Does he think you’re one too? The answer to both questions appears to be…yes.
Because why else would he make this statement at the signing ceremony for the so-called “financial reform” bill: “There will be no more taxpayer-funded bailouts. Period.”
Really? Let’s examine that fantastic assertion at two levels: macro and micro.
Since the statement was made at a bill signing ceremony, we can presume that the reason there will be no more taxpayer-funded bailouts is because of the law’s provisions. Because we do not need a law to stop taxpayer-funded bailouts. All we need is the political cajones to just say “no.”
Last time around, those cajones made only a brief appearance between the Republicans‘ legs. They initially said “no” to the bailout but then suffered from…“shrinkage.” They lost their cajones and caved in to hysterical predictions of doom and gloom from Wall Street con men who had spent most of their careers railing against the government to stay out of their business… until their own survival depended on government aid. Hypocritical bastards.
But does anyone, other than a moron, believe that passing a law will, ipso facto, prevent something? Duuuuuuh!
Isn’t there a law against murder? And are we therefore murder free? Not the last time I checked.
All a law does is set penalties for those who violate it…if the violator is identified, caught, and convicted. Very big “ifs.” Those not inclined to do whatever it is a law prohibits are unaffected by the law.
Similarly, a law will never prevent those who are intent on violating the law from doing so. Especially if they believe the likelihood of being caught and convicted is low. Or if they just don’t care about the consequences to them.
Perhaps Obama believes that the law will provide the government the needed powers to prevent another financial meltdown. That the problem was the government previously lacked authority to stop the rapacious Wall Street villains from wrecking the economy with voodoo financial instruments. Now the government has the necessary authority to ride herd over Wall Street. So no more taxpayer-funded bailouts.
But is authority sufficient? Let’s look at food contamination. Has all the authority of the Department of Agriculture to safeguard food prevented food contamination?
Of course not! We have suffered from numerous outbreaks of food contamination along the entire spectrum, from vegetables to meat to peanut butter. And we will continue to suffer from food contamination.
So why is it that somehow the so-called financial reform bill will be different? That Obama can state: “There will be no more taxpayer-funded bailouts. Period.”
It is because Obama thinks we are morons. Period.
But wait..there’s more! That was the “macro” level perspective and I also promised a “micro” level one. The micro level perspective being the bill itself.
Now I have not read the first word of that bill. I don’t need to read a word of it to recognize bullshit.
Because it’s not just me who thinks the bill will fail stop another taxpayer-funded bailout. So does Fortune magazine, which I don’t think qualifies as a left-leaning, bleeding-heart liberal publication.
In a nutshell, Fortune’s position is: “The bill does not address the problematic nature of modern executive and professional compensation even though the data shows that these are leading causes of the Great Recession.” In plain language: the problem is the greedy Wall Street scumbags. Period. (Read the Fortune article here.)
The fact is this: there will be another taxpayer-funded bailout because the government did it once and so there is no reason the government will not do it again. Period.
The government will literally buy into the same doomsday scenario of economic Armageddon that “justified” the last financial bailout and then pat itself on the back while the Wall Street scammers collect their bonuses as Main Street’s little people are put out of work and home.
As for those staunch conservatives who may still believe the right wing fairy tale that the reason for the financial meltdown was because the government pushed banks to give subprime mortages to those who couldn’t afford those homes….
A Newsweek article on the so-called financial reform bill noted the results of some research on those subprime mortgages. Yes, research…not wild innuendoes based on out of context propaganda seen on a conservative blog like the one that hoodwinked so many about Shirley Sherrod and probably also pushed the “it’s the government’s fault” lie.
A research firm discovered that about 40% of subprime mortgages issued in 2004 went to persons who qualified for prime rate mortgages. And in 2006, it was 61% who qualified for prime rate mortgages but received subprime ones.
And if you don’t want to believe the research firm, is the Wall Street Journal more credible? Its research revealed that in 2005, 55% of subprime mortgages qualifed for prime rate ones. (Read the Newsweek article.)
What we have here is massive fraud. Massive fraud based on greed. And who’s going to go to jail? (Which, in my opinion would be wasting my taxes. Just give me a box of aluminum baseball bats and I’ll gladly administer “people’s justice.”)
In 2008, this moron will vote for any Democrat willing to challenge Obama. And if Obama is the nominee, then I’m voting for someone else. Not the Republican. But probably the Libertarian party.
Better yet, I can start the MAO party – Morons Against Obama….