Obama's golden camel.

[gsvol]

Goldman Sachs pulls itself together, posts a huge quarter, doubles its stock price, raises $5 billion with a $123 top-tick, frees itself from the TARP, and resumes its perennial habit of Wall Street domination...while the rest of the financial system collapses in a heap of taxpayer-subsidies...

President Obama continued collecting money for his 2010 Senate re-election campaign even after he resigned his seat from Illinois, including a maximum $2,300 donation the day after Christmas from a top executive of a Wall Street firm that had received a government bailout.Four contributions - $4,800 in all - were donated to the Obama 2010 fund on Dec. 26, according to Federal Election Commission reports.The money came from some of Mr. Obama's top presidential fundraisers: Bruce A. Heyman, managing director at Goldman Sachs, which received a $10 billion bailout last year; Steven Koch, vice chairman at Credit Suisse First Boston; and John Levi, a lawyer at the law and lobbying firm of Sidley Austin LLP.

The donations are legal, but the timing is unusual because Mr. Obama formally left the Senate on Nov. 16 and already had a surplus in his Senate campaign treasury.

Maybe lawgator can explain this to us toothless ignoramouses in volnation??

.Let’s start with the numbers. Why is a first term Senator pulling down almost $300,000 a year from Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, Countrywide Financial, and Washington Mutual? He has not even completed his fourth year in the Senate and received a total of $1,093,329.00 from these eight companies and their employees. (all data from OpenSecrets.org). John McCain’s numbers, according to OpenSecrets.org for the period 1990-2008 (i.e., 18 years worth of data) only collected $549,584.00. In other words, Barack is receiving $273,582.25 (and 2008 is not over) per year while McCain raised a paltry $30,532.44.

Want another shocker? Barack Obama has received more from one source–Goldman Sachs $542,252.00–than McCain has from all of the companies combined. Who the hell is more beholden to lobbyists? And why does a junior Senator from Illinois rate this kind of dough?

Put in further perspective, the entire world’s GDP, according to the CIA’s world book, is $71 trillion USD annually. Compare that with that $1.14 quadillion and you now understand that a huge transfer of wealth is taking place, crowding out legitimate recovery efforts.

Sorry, Taxpayers, You Aren't Getting Paid Back By Goldman Sachs

Anyone supporting Obama is either profiting from this transfer of wealth is dumber than the average person who suffers from downs syndrome.

[gsvol]

“JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac all say they have increased foreclosure activity in recent weeks,” reported The Wall Street Journal on April 15, 2009. Why now? These firms had all instituted moratoriums on foreclosures as they waited for clarity from the Obama administration.

That clarity never came.

Tim Geithner, Obama’s Treasury secretary, was given the job of slowing foreclosures. His first proposal was a flop. He started by announcing a mortgage bailout proposal that was so vague on details it could hardly be understood. Geithner and Obama’s economic team had months between the November election and the inaugural to formulate a plan and prepare it for the public; instead, Geithner waited until March and announced a non-plan. He went to Capitol Hill the next day and was harshly grilled by what should have been a friendly audience. The stock market plunged in reaction.

Timothy Geithner was marketed to America as a Wall Street “wunderkind.” As head of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, he worked closely on the initial Bush bailout scheme with Henry Paulson, Bush’s Treasury secretary. Wall Street hoped Geithner would continue the less interventionist policies of Bush and Paulson. Many believed that someone who was closely involved from the beginning could provide continuity of leadership, and keep in check the less business friendly voices in Obama’s team. All of these hopes have vanished.

In essence, he has been asked by President Obama to become America’s central planning czar.

The record so far has been dismal.

Geithner managed to destroy dollar confidence worldwide. In a passing statement at a news conference, Geithner admitted he admires the Chinese central bankers and that he and Obama are open to a major Chinese currency proposal. The Chinese suggested we abandon the U.S. dollar as the world’s settlement currency, and adopt a new world currency. Geithner’s casual acceptance of this scary idea, understandably, caused the dollar to free fall in the foreign exchange markets the next day.

The root of problem is arrogance. Geithner and Obama believe they can solve all our economic troubles with bigger government. Geithner is going to keep blundering until he and Mr. Obama realize that massive government growth cannot solve our current economic woes, just like they didn’t solve the problems of Nazi Germany, Cuba and the Soviet Union.

[lawgator1]

Mods, can we do something about this?

[MG1968]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

Mods, can we do something about this?

the mods can, but Janet Napolitano could go one better. After all, criticism of Obama can't be allowed.

[666]

Originally Posted by MG1968

After all, criticism of Obama can't be allowed.

I think law is either talking about being called out for no reason or the subtle "OBAMA IS EVIL MUSLIM" garbage that gs always throws in his posts.

[rjd970]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

Mods, can we do something about this?

The more I think about it, the more I think he should be allowed to post what he wants. Unless he made specific attacks on you personally, it would be censorship to force him to stop.

Of course, I don't know what he said, I have him on my ignore list.

[lawgator1]

Originally Posted by 666

I think law is either talking about being called out for no reason or the subtle "OBAMA IS EVIL MUSLIM" garbage that gs always throws in his posts.

Sublte?

Originally Posted by rjd970

The more I think about it, the more I think he should be allowed to post what he wants. Unless he made specific attacks on you personally, it would be censorship to force him to stop.

Of course, I don't know what he said, I have him on my ignore list.

I also have him on ignore. Its just that he seems to author over half of the threads and the titles all have this intentionally antagonistic flair to them. He can post what he wants, but you can't ignore "thread" titles and so unfortunately everyone is subjected to it and its just tiresome.

[gsvol]

Is Geithner's Hedge-Fund Bailout Illegal?

It's a game of three card monte and most people are clueless except they know they are being ripped off, that is if they aren't sheeple who still believe Barry is the greatest thing since cheese whiz.

Fed Shrouding $2 Trillion in Bank Loans in ‘Secrecy,’

The Fed refuses to name the borrowers, the amounts of loans or assets banks put up as collateral under 11 programs, arguing that doing so might set off a run by depositors and unsettle shareholders.

Government loans, spending or guarantees to rescue the U.S. financial system total more than $12.8 trillion since the international credit crisis began in August 2007, according to data compiled by Bloomberg as of March 31.

Barry unaware of tea parties in which over a million American citizens participated.

Does he remember bragging on the NOI Louis Farrakhan million man march on Washington he helped organize that produced far less than half a million??

[lawgator1]

I see he posted. Can't see what he wrote.

Thank, God.

[rjd970]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

I see he posted. Can't see what he wrote.

Thank, God.

Me too, glad I don't have to look at it.

[KentheOrange]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

Mods, can we do something about this?

This is great! A lawyer (so he says) wanting to squash someones right to free speech so he won't have to read the thread titles.

[lawgator1]

Originally Posted by KentheOrange

This is great! A lawyer (so he says) wanting to squash someones right to free speech so he won't have to read the thread titles.

No, I didn't say that. Maybe it can be rigged that we don't have to see his thread titles if he's on ignore list?

[lawgator1]

Incidentally, I doubt that this forum is governed by the U.S. Constitution.

[DC Vol]

Originally Posted by KentheOrange

This is great! A lawyer (so he says) wanting to squash someones right to free speech so he won't have to read the thread titles.

LG is just quicker to mesh into the overarching theme of a diminishing 1st Amendment.

[DC Vol]

Originally Posted by lawgator1

Incidentally, I doubt that this forum is governed by the U.S. Constitution.

making your request less substantial.