Stupid Tea Party Helped the Rich Get Tax Cuts

The Debt Ceiling Could Be the Tea Party Downfall

Well, it looks like the Tea Party was instrumental in getting the S & P to lower the US credit rating. I have written at Business Insider that the Tea Party had ulterior motives for doing what they do, especially regarding the balanced budget. Indeed, are Republicans agents of the IMF?

Here is the problem with what the Tea Party did regarding the debt limit:

1. The Tea Party refused tax increases on the rich. This displeased S & P. S & P had already warned the US that they needed the 4 trillion action. And when Obama tried for the grand plan the Tea Party made him look like a fool. The Tea Party looks pretty foolish now as the American people are turning against them.

2. The Tea Party caused the brinkmanship surrounding the debt ceiling. According to the S & P, that also factored in on the downgrade of debt. The Tea Party has blown it for America. We hope there is not much collateral fallout.

Sensible Economic Solutions for Tea Party to Think About

My New Ebook Includes Discussions About Ron Paul and Will Rogers and Their Similarities and Crucial Differences

The Tea Party Has Been Betrayed By Republicans but They Like It!

The Tea Party is a movement, or so it says. It is not a political party. So then, when the Republicans held unemployment benefits for poor people hostage to tax cuts for the rich, this was a betrayal of the Tea Party principles. What principle was betrayed? The principle of fiscal restraint was betrayed. The increased need by government to borrow from China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc., to pay for tax cuts for the uber rich is a total scam against the US taxpayer. The tax cuts for the rich were not needed to stimulate the economy because the richest among us save that money. It does not work as a stimulant.The Tea Party helped the rich get tax cuts, by their silence, as newly elected congressmen not yet seated, and in doing so violated their principle to limit borrowing from foreign powers.

So, really, as much as I am no fan of the Democrats, at least they have a thimble full of common sense, refusing to seek tax cuts for the rich. The compromise made by them to free unemployment insurance was to cave to the Republicans and give massive cuts of 70 billion dollars per year to the richest Americans. If government insists on this tax cut, why not redirect it to every household in the USA? Each household would get a $500 dollar stipend, per year! That would be spent, more likely, than any cuts for the rich. Even if you believe in tax cuts it makes no sense to keep giving a tax cut that has not worked for 10 years, to the rich!

Even the central bankster, Ben Bernanke, stated that the inequality between the rich and poor is destroying the nation. So why didn't the Tea Party listen? Why didn't they buck the Republicans and refuse tax cuts for the richest? Is their plan to spend the US into debt default? More likely their plan is to protect the wealthy bondholders, even at the risk of social unrest! That is why I don't trust Glenn Beck!

The Bush tax cuts for the rich have been in effect for 10 years and have not worked! I repeat, Tea Party, they haven't worked in getting jobs up and running because Wall Street created a credit crisis!

I have held out that Tea Party folks could be a force for good in US politics. But as of this writing, I don't think they are willing to understand the scam of banker abuse upon mainstreet. Isn't there something that can help them understand that mainstreet is taking a hit because bankers are buying loans from the Fed that are being turned into government backed loans? I mean, even now, after the credit crisis, the Tea Party will never be able to get rid of Fannie and Freddie because it is the plan of the banksters to make securitized loans permanently guaranteed.

Tea Party: This Is How The Banksters Are Using Fannie and Freddie Under Your Sleepy Noses!

Lee Adler, editor of the Wall Street Examiner and fellow contributor on Business Insider, has stated:

From there, the banks will use the cash from selling the loans to Fannie, Freddie, or Flub, and they buy the new Fannie and Freddie MBS, which Fannie, Freddie and the Flub just made from the good loans which the bank just bankrolled with Bernanke's (Liar Ben’s) freshly electronically created (but not printed) cash.

So the banks now get the loans back in their portfolios, except that now they come with a government guarantee, courtesy of the fact that Fannie, Freddie, and the Flub are government agencies, and actually government owned. The banks almost instantly went from at risk lender, to a holder of government guaranteed paper on the very same loans they just made.

Thus the circle is jerked. The banks made good loans with money from the Fed, and with loans that they pulled off the Fed’s balance sheet. Plus, they got a government guarantee on top of it. Meanwhile the Fed is left with just poor quality loans. It’s a perfect scam.

