London; renamed ICE Futures, it now operates as an "exempt commercial market" under section 2(H)(3) of the Commodity Exchange Act. As the Senate hearings pointed out in the summer of 2006, "Both markets operate outside of any CFTC oversight."
If you reread the quotes at the start of this story again, you find that many officials in the government warned against what would happen in a deregulated energy market, because it was so easy to manipulate. We already know this to be true thanks to Enron’s California misdeeds. And, as we pointed out last week, British Petroleum was busted for manipulating the propane market and fined over $300 million; and Amaranth Partners was caught manipulating the natural gas market, unconscionably causing the futures price for natural gas to raise every Texan’s electric bills. (It took two years for Amaranth to be exposed.) And yes, the manipulation happened in the new "dark" and unregulated exchanges, making it almost impossible to uncover. So it’s not a question of "if" some "theoretically possible" manipulation and distortion of the market will result from this bill, championed by Phil Gramm, his wife Wendy and Christine Delay’s employer, Alexander Strategies. The reason it is not theoretical is because we keep catching well-known companies doing it on a regular basis.
No Conscience in Congress?
All you hear daily is that the world has a severe shortage of oil, or you can buy only 200 pounds of rice at one time, or we will have a gasoline crisis this summer, etc. But it takes only a minute to find hundreds of quotes from highly respected oil and economic analysts, (not to mention CEOs of the major oil companies), that completely dismiss the claim of oil, gas or food shortages that have been headlining the news.
Even more troubling is that within months of the CFMA’s going into effect, we knew it had enabled easy manipulation of any energy market, but nothing was done to fix it. Nor was anything done when the Senate held its hearings on this matter in 2006, or in the House hearings last December.
Today we call this situation the "Enron Loophole," but that’s untrue. It’s not a loophole: it was a new law passed in 2000 – and far more individuals than Ken Lay have used that law to line their pockets with hundreds of billions of American consumers’ hard-earned dollars. That’s not my opinion, that’s direct testimony by numerous experts before both the House and Senate.
Professor Greenberger warned about our "New American Economy" far better than I could:
"Should we have an economy that’s based on whether people make good or bad bets? Or should we have an economy where people build companies, create manufacturing, do inventions, advance the American society and make it more productive? We are rewarding people for sitting at their computers and punching in bets. That’s not the way our economy is going to be built, and India and China, with their focus on science and industry and building real businesses, are going to eat our lunch, unless the American public wakes up and puts an end to an economy that praises and makes heroes out of speculators."
Greenberger’s statement explains why Detroit and other American manufacturers suffer while Wall Street speculators make a fortune — and your rapidly shrinking checkbook pays for it, every time you buy food, fuel or feed.
All because there is no shortage of these goods, you’re just being told there is because it’s more profitable – for a few – that way.
© 2008 Ed Wallace
Ed Wallace is a recipient of the Gerald R. Loeb Award for business journalism, given by the Anderson School of Business at UCLA, and is a member of the American Historical Society. He reviews new cars every Friday morning at 7:15 on Fox Four’s Good Day, contributes articles to BusinessWeek Online and hosts the talk show, Wheels, 8:00 to 1:00 Saturdays on 570 KLIF. E-mail: wheels570@sbcglobal.net
http://www.star-telegram.com/ed_wallace/story/659081.html
The Fort Worth Star-Telegraph’s orientation is rather liberal.
ICE, ICE, Baby, conclusion
"Too cold, too cold"
SPECIAL TO THE STAR-TELEGRAM
"What’s been happening since 2004 is very high prices without record-low [oil] stocks. The relationship between U.S. [oil] inventory levels and prices has been shredded and become irrelevant."
— Jan Stuart, Global Oil Economist, UBS Securities
"What you have on the financial side is a bunch of money being thrown at the energy futures market. It’s just pulling in more and more cash. That’s the side of the market where we have runaway demand, not on the physical side."
