Comments for en-gb 30 Sat 23 Aug 2014 19:30:50 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at dennisjunior1 Justin:Yes, the deregulations in reality had a major part in the downturn of the economy in the United States...Also, overspending by all parties didn't help....--Dennis Junior-- Thu 25 Dec 2008 03:26:37 GMT+1 carmenincali AMERICA HAS BEEN COOKING THE BOOKS TO MAKE IT LOOK FUNDAMENTALLY SOUND. The economy here is a result of self inflicted woulds done by the government in favor of the rich to the middle and lower classes. *****Deregulation is a very big PART of the problem.***** In brief, the U.S. has some big hairy fundamental issues on the macroeconomic scale. 1. We have a trade deficit of $700billion dollars which started with the signing of NAFTA with China in 1996. The production stayed the same, the labor was cheap. Americans lost $100-200 billions each year in taxable salaries, purchasing power and the ability to make the mortgage payments. This encouraged China to buy U.S. Treasuries, they were kind enough to keep the Yuan low. For their own benefit, but the Yen is rising and America's going to be paying more debt back to Japan for a very long time. The US dollar declined in direct proportion with this trade deficit alone, before Bush got into office. So Bush took a bad situation and screwed it up royally. 2. The GDP is up because the collective derivative market has a fraudulent value. The banks and non-bank lenders screwed themselves by selling unsecured debts in a bearish economy., the falsely appraised real estate values, inflation and increased costs of imports like gas pumped the GDP up even higher. Without credit, America didn't have the purchasing parity. Credit is the easiest way to transfer wealth. This was done to make the federal deficit look like it's at 65% of the total GDP. of the sudden, after the G7 meeting North Korea is off the hook for nuke testing. I am suspicious that China wanted their money back which started this mess. Without real job creation and innovation, the U.S. simply isn't able to fix this mess. There's no transparity for the American people, a lot of crimes. We have to get this fixed. To the world, we didn't approve of this and we're sorry for your troubles. Wed 15 Oct 2008 05:41:58 GMT+1 courtesycaller It was W.H. Auden thinking of his own death, not Larkin. Tue 14 Oct 2008 09:44:31 GMT+1 smileytm303 This post has been Removed Sun 12 Oct 2008 17:28:46 GMT+1 jacksforge 265. At 01:09am on 08 Oct 2008, TrialofK wrote:a polite letter explaining what happened Thu 09 Oct 2008 20:48:09 GMT+1 Castaway_4ever The financial mess surroiunding the housing industry in the US has very little to do with "de-regulation" or poor regulation. Rather it had everything to do with the Federal Government trying to engineer a specific social outcome. The vehicle of the social engineering experiment was the Community Reinvestment Act. In short the Federal Government greatly incentivised banks (even forced them) to lend to people who should never have been granted a loan...and then Freddie and Fannie guaranteed the loans. This train wreck was entirely foreseeable and could have been easily avoided. While I am no proponent of the inordinate compensation of bank executives, the preponderance of blame rests with the politicians (particularly with the Democrats and the Clinton administration)...a fact that has somehow been largely overlooked and underreported Thu 09 Oct 2008 15:00:12 GMT+1 Hank_Reardon Blaming deregulation is like saying that it was a knife that killed him. Deregulation may have been one of the tools used to bring about this collapse but the culprits are those who weilded the knife.and now the culprits have all decided to give us a half a percent cut in the interest rate, so after they have knifed us they are offering a band aid.If you read the 451 pages of the 'bail out bill' you will soon learn thatis nothing more than a bill that creates a financial dictatorship in the US. I hold out little hope that our answer to this problem will be any different. leaving all us to argue the toss. Thu 09 Oct 2008 06:51:42 GMT+1 mary gravitt Deregulation lies at the heart of the present financial crisis. FDR beginning in 1933 set in motions laws to protect people from what we are suffering now.The Neoconservatives/Neocons convinced a dim witted president that these rule need no longer apply and he believed them instead of US history. Now the world pays the price of his ignorance. Thu 09 Oct 2008 01:25:00 GMT+1 bobNewJersey It was impossible to regulate questionable securities that are now the blame for the current economic turmoil in a political environment screaming for deregulation.New types of "snake oil" securities were introduced in this environment of deregulation. In 2004 the SEC removed