Read more:

So, in essence, the banks are filtering loans that can be refinanced to Fannie and Freddie that come back with a government guarantee. Listen, Tea Party sleepyheads, Basel 3 wants the congress to have no ability to pull any loan guarantees made by Fannie and Freddie. The idea is to fill their coffers with so many Fannie and Freddie loans that the government dare not put these banks in danger. Check out that article that I wrote at Seeking Alpha. You will see that I am not lying. And the Adler article just is another source of proof that you are being taken for a ride by the big banksters.

And now Tea Party, the TBTF banks, like Wells Fargo, who are your gods want to threaten the government with the demise of the 30 year mortgage if every single loan is not guaranteed! This is fascist behavior Tea Party, not communism. Wake up Tea Party and weep for your nation!

The Tea Party Can't Reduce the Deficit By Giving the Rich Massive Tax Cuts

Tea Party:There Is Only One Way To Stop the Madness

There is only one way to tolerate all these government guarantees that the banksters and Republicans seem to want. That is right Tea Party, there is only one way. And that way is to ban securitization of mortgages. Securitization of mortgages creates moral hazard. It allows for folks to write sloppy mortgages, on purpose even, and then pawn those mortgages off onto unsuspecting investors. There is so much money floating around at the top reaches of the population that they have to put the money someplace. They want real estate to boom again, even if it means another meltdown. They want boom and bust and boom and bust.

Tea Party, all of that nonsense punishes savers and real investment. A credit bubble is not the way to fund a recovery in the economy. Tea Party, you see how much that has already cost us right? Or have you been living on another planet, sheesh!

The Tea Party is a movement, as I said above, so that it must apply leverage to both political parties to curb spending. Now, I am not for massive austerity because it doesn't work, yet some austerity and targeted stimulus in tech would help our economy.One positive thing the Tea Party could do is watch the price of gas. And if it goes much higher they could do the one thing that I agree with them on so far, which is to call for an end to Bernanke's QE2.

The Tea Party, sans Sarah Palin and the demogogues, could possibly be a movement for good, but so far it appears to be a movement for the rich. If that is the case we have been seriously duped! The jury is out, but they need to help out mainstreet. I am pretty certain at this point that they are not a populist movement, but rather are populism for the wealthy.

More by this Author

Comments 40 comments

BobbiRant profile image

BobbiRant 5 years ago from New York

Well since the Tea Party is funded and pretty much controlled by the Koch family of billionaires, I am not the least bit surprised what the Party's agenda is. Good write.

Sandyspider profile image

Sandyspider 5 years ago from Wisconsin, USA

I knew that the Tea Party was a movement for the rich from the beginning.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Yes Bobbi and Sandy, their true colors are showing. Unless they seek to embrace mainstreet and the poor, they are dupes of the rich. But if mainstreet and the poor have a hard time of this, you will see it eventually get back to Wall Street and the wealthy. Remember Bernanke's words about the danger of having a society with massive income gaps.

justom profile image

justom 5 years ago from 41042

Right on the money. It's exactly why it's come to being sick of politicians period, Obama caved, that's the bottom line. Give the money to the people who need it and they spend it. Give it to the fat cats and they sit on it. I'm tired of trickle down, I want to gush UP!! Nice work as always, Peace!! Tom

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Thanks Tom. Many years of trickle down have done nothing to create jobs. Maybe it worked once, with Reagan, maybe. But it hasn't worked since.

eovery profile image

eovery 5 years ago from MIddle of the Boondocks of Iowa

We are in need of jobs. I am so disappointed that with your background, you don't know what these guys do with their money. Put it in their mattresses? No they invest it, and these investments create jobs.

We need the stability, so that the businesses can get some confidence and know what the policies will be so that they can plan on go on with business.

So it is so bad that a business person works hard and starts making money that he is punished and has to pay more taxes. So is it a crime to make money in the US?

If the banks are doing bad things we need to go after the banks, and not punish everyone else because of the banks.

Keep on hubbing!

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

No Eovery, the corporations are sitting on trillions of dollars and they aren't hiring. Trickle down has been attempted for 10 years and nothing has helped mainstreet.

If you want to protect the rich from paying their fair share then that is your right. I just hope it doesn't result in mainstreet being so damaged that she pulls the rich and foreign nations down with her.