— Tim Evans, Senior Oil Analyst, IFR Energy Services [From testimony: U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations’ report, "The Role of Market Speculation in Rising Oil and Gas Prices," June 27, 2006]
The Love of Money
Record high prices without record low oil inventories, analysts saying that so much money flows into oil commodities that it gives the impression of shortages, when in fact no shortage exists. That mirrors the situation in the commodities market for food, as Bloomberg pointed out in its April 28 article, "Wall Street Grain Hoarding Brings Farmers, Consumers Near Ruin": "Commodity investors control more U.S. crops than ever before, competing with governments and consumers for dwindling food supplies." That’s right; food, oil and gasoline have become an "asset class." No longer are you fighting a neighbor at the supermarket over the last box of Cheerios®; now you’re fighting the futures traders, who are actually determining what you will pay for that cereal.
We started as a society that worships hard labor and the basic business ethic of building value into the goods you create. How’d we get from there to worshiping Wall Street’s billion-dollar boys — who create nothing, build nothing, own nothing and deliver no goods, and yet can throw so much money into products made by others that they determine what we consumers will pay for those goods?
It wasn’t always this way.
In the past, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission acted as the cop on the beat, ensuring that buyers in the market were not distorting or manipulating prices beyond what supply and demand normally dictate. Certainly, if a hard frost hit Florida and cost growers an orange crop, then bidding up the price of the remaining oranges was both a wise investment and allowed under the trading rules. Right now investors know that if they borrow and invest huge amounts in commodities futures, they can create a shortage on paper – which drives prices up just like an actual shortage of any given product would. What kept traders from cornering the market that way in the past were the government’s anti-manipulation rules.
Lay, DeLay, Gramm, Gramm & Clinton
The late, infamous Enron head, Ken Lay, realized in the eighties that he could make more money bidding up energy in the futures market than by actually creating and selling energy. But, under then-current rules, how much you could make swapping paper was limited. Fortuitously, Lay had excellent Texas political connections; and in November of 1992, the head of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission moved to exempt energy-derivative contracts and related swaps from any government oversight.
A vote was hurriedly put together before the Clinton White House would take over, and so Lay could finally start "dark" – unregulated – futures trading. The head of the CFTC was Wendy Gramm, wife of Texas Senator Phil Gramm; five weeks after she left, she became a board member of Enron in Houston.
Fast-forward to late 2000 and H.R. 5660, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, sponsored by Republican Congressman Thomas Ewing of Illinois. That bill went nowhere, even though Tom Delay’s wife Christine was then working for a Washington lobbying firm, Alexander Strategies – which Enron had paid $200,000 to push through legislation for permanent energy deregulation in these "dark" markets.
Six months later came Senate Bill 3283, also named the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. This time around the sponsor was Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, and now Phil Gramm was listed as one of the bill’s co-sponsors. Like it had in the House, this bill was destined to go nowhere until, late one night, it was attached as a rider to an 11,000-page appropriations bill – which was signed into law by President Clinton.
Now traders had an officially deregulated market for energy futures. Worse, that bill also deregulated many financial instruments – including the collateralized debt obligations that are at the center of today’s mortgage crisis, which may well cost us more than $1 trillion before it’s over.
Everybody Was Warned!
As USA Today wrote of this fiasco in January of 2002, "But, as a power marketer, [Enron] could buy enough energy-futures contracts in a region to create a virtual monopoly." That’s right: As early as the winter of 2002, it was widely known that the 2000 Commodities Futures Modernization Act had created a monster, capable of running up energy prices outside of the normal law of supply and demand. Worse, our government had been warned this was going to happen. Representatives of the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the CFTC had already told Congress not to deregulate energy because "the market was ripe for manipulation." Everybody was warned; that’s why this deregulation bill was stealthily inserted into that appropriations bill without a floor debate.
Phil Gramm’s office denied that he had anything to do with writing the section of that bill that actually deregulated energy. And yet Prof. Michael Greenberger, formerly a CFTC board member himself, said that Gramm’s wife Wendy, along with a few lobbyists and Wall Street attorneys, had rewritten it. When Robert Manor of the Chicago Times wrote about this situation on January 18, 2002, neither Gramm could be reached for comment.