regulation from major investment firms and allowed these institutions to self regulate themselves.With such a low opinion for the need for regulation in the United States it is not surprising that the large source of cheap capital that was available would quickly find itself being used for questionable securities that promised quick lucrative returns. With a political environment that favored regulation the large source of cheap capital might have flowed into industry and innovation instead of wallpaper. Wed 08 Oct 2008 22:01:58 GMT+1 john-In-Dublin 240 seanspa wrote:"What I am looking for from Obama is a denunciation of what Ayers stood for, and not just a claim that they are accidental acquaintances."From this link -"Asked about his relationship at a Democratic debate on April 16, 2008, Obama said, "This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis."And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn’t make much sense."'Detestable acts' sounds like a denunciation to me. Wed 08 Oct 2008 19:41:42 GMT+1 JerryD23 It was a noble cause but even the New York Times knew who was taking a huge risk in 1999.Search "Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending" from Wed 08 Oct 2008 17:14:03 GMT+1 rockSimon1 I still find it remarkable that GWB seems to be an irrelevancy in terms of this election. Although McCann seems to be slipping back in the polls it has not been to the extent that I would have thought. After all the Republican party has been in power for 8 years and has had its hand on the tiller through the biggest meltdown in the financial markets since the Great Depression.Now I understand that the US laissez-faire notion of government as well as the federal nature of the states may go some way to explaining this. However, it cannot be denied that GWB has overseen the biggest defecit in the US economy since records began. He has also been directly responsible for a great misjudgement in the invasion of Iraq. This immoral and unnecessary war has caused untold damage to the region, has displaced 4 million Iraqies and has got nowhere near its intended objective of bringing democracy and stability to the country. In addition, to this while it is debateable whether the war directly caused the current crisis, the increase in fuel costs and the projected costs (funded in the main part by loans) of three trillion dollars must have limited the US governments options to deal with the crisis.Add to this the 2000 election fiasco and the debacle over Katerina and the fact that right now American popularity in the world is about as low as anyone can remember and it all points to meltdown in the polls.For all this McCann as a republican is still holding up in the polls. At present he is behind by 9 to 5 points in the polls which does not strike me as political meltdown.Maybe I find hard to understand because I am a Brit and using the British model I know the electorate would be chomping on the bit to get its revenge through the ballot box on a administration that was so disreputable and discredited. Perhaps this can partly be explained by the fact that in the US the party connection is not so strong as in the UK. Certainly Obama has worked hard to try to connect McCann with the Bush administration while McCann has had a hard time squaring the circle with the idea that he is something new while still holding on to the ideals of the Republican party. Whatever the reason its a mystery to me. Wed 08 Oct 2008 14:34:06 GMT+1 jacksforge Britishish I call that Rag ,good for applying wax to metal and little else, the "Daily Diana"Does it still have something about Di and the Boys every day? Wed 08 Oct 2008 14:18:32 GMT+1 jacksforge 227. At 7:09pm on 07 Oct 2008, JodyNC wrote:A whole bunch o sense.------------------------Gary sorry if my typing is not up to my thoughts, but well twist it.Did the Globalisation protesters get it wrong.Has Globalisation been the saviour of humanity that was promised ?Did the policies of selling industry to china to evade epa regulations and get cheap labour help the world?Did "consolidating" industry to a few multi nationals better the world?Is it better that your average pair of knickers has seen more miles than the person wearing them help.Was it not the Hippies that believed what Rachel Carson had to say before the rest got on board.Education is better than just an understanding or care of the way words are put.So many Educated people have done us so well.Problem is they were Ignored by the " Educated People" .An english Professor is not always an avid historian and a learned man, as Mark is, often they seem to be people obsessed with depressed drunks._--------------------Back to Jody well said again. well written to if that matters. Wed 08 Oct 2008 14:16:55 GMT+1 AlasdairKean An alternative view of the current crisis which differs sharply from the sources cited by Justin can be found at'Subprime Suspects: The right blames the credit crisis on poor minority homeowners. This is not merely offensive, but entirely wrong' Wed 08 Oct 2008 13:57:44 GMT+1 RedWhiteandermblue "U.S. investment banks, regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, bought piles of toxic waste...If that doesn't convince you that deregulation is the wrong scapegoat..."