Keep in mind, the Fed chairman may be a liar in many ways, but he knows that the economy is not sustainable without central bank and government intrusion. That is why these companies are not hiring, not because the rich need a tax cut!

American Romance profile image

American Romance 5 years ago from America


Why is it the successful that hold the responsibility for paying off wasted debt and irresponsible behaviour by our government? Isn't that a form of wealth distribution? And wouldn't wealth distribution be socialist behaviour? ........that is not the America I grew up in!

And if the Democrats are so up in arms and worried about the unemployed then shouldn't they just write a check from the unused Stimulus money they still havent spent??? Maybe they just want to stab Republicans who are finaly doing what the majority WANT THEM TO!

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Well, you have a lot to learn American. First, most income that was above the mean moved to the top through dishonest loans, bonuses and taxpayer bailouts. Were you screaming at Wall Street while they were ripping off mainstreet? I doubt it. Your type rarely do.

This is what you don't understand, money is moving to the top 10 percent in a way that jeopardizes our country. Even though he is disingenuous, or he would hate asset inflation, Bernanke is warning us:

Class warfare with unsustainable loans came from the TOP DOWN. Class warfare was imposed upon mainstreet by Wall Street. If you don't understand this you need to read the rest of my articles. Good luck.

Pcunix profile image

Pcunix 5 years ago from SE MA

The Tea Part movement is a populist movement. That automatically means that it is chock full of not very bright people.

However, it does amaze me that these people are not smart enough to see the manipulation by the rich.

SteveoMc profile image

SteveoMc 5 years ago from Pacific NorthWest

The rich defend the actions of the rich. Love your hub and can't agree more.

Micky Dee profile image

Micky Dee 5 years ago

Thoise poor rich people need so much help. Bah! Humbug! God bless you bgamall! God bless the truth and you tell it so well! When I grow up, I want to be just like you!

AR will NEVER stand for anything concerning the average citizen. Never.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Thanks guys. What people don't understand is that corporations are sitting on trillions of dollars and they aren't hiring. If tax cuts would help them hire they already would be in the process because they already are loaded with cash. They have a lot of debt as well, some corporations, because of the credit crisis.

jtcarr1164 profile image

jtcarr1164 5 years ago from Tueplo, Mississippi

I can not believe all this. What is good for Wall Street is good for Main Street. This has been proven before, this is nothing new.

What dangers are there with a gap between the rich and poor? The dangerous one that existed during the Reagan years? The situation is not that the poor get poorer, they get wealthier. Poverty decreased during the Reagan and Clinton. Bernake is inciting the danger by screaming class warfare. Same as our president. This is nothing short of Marxism. Karl Marx was the champion of class warfare.

I will agree with most of your hub, except that it is not the responsibility of the successful and rich to bail out an incompetent federal government. Do you have any idea how childish it sounds to scream "Tax the rich!"

What part of history do you not understand? If you raise taxes on the rich, not only will it squash growth, it just gives the fed more money to waste. If anyone is sitting on money right now, who can blame them with the socialist direction we are heading.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Another non rich fellow speaking in opposition to his own self interest.

This is the bottom line, JTC., even rich people are guilty about not paying enough. This is pure Wall Street greed greasing the pocketbooks of Republican congressmen.

jtcarr1164 profile image

jtcarr1164 5 years ago from Tueplo, Mississippi

How do the rich not pay enough? It is not the governments money. Wealth is acquired, not distributed. The bottom 40% pay no taxes at all. Is this fair? Why are there so many people who hate the rich and want to see them punished?

Tax hikes = robbery. Cut spending!!

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

I agree that wealth is acquired. However, if the ones who benefit from sweet laws, even laws that allow immoral gains, refuse to be responsible, and realize that the entire country's financial health will ultimately benefit them, then they are stupid.

Through history, civilizations that destroy the middle classes disintegrate. I wonder if the richest Americans want to take that chance. It is a pay me now, or pay much more later kind of deal.

Do you really want the car to stop running or do you want the repairs to be made?

If you want to prove Karl Marx right, just keep on advocating policies that weaken mainstreet JTC.

jtcarr1164 profile image

jtcarr1164 5 years ago from Tueplo, Mississippi

I have no desire to prove Marx right, as long as people are screaming about class warfare some may lend him credibility. It will not be from me.