Kill It Before It Multiplies
When Enron failed and took its private, unregulated energy exchange to the grave, another rose to take its place. The Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) was the brainchild of Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, British Petroleum, Deutsche Bank, Dean Witter, Royal Dutch Shell, SG Investment Bank and Totalfina. In 2001 ICE purchased the International Petroleum Exchange in London; renamed ICE Futures, it now operates as an "exempt commercial market" under section 2(H)(3) of the Commodity Exchange Act. As the Senate hearings pointed out in the summer of 2006, "Both markets operate outside of any CFTC oversight."
If you reread the quotes at the start of this story again, you find that many officials in the government warned against what would happen in a deregulated energy market, because it was so easy to manipulate. We already know this to be true thanks to Enron’s California misdeeds. And, as we pointed out last week, British Petroleum was busted for manipulating the propane market and fined over $300 million; and Amaranth Partners was caught manipulating the natural gas market, unconscionably causing the futures price for natural gas to raise every Texan’s electric bills. (It took two years for Amaranth to be exposed.) And yes, the manipulation happened in the new "dark" and unregulated exchanges, making it almost impossible to uncover. So it’s not a question of "if" some "theoretically possible" manipulation and distortion of the market will result from this bill, championed by Phil Gramm, his wife Wendy and Christine Delay’s employer, Alexander Strategies. The reason it is not theoretical is because we keep catching well-known companies doing it on a regular basis.
No Conscience in Congress?
All you hear daily is that the world has a severe shortage of oil, or you can buy only 200 pounds of rice at one time, or we will have a gasoline crisis this summer, etc. But it takes only a minute to find hundreds of quotes from highly respected oil and economic analysts, (not to mention CEOs of the major oil companies), that completely dismiss the claim of oil, gas or food shortages that have been headlining the news.
Even more troubling is that within months of the CFMA’s going into effect, we knew it had enabled easy manipulation of any energy market, but nothing was done to fix it. Nor was anything done when the Senate held its hearings on this matter in 2006, or in the House hearings last December.
Today we call this situation the "Enron Loophole," but that’s untrue. It’s not a loophole: it was a new law passed in 2000 – and far more individuals than Ken Lay have used that law to line their pockets with hundreds of billions of American consumers’ hard-earned dollars. That’s not my opinion, that’s direct testimony by numerous experts before both the House and Senate.
Professor Greenberger warned about our "New American Economy" far better than I could:
"Should we have an economy that’s based on whether people make good or bad bets? Or should we have an economy where people build companies, create manufacturing, do inventions, advance the American society and make it more productive? We are rewarding people for sitting at their computers and punching in bets. That’s not the way our economy is going to be built, and India and China, with their focus on science and industry and building real businesses, are going to eat our lunch, unless the American public wakes up and puts an end to an economy that praises and makes heroes out of speculators."
Greenberger’s statement explains why Detroit and other American manufacturers suffer while Wall Street speculators make a fortune — and your rapidly shrinking checkbook pays for it, every time you buy food, fuel or feed.
All because there is no shortage of these goods, you’re just being told there is because it’s more profitable – for a few – that way.
© 2008 Ed Wallace
Ed Wallace is a recipient of the Gerald R. Loeb Award for business journalism, given by the Anderson School of Business at UCLA, and is a member of the American Historical Society. He reviews new cars every Friday morning at 7:15 on Fox Four’s Good Day, contributes articles to BusinessWeek Online and hosts the talk show, Wheels, 8:00 to 1:00 Saturdays on 570 KLIF. E-mail: wheels570@sbcglobal.net
http://www.star-telegram.com/ed_wallace/story/659081.html
So big guy,
Whats your man in the whitehouse going to do to stop this influx of rich internationalists who are destroying our economy on the hopes of huge windfall profits at reduced tax rates as per the man in the whitehouse?
Nothing, thats what he will do. Because it's his buddies are the one's manipulating the markets, ever hear of Goldman- sachs? You need to look uup their financial profile and see since 2006 they have been trying to corner the market on oil futures. Is it any coincidence, it is their analysts who are putting out these forcasts that seem to drive the prices up just when the market seems to stall its upward movement?