(A quote from the article inspiring this thread.) The proximate cause of the crisis was caused by the SEC INSUFFICIENTLY regulating US investment banks. Yes, we understand that they have oversight, and, in that sense, "regulate," but this is a dishonest argument.The article strikes me as written by a free-market, anti-regulation fan who is trying desperately to shift the blame away from the obvious culprit. The truth is that the free market never worked, and that prosperity has only been achieved by states balancing somewhat free markets with a large public sector. Many remain ideologically attached to the false God of the free market, nevertheless, and will not abandon their faith. The larger point that the Democrats collaborated in many instances does show that this, like every other crisis, was not caused purely along party lines. But we knew this already. Wed 08 Oct 2008 13:49:12 GMT+1 Hank_Reardon Wake up folks,Its the central banks that caused all this. This collapse has been done with pupose and by design. Why do you think they stopped publishing the M3 index?All this bail out nonsense is just adding fuel to the fire. The next stage of all this is hyperinflation, mass unemployment and will end up with food queues.We would have had a small chance had we just let the markets and banks fall (the puke) instead we are taking the pison pill and what was once only going to effect the private money is now going to bring down our public money.Its the fed, the bank of england, the ECB. Look no futher for those who have done this. Wed 08 Oct 2008 11:31:28 GMT+1 mike0908 Yes. I think we need a clear set of rules, and strict enforcement. When we have a set guideline then we can expect to see some stablility. Wed 08 Oct 2008 02:51:59 GMT+1 british-ish 260 (Gary A Hill)Oh dear, I'd forgotten it was that wretched right-wing British rag that started this with his brother doing the dirty work Christopher Hitchens presumably couldn't find an outlet for.How embarrassing.All I can say by way of apology is that the Daily Mail is so anti immigrant it could easily be accused of being racist, still thinks Maggie Thatcher should be PM and it supported the British Fascists in the 30's.It hasn't changed much, as you can see. Wed 08 Oct 2008 00:35:07 GMT+1 british-ish To anyone interested, my post 253 gave the details on the BBC's own "Complaints" page so others could complain, as I have done, about the delays tonight.It appears the moderators thought this information ought not to appear here.The person responsible for this part of the BBC's website is Richard Deverell, Head of News Interactive, if anyone is interested.And that, moderators, is in the public domain, published on this BBC website. And by the way (hint) you are dealing with a media journalist here. Wed 08 Oct 2008 00:11:46 GMT+1 TrialofK Well if we look at history and the big picture deregulation is the culprit.History -the great depression caused in part by banks investing in the stock markets and the the South Seas Bubble.1933-Glass Steagal Act passes and prevents banks from investing in stock market1999 the final vestiges of the Glass Steagal Act are removed by the Republican congress and the Democratic President.Now bank holding companies can interact with the stock market-going against the law enacted to prevent another great depression.2001-9/11After that the recession was avoided by manufacturing a housing boom with a reduction in regulation of loans. This created an artificial jump in housing demands and thus a bubble. Since the banks and stock market are free to intermingle the banks have unlimited investors who are spending other peoples money. 2004 SEC bends to the will of large Banks (including CEO Henry Paulson, of Goldman Sacks) and decreases the amount needed for asset protection allowing the banks to ship more money to the Investment side-and the banks where allowed to regulate themselves. we have a deregulated banking industry allowed to interact with the global stock market and it creates a housing bubble that is what this mess is about. Wed 08 Oct 2008 00:09:34 GMT+1 AndreainNY I'll let my final word on the Obama-Ayers relationship be this video of a Time reporter questioning an Obama spokesman.He is unable to get an answer to the question of whether Obama believes it's okay to associate with a terrorist. Wonder why.Obama Spokesman Admits Obama Knew About Ayers Tue 07 Oct 2008 23:35:10 GMT+1 AndreainNY 246. Fritz_Kraut:Andrea, with all due respect, you are spamming.Every time you have an opinion on a matter, you stubbornly repeat it numerous times, it really is a nuisance.