How can you say the rich are not being responsible? They are the ones paying the bulk of the tax burden. How about the people on the bottom, 40% of which do not pay any taxes, where is their responsibility?

The middle class thrived and grew, even the minorities, during Reagan's administration. He did that by cutting taxes. I am sure you were around, you should remember those days.

Just using the car analogy (that is getting so old) shows which camp you are in. Another socialist trying to hide behind another moniker.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Before you call me a socialist, consider that the banks privatized the profits and socialized the losses. That is fact.

I hope also that you would look at this hub I just wrote for you and those who are having trouble seeing what the banks have done. I hope you read it and comment. I believe in free speech and I am fair and balanced:

burning bush profile image

burning bush 5 years ago

I confess that I am not fair and balanced, just like our society. I agree with every statement and argument you have framed. I see no reason for giving a balanced view of a situation created by and now supposedly to be rectified by the same uninformed, thoughtless, self-centered, selfish and ignorant bananaheads who have now been "re-elected". It would appear we voters have the memory of an ant or we are just a bunch of sheep following the guy who says he will feed us. Of course eventually we will be led to slaughter. Its not socialism but rather common sense to allow the cuts for the wealthiest to expire and continue those for the majority. We will spend the money in one way or another which only helps the recovery effort. The rich will sock it away because they just don't need it. We can all look forward to more of this class warfare as 2012 nears and corporations can contribute without restriction to all their favourite politicos. I know I sound angry and my rant is probably an overstatement but for a country of mostly pragmatic and intelligent people, we have somehow developed a mob mentality, replacing reason and serious dialogue with hate speech, lies, and a me-first agenda. Unfortunately this, to me, describes the so-called tea party which bgamall your hub has bagged to a "t".

imjustmusing profile image

imjustmusing 5 years ago from Massachusetts

The top two percent of income earners pay 70% of the taxes, the bottom 42% pay none.

The erosion of the middle class can also come from the bottom. Why would someone want to work when those who don't make the same money for doing nothing?

If you believe that taxing the rich more will result in more taxes being paid, check your history. Read up on the Great Depression and the New Deal. FDR raised taxes on the rich to the highest rates ever. And what happened? Tax receipts went down. Why? because the rich, decided to earn as much. How? By not expanding their companies, increasing production, buying more machines etc. So then what happened? The hero of the progressives, FDR, began to tax everything else instead, excise taxes on everything, gas taxes, etc. All of this decreased demand which probably added five or six years onto the depression.

So tell me, what is the incentive for someone to get off unemployment and find a job if they now get paid the same or more to stay home> What is the incentive for someone to start a business when according to your theory once they are successful they should now pay for everyone else to do nothing?

As far as the unemployment extension issue goes, the Tea Party was against extending the benefits unless the money came from existing funds, i.e. unused stimulus funds (by the way when is the stimulus actually going to stimulate something). All this extension did was add to the deficit.

And do you honestly believe the Democrats and most Republicans would take this money received from getting rid of the Bush tax rates to decrease the deficit like they said? Never happen, they will just spend it.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

IMJ, are you in the top two percent? If you aren't perhaps you are not understanding the situation and perhaps you are arguing against your self interest. Many in the top two percent understand the situation and understand that they are under taxed. Many say their class should pay more except that greedy Glenn Beck.

Also your figures are wrong: The top 10 percent pay about 70 percent of the taxes.

And remember, this does not include sales tax, gas tax, state tax, car tax, house tax, etc. that are generally regressive.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Burning Bush, thank you for the encouragement. America has ceased being pragmatic because greed is dripping from many of the most wealthy members and their minions.

Mike Dale profile image

Mike Dale 5 years ago from Far northern California

I like your passion BG. There are a lot of good comments here, which leads to good debate. I think it's beneficial when we carefully consider all points of view.

I think it all boils down to that it stinks that we're in this position at all in this country. Big business, the Fed, banksters, and their best buddies in Government have all been playing footsies in bed together far too long. As long as this unholy alliance continues, I suspect the argument about tax rates, earmarks, or unemployment will be moot in the long run.

Medicare/medicade, social security and military account for almost 75% of spending by the government. Everything else the government does is only 25% of spending. We've created a massive welfare and entitlement state, and a military commitment that we cannot come close to affording. Add in the billions we borrow daily from other countries, as you pointed out, and it's an unsustainable model.