What we are seeing is a gross sickness that has invaded wall street. The lust for great riches at any cost. No society can survive when it is completely given over to unbridled greed. The lust to be, not the next millionaire, but the next billionaire. It is high time that this government reign in this culture of "Vulture Greed" before this country is reduced to the have and the have nots.
Whats your man in the whitehouse going to do to stop this influx of rich internationalists who are destroying our economy on the hopes of huge windfall profits at reduced tax rates as per the man in the whitehouse?
Nothing, thats what he will do. Because it's his buddies are the one's manipulating the markets, ever hear of Goldman- sachs? You need to look uup their financial profile and see since 2006 they have been trying to corner the market on oil futures. Is it any coincidence, it is their analysts who are putting out these forcasts that seem to drive the prices up just when the market seems to stall its upward movement?
What we are seeing is a gross sickness that has invaded wall street. The lust for great riches at any cost. No society can survive when it is completely given over to unbridled greed. The lust to be, not the next millionaire, but the next billionaire. It is high time that this government reign in this culture of "Vulture Greed" before this country is reduced to the have and the have nots.
quote:Originally posted by crtscofield:
Total Truth,
What do you think of " Trickle Down Economics" and "Voodoo Economics" now?
When it comes to the yearly multi-billion dollar profit corporations, I have learned to read through their own manipulation and propaganda............. as you say,,, Voodoo economics!...... yes.......
quote:Originally posted by crtscofield:
So big guy,
Whats your man in the whitehouse going to do to stop this influx of rich internationalists who are destroying our economy on the hopes of huge windfall profits at reduced tax rates as per the man in the whitehouse?
Nothing, thats what he will do. Because it's his buddies are the one's manipulating the markets, ever hear of Goldman- sachs? You need to look uup their financial profile and see since 2006 they have been trying to corner the market on oil futures. Is it any coincidence, it is their analysts who are putting out these forcasts that seem to drive the prices up just when the market seems to stall its upward movement?
What we are seeing is a gross sickness that has invaded wall street. The lust for great riches at any cost. No society can survive when it is completely given over to unbridled greed. The lust to be, not the next millionaire, but the next billionaire. It is high time that this government reign in this culture of "Vulture Greed" before this country is reduced to the have and the have nots.
You wouldn't be refering to the same "gross sickness" that drove the "Tech bubble" and made your boy Bubba look like some kinda genius while he was in office would you? We all know what happened when that bubble burst.
were the people who drove the tech bubble, the personal friends and business partners and former businesses of the prez and especially the vice prez?
This started under Bubba and is still bubbling up. Transparency is the best prevention without new government regulations. Daylight is still the best disinfectant.
quote:Originally posted by crtscofield:
were the people who drove the tech bubble, the personal friends and business partners and former businesses of the prez and especially the vice prez?
Does it matter? I would say no. They were still making outrageous amounts of money that eventually led to a collapse in the market.
For the fifth or sixth time, I am a conservative and randian, not an advocate of the present President or any other President. I defend when I think he should be defended, protest when I think that is due, and sometimes just be quiet.
quote:Originally posted by Southern Patriot:quote:Originally posted by crtscofield:
were the people who drove the tech bubble, the personal friends and business partners and former businesses of the prez and especially the vice prez?
Does it matter? I would say no. They were still making outrageous amounts of money that eventually led to a collapse in the market.
LOL,
It seems to me that Bubba used the government to make sure that the tech market was not dominated by one man. A la Netscape vs. Internet Explorer.
quote:Originally posted by Howard Roark:
For the fifth or sixth time, I am a conservative and randian, not an advocate of the present President or any other President. I defend when I think he should be defended, protest when I think that is due, and sometimes just be quiet.
Howard,
in this you and i are in complete agreement. I no longer identify myself with any party, i now look at the issues and vote on those alone.
There is no doubt that our economy is now being manipulated by a few, the time has come for action. When Bush ran for his first term i remember him saying that he was not a talker, but a doer. I am still looking for Bush the doer.
"LOL, It seems to me that Bubba used the government to make sure that the tech market was not dominated by one man. A la Netscape vs. Internet Explorer."
He really succeeded in that didn't he!
He really succeeded in that didn't he!
Touche'
But at least Gates was not allowed to manipulate the market.
But at least Gates was not allowed to manipulate the market.
Gates now specializes in giving money away, not making more. Nothing wrong with that, its his and he can spend it any way he wants.
quote:Originally posted by Extra260:
Howard Roark,
If the oil company executives were driving down the road throwing their profits out the back of a semi, they would die of old age before they could empty the truck. But since you think they aren't making any money, would they please give me some of it?
It is amazing that if you calculate the losses and write downs in the banking markets over the last year and a half, ( that we were all taxed to pay for in the form of inflation) it would equal just about the same exorbitant profits of the major oil companies.
If you would like some info on this go to www.youtube.com and do a search for Lindsey Williams. You should be able to figure out the rest.
I am a registered Republican and voted for Bush twice. I have NEVER voted Democrat..... Until this year. This man has almost destroyed the middle class and this country!
Extra,
OK, you can cut and paste with the best of them. You've proved you have skills somewhere between a mockingbird and a first grader! Now what?
Are you sure you aren't PBA?
OK, you can cut and paste with the best of them. You've proved you have skills somewhere between a mockingbird and a first grader! Now what?
Are you sure you aren't PBA?
Howard,
I tried to delete that post but it didn't work. When i set up my account it was posting my email address with it, when i went in to try to change that it duplicated my posts. Sorry, but the tools in this forum are liken to the stone age.
BTW, no i'm not pba or whomever you think.
I tried to delete that post but it didn't work. When i set up my account it was posting my email address with it, when i went in to try to change that it duplicated my posts. Sorry, but the tools in this forum are liken to the stone age.
BTW, no i'm not pba or whomever you think.
Extra,
Thanks for the explanation. If you click on your post, you may edit it or delete it by clicking the delete button on the lower right side. to the left of the POST NOW button.
Thanks for the explanation. If you click on your post, you may edit it or delete it by clicking the delete button on the lower right side. to the left of the POST NOW button.
Here's yet another link to read.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/gasoline-shifts-spotlight-cftc/
And before the inevitable "There aught to be a law" rant comes out of everyones mouth there is this quote from one of the traders:
“It's a witch hunt basically -- blame the speculators and take the heat off Congress. It's nonsense,” said Kevin Kerr, head of Kerr International Trading. “The fact of the matter is that these markets are already over regulated and imposing more restrictions, higher taxes, and oversight on hedge funds and speculators will drive them offshore to many other locales happy to take their money.”
Unless someone can find a way to implant a soul in hedge fund and commodity traders, I don't think Congress can help as long as money can be wired to another country and invested there. But tru-blue Democrats should not wail and cry in vain, big boys like Soros and Buffet support Democratic candidates. Their 527's will be flush with cash.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/gasoline-shifts-spotlight-cftc/
And before the inevitable "There aught to be a law" rant comes out of everyones mouth there is this quote from one of the traders:
“It's a witch hunt basically -- blame the speculators and take the heat off Congress. It's nonsense,” said Kevin Kerr, head of Kerr International Trading. “The fact of the matter is that these markets are already over regulated and imposing more restrictions, higher taxes, and oversight on hedge funds and speculators will drive them offshore to many other locales happy to take their money.”
Unless someone can find a way to implant a soul in hedge fund and commodity traders, I don't think Congress can help as long as money can be wired to another country and invested there. But tru-blue Democrats should not wail and cry in vain, big boys like Soros and Buffet support Democratic candidates. Their 527's will be flush with cash.
Bush has the right connections and influence to affect the gas prices. He is friends with the Saudis. He is also an oil man. He has no problem with going behind the backs of the American people and doing whatever he wants. The stimulus check that you got was only hush money for us. After he leaves office, gas prices should drop and if not I am wrong.
quote:Originally posted by cyfilmstudent:
Bush has the right connections and influence to affect the gas prices. He is friends with the Saudis. He is also an oil man. He has no problem with going behind the backs of the American people and doing whatever he wants. The stimulus check that you got was only hush money for us. After he leaves office, gas prices should drop and if not I am wrong.