We will either have to chose to massively change how we do things, or it will be forced upon us economically.

You're right, the greed at the top is bleeding us dry. Unfortunately too many people don't understand how that works. They prefer to run around with silly mantra's about evil socialism or evil capitalism. This country has neither.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Well said Mike. Crony capitalism, or corporatism is neither communistic nor capitalistic.

Mike Dale profile image

Mike Dale 5 years ago from Far northern California

Yes sir! You and i may not agree on each and every point, but it's always encouraging to run across someone who bothers to independently think about these things. Usually I end up debating someone who clearly got their talking points from party line, or from the likes of Hannity or Olbermann. Critically thinking is far more beneficial than repeating.

Hello, hello, profile image

Hello, hello, 5 years ago from London, UK

I always had the feeling tht the Tea Party was nothing but wolf in sheep clothing. They are out for the money and get rich. They know and they know what they doing. Thanks for a great hub.

ahorseback profile image

ahorseback 5 years ago from New England

I vote this up , first , because it creates dialog. And second because , in spite of the fact it creates criticism of the tea party , I'm ok with that too. Here's the thing ! It's called ...The two party system. Boom! Thats the paradox of this democrracy. Left, Right! The fuel of the system! It's that Black or white , right or wrong choice of buttons that is the only fuel that moves this democracy's internal piston. Is it enough ? It seems not, to me ! The whole picture seems to join in one spot a batch of two part epoxy , and then hardens into a solid ! Boom ! Inaction.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

I agree about the inaction to really solve problems. And I also think that you guys are right about what I believe is a Tea Party scam. The scam is that this is populism for the rich, not real populism. It is the usurpation of a legitimate emotional response by very sophisticated political people. I heard Glenn Beck today defending corporations again. But mainsteet has been abused by corporations, expecially by financial corporations, and probably by big pharma and big oil too.

Thomas 5 years ago

The constitution of our country is all about liberty, life, and the persuit of happiness. Whether or not a person gets rich or poor depends largely on his efforts. The rich provide jobs for the poor and the poor want welfare checks from the haves. Education + Hard Work minus Drugs equals success and the American Dream. Jealous people hate the rich because of their inadequacies.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

I guarantee you Thomas, that Thomas Jefferson would be at the fore of calling for jail for the banksters who ripped this country off. You should use initials instead of your name, as it doesn't measure up to the great Jefferson.

ahorseback profile image

ahorseback 5 years ago from New England

And !,it's the constituion protection of corporations , [new] ,that ilks me. There has been a corporate hardening of benifits and pay to peoples, The dissolving of loyalties from employer to employee. And a un-nationalization or lack of patriotism in corporate loyalties to America and it's people.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Of course, these corporations are patriotic to their shareholders only. They must be controlled or they will continue to erode the sovereignty of the nation.

American Romance profile image

American Romance 5 years ago from America

bgamall, sorry took so long to get back, I always look forward to good debate but it must remain on facts or I get bored,

This financial crisis came from liberal Democrats pushing through a bill called the fair housing act, yes it was signed by Bush but built by Democrats, This bill is what allowed thousands of horrible home loans to be made for those who normally couldn't borrow 50 bucks! I have all the names and numbers if you need them???

By the way when you get pissed about bonuses and salaries you are showing your true liberal socialist ways! Anytime one resents what others make they put themselves into the category of class warfare, another socialist term if you didn't know it! Besides 90 percent of the stimulus money went overseas so why do you care? Maybe you should write about that and why we still have 9.8% unemployment????

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Aermican, you are wrong. The CRA ACORN loans were not the loans that propelled the bubble past the tipping point. Had these been the only subprime loans there would have been no crisis. You must look at the chart here: Try to understand the red part of the chart. The red had nothing to do with ACORN, and much of the green had nothing to do with ACORN. You have been lied to by Faux News, American.

Let me try to explain further. The private mbs, which started according to the chart in late 2003, corresponds with the installation of Geithner as president of the NY Fed. This thief allowed all these mortgages to be written and actually, this is what Basel 2 wanted in the first place back in 1998.