Yes yes yes and yes!....... his 'last' ultimate screwing of Americans....... and his own greed at work....... I am ashamed I voted for him.....
Since his investments are in a blind trust and did not include significant oil stocks when he placed them in thetrust, how is he to profit?
Well the manipulation continues unabated. This morning some low life from Morgan Stanly issues a report predicting 150 a barrel oil and it shoots up to record highs. Every time the market stalls out and starts to retreat, along comes another report from the VERY PEOPLE MANIPULATING THE MARKET designed to start the market moving up again. 3 weeks ago it was Goldman-Sachs, now it's Morgan Stanley.
Guys this was predicted a year ago. Go to www.youtube.com and type in lindsey williams into the search bar. $150 a barrel oil is what they want.
Guys this was predicted a year ago. Go to www.youtube.com and type in lindsey williams into the search bar. $150 a barrel oil is what they want.
quote:Originally posted by Extra260:
were the people who drove the tech bubble, the personal friends and business partners and former businesses of the prez and especially the vice prez?
No, that was me, and a million other investors. I did quite well during that period.
quote:Originally posted by Howard Roark:
Since his investments are in a blind trust and did not include significant oil stocks when he placed them in thetrust, how is he to profit?
We have already had this debate here...... now only time will prove to you where Bushs money is....... and I hope you are man enough to come on here and say you were wrong.......
Let's see:
Who was right?
On yellow cake uranium, Joseph Wilson or GWB?
Who was right on WMD's, Joseph Wilson or GWB?
Who was right on Louis Libby leaking Wilson's wife's name to the media, GWB and Rush Limbaugh or the liberal Media?
I don't think time has shown that Bush has told the truth about anything.
Who was right?
On yellow cake uranium, Joseph Wilson or GWB?
Who was right on WMD's, Joseph Wilson or GWB?
Who was right on Louis Libby leaking Wilson's wife's name to the media, GWB and Rush Limbaugh or the liberal Media?
I don't think time has shown that Bush has told the truth about anything.
Extra, you mean this Joe Wilson?
http://www.slate.com/id/2140058/
And I think it was a fellow named Armitage who gave up the name of the analyst, Valerie Plame.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/30/leak.armitage/index.html
http://www.slate.com/id/2140058/
And I think it was a fellow named Armitage who gave up the name of the analyst, Valerie Plame.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/30/leak.armitage/index.html
Flatus,
Maybe you should look at evidence from the prosection and not biased reporting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Plame6.png
If you understand flow shartds at all, it shows that Libby knew before all of them you mentioned.
So, where are the yellow cake uranium nuclear missiles?
Maybe you should look at evidence from the prosection and not biased reporting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Plame6.png
If you understand flow shartds at all, it shows that Libby knew before all of them you mentioned.
So, where are the yellow cake uranium nuclear missiles?
Obviously I can read a flow chart better than you. It shows that the reporter Bob Novak got his information from Armitage and then Novak contacted Bill Harlow of the CIA and Karl Rove.
LOL,
Then why wasn't Armitage tried for outing a CIA agent? And what does the dotted line represent?
Then why wasn't Armitage tried for outing a CIA agent? And what does the dotted line represent?
The CIA agent must first be a covert (secret) agent and not simply an analyst. Valerie Plame stopped being a covert agent when it was discovered that Aldrich Ames was a Soviet informant and had probably outed her. Also a person must know that the agent is covert. Bob Novak contacted Bill Harlow and even asked if Plame was covert. Harlow asked Novak not to print her name, but that it was not illegal to do so.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/spies/ames/1.html
As far as the dotted line, since there is no legend or supporting literature sources with the Wikipedia chart its up to your prejudices. It could mean a definite link or a disputed link with no supporting facts.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/spies/ames/1.html
As far as the dotted line, since there is no legend or supporting literature sources with the Wikipedia chart its up to your prejudices. It could mean a definite link or a disputed link with no supporting facts.
Plame (Wilson) was in fact a covert agent. Parroting Republican lies does not make something so.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060918/corn
Armitage, Libby, and Novak should have been tried and if found guilty, hanged by the neck until dead.
All three by outing her have shown they are more interested in protecting their political party than they are interested in the security of our country. They are not patriots , and in reality are really are traders to our country in time of war.
If we had had a real president, he would have insisted on capital punishment instead of commuting Libby's sentence and attempting to cover the whole thing up.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060918/corn
Armitage, Libby, and Novak should have been tried and if found guilty, hanged by the neck until dead.
All three by outing her have shown they are more interested in protecting their political party than they are interested in the security of our country. They are not patriots , and in reality are really are traders to our country in time of war.
If we had had a real president, he would have insisted on capital punishment instead of commuting Libby's sentence and attempting to cover the whole thing up.
Novak was the first reporter to make Plame's name public, after first learning it from Armitage. The special prosecutor investigated early on and determined a crime was not committed.
That is the problem with unaccountable prosecutors. If they determine no major crime, they morph into Inspector Jubert and indict someone for anything to justify their existence.
That is the problem with unaccountable prosecutors. If they determine no major crime, they morph into Inspector Jubert and indict someone for anything to justify their existence.
I believe Michael Isikoff might be a little biased as he is blogger on the left-wing Huffington Post. Heres another view.
http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200507180801.asp
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1444282/posts?page=71
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03172007/news/columnists/pa...s_john_podhoretz.htm
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/4/120953.shtml
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/was_valerie_covert.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200507180801.asp
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1444282/posts?page=71
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03172007/news/columnists/pa...s_john_podhoretz.htm
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/4/120953.shtml
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/was_valerie_covert.html
quote:Originally posted by Howard Roark:
Novak was the first reporter to make Plame's name public, after first learning it from Armitage. The special prosecutor investigated early on and determined a crime was not committed.
That is the problem with unaccountable prosecutors. If they determine no major crime, they morph into Inspector Jubert and indict someone for anything to justify their existence.
Excuse me,
Lewis Libby WAS CONVICTED of lying to a grand jury in testimony he gave in the investigation concerning the leaking of the name of a covert CIA agent as it was being investigated by a specially appointed prosecuter.
Was this not the same set up that all you Repubs wanted Slick Willie impeached for?
Extra,
You are excusable! Thanks for proving my point, although I assumed most would realize I was referring to Bubba, as well.
I took no pleasure in Bubba's trial. Making a laughing stock of the office of the President to the world gave me no pleasure. As I said, on unaccountable prosecutors!
You are excusable! Thanks for proving my point, although I assumed most would realize I was referring to Bubba, as well.
I took no pleasure in Bubba's trial. Making a laughing stock of the office of the President to the world gave me no pleasure. As I said, on unaccountable prosecutors!
Incredible,
By the time Bush leaves office you won't be able to find a single dyed in the wool republican who voted for him.
By the time Bush leaves office you won't be able to find a single dyed in the wool republican who voted for him.
Voted for him both times. Given the same choices, I'd do the same.
Will vote for McCain, even if he is no conservative, rather than Obama.
Will vote for McCain, even if he is no conservative, rather than Obama.
quote:Originally posted by Extra260:
Incredible,
By the time Bush leaves office you won't be able to find a single dyed in the wool republican who voted for him.
Rather than be erroniously thought to have voted for Kerry or Gore, I will proudly and loudly claim I voted for Bush both times.
I could not abide being accused of voting for Kerry or Gore, either one.
Sassy,
i agree with you on the two dems.I am afrais this is the failing of a two party system, both parties have slid to the extreme wings of their respective parties. Right when we need a democrat party for the people, it has been taken over by the counter culture of the 60's. I think in the next few years we are going to have to have a real polital shift or a real third party or our country is done for.
i agree with you on the two dems.I am afrais this is the failing of a two party system, both parties have slid to the extreme wings of their respective parties. Right when we need a democrat party for the people, it has been taken over by the counter culture of the 60's. I think in the next few years we are going to have to have a real polital shift or a real third party or our country is done for.