What you must understand is that this scam came from the central banking system, as Greenspan in Feb 2004 stated that people could get a better deal with adjustables. That was a bold faced lie. Never had anyone but people of means ever even been allowed ponzi adjustable loans. This upped demand which actually drove prices up, just like the investment banks drive prices up when they manipulate futures contracts in oil.

If you think it was ACORN that was the key to the housing crisis you are just another weak thinker.

OpinionDuck profile image

OpinionDuck 5 years ago


Based on your comments,I don't think that you have a clue. I added this sentence after you used weak thinker without including yourself.


I disagree with your solution of securitization of loans.

The problem was not the bundling of mortgages and making them investment blocks, the problem was that the mortgages were not real bona fide mortgages, they were giveaways by the government.

During the Clinton Era the thought was to let everyone be home owners. They weren't going to let fundamental business methods get in the way of that. Why does the bank need any equity in the loan. With the Federal Reserve making the prime interest rate so so low, we can offer a whole menu of new and very dangerous loans. The biggest offenders of that was Freddie and Fannie, the government mortgage insurers. By the way, Congress excluded them from the recent financial reform.

With equity and down payment no longer hurdle for the income challenged people that really couldn't afford a home, now they were homeowners.

With all the variable rates, and negative amortization loans being created, anyone could get a loan to own a homw.

These loans were like time bombs, fortunately the fact that the Federal Reserve kept the prime low, made the bomb fuse long. This had the bad effect of allowing many more of these bad loans to be made. These bad loans were baggaged up with others and sold in bundles. Yes, this was a factor to the impending economic meltdown, but it couldn't have happened if the loans in the bundles were solid loans.

The availability of these demon loans, creating a housing martket that really didn't exists. The prices of houses using supply and demand caused the next step in the problem.

The selling prices of houses were escalating like that stocks during the dot com era. The result would be the same as the stocks in the dot com era. Those on board at the beginning, the creators and their close cohorts made the bulk of the profit.

The conservative market evaluation of houses to be loaned money for purchase becames swept away by the housing fever. Like a fever, it was delusional and what we saw was not real, yet it was acted on like it was real.

Most of these inventive demon laws were little more than costly rent payments. Many of them required refinancing after a year or a few years, and with an amortized loan this creates an interest only loan, and some with penalties.

I did a hub on the thirty year loan and why it was the best of the bad loans.

I would have to write a hub to discuss it more thoroughly but the point is that you are blaming the tag for the dogs bad decisions.

The government didn't learn from the dot come scam, so the housing and loan scam was to have them repeat history using a different variation.

Oh BTW, it was a speculation scam that raised the price of oil from under forty dollars a barrel before 2008 and allowed it to go over one hundred and twenty dollars a barrel in 2008. Its escalation was only stopped by the entire collapse of economy.

The Congress and their political parties were too busy doing their two year campaign for the 2008 election to know or care about the problems of the economy.

H P Roychoudhury profile image

H P Roychoudhury 5 years ago from Guwahati, India

Those have the money, they are the undeclared monarch. They can alter and do what they like No matter it is in Tea Party.

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Duck, moral hazard is the risk of securitization. People want to write bad loans if they know they will be bailed out. Just read this:

But I agree with you, Duck, that speculation drove up the price of oil and they are trying to do it again. Only people with a legitimate need to hedge their businesses should be allowed to get a derivative. GS and the other banksters should be made to take delivery of the contract if they speculate, but of course it is rigged for them.

Undeclared monarch. HP, you can say that again. You hit the nail right on the head.

sir slave profile image

sir slave 5 years ago from Trinity county CA.

awesome anti-tearade!!

I'm wondering about the connection with romney and the tea seems quite distant at one moment when i hear stories like the one you posted. but then I heard he's backing a radio ad for an amendment banning gay marriage?? he will be hung on a patard(sp?) for that one should he win the nomination.

I didn't ever think of him as a super social crusader, other than what was obligatory being a mormon republican. But everybody knows he not a neo-con on many issues. would he attack another country and get us into another war?? that is my question to anyone on the right who seeks to be the NEXT republican president after Dubya!

bgamall profile image

bgamall 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada Author

Romney is a mutt more than a mitt. I really hope people see that he is a bit unusual. I think he talks alot about war in the debates, so you don't really know.

Boy, Sarah Palin has sure been quiet lately. Her handlers must have told her to shut up!

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

    Click to Rate This Article