***********************I could also view comments contradicting my own as stubbornly repetitive. It is equally a nuisance to read repeatedly people claiming that Americans don't care about what Ayers did when, in fact, Americans have voiced their concerns about Ayers continuously since the primary. Tue 07 Oct 2008 23:05:07 GMT+1 Britishdem Of course deregulation caused the crisis. When you remove the only way of checking these big, greedy firms, what do you think happens? They get greedy because no one is keeping an eye on them and do whatever they like. Deregulation went on from Reagan if I am not mistaken and so popular. Well, so much for capitalism now and so much for the Reagan legacy. Look at what has happened: Dow Jones has dropped another 500 points today. Thousands if not millions will lose their jobs and savings. Who cares about them? Tue 07 Oct 2008 22:44:59 GMT+1 John Holden-Peters The short answer is that deregulation has played its part in this fiasco, how big we may know one day. Whether it has favoured the Democrats or the Republicans, also not clear. Just now it is not doing John McCain any good. It is his party that has been in power during the worst excesses of Wall Street and that is why he is trying to distance himself from GWB. Nice try but it won't work.His campaign is not being helped by his choice of VP. Seemed brilliant at first, someone to bring in the very right-wing, "religious" female voter and her mate. It's all falling rather flat. The US electorate is much more intelligent than some of us Europeans sometimes think. Tue 07 Oct 2008 22:38:25 GMT+1 Gary_A_Hill seanspa (#240), Obama has denounced the Weathermen, through a spokesman, William Burton, who is quoted in a discussion of this subject at the following link: Tue 07 Oct 2008 22:14:51 GMT+1 british-ish lawchicago (242) wrote:"God help us all. What has W been doing lately? Packing?He doesn't really need to do that until closer to Christmas, does he?Perhaps he's been practising not calling Gordon Brown "Tony", Medvedayev "Vladimir" and Sarkozy "Jacques" in readiness for the G8 meeting. That's the sort of preparation for a global leaders' meeting in the midst of a crisis that could take up a lot of time.I'll give him this, he certainly has a gift for stating the obvious. Tue 07 Oct 2008 22:13:29 GMT+1 Gary_A_Hill british-ish (#239), "the point of all this pfaffing around" is that we are near the end of a rather long election season and need to get through it with the right result. That would be to throw the Republican rascals out. There are some Democratic rascals, too, but as they are "liberal" rather than dogmatic, they are more amenable to revising their positions. When the Democratic Party takes control of everything, that's the time for solutions. Then they can take full responsibility for the outcome. Tue 07 Oct 2008 22:06:48 GMT+1 goleooo DougTExanDo you realize how stupid your sound?How do you live with yourself? it must be really hard. other than being an ignorant you also come out as a coward. you know why?the only thing you really wish you could do is admit you would love to get a KKK badge. You know damn well there is no connection between obama and bin laden, as a matter of fact there is more connection between the republican party and bin laden since they are the ones that keep him alive to serve their purpose of fighting unnecesary wars and fool idiots like you. (wasn't bush employed by Bin Laden's family?)Yea i am insulting you! you betcha! wink wink... you have no idea what a terrorist really is...why don't you stick to watching your fox news and getting brainwashed by your preacher or McPalin. If this wasn't my country i would have holeheartedly wished to see McCain and Palin win only to have idiots like you stop making decisions about the fate of billions around the world for the sake of what US did in the past. But I have to admit, if there were no people like you, than America would be too good to be true. Tue 07 Oct 2008 22:02:19 GMT+1 soliplaya I have a naive question : 700 billion $ is not an accountant's rounding error. It is 26,000 metric tons of pure gold, and it takes 750 large trucks to move that.6 months ago, nobody seemed to know that there was a such a hole in the accounts; now everyone knows that there is one. So either that money was not really there 6 months ago, or it was. If it wasn't, then why did all these brilliant economists, central bankers and financiers not say so then ? And if it was there, where has it gone in the meantime ? Tue 07 Oct 2008 21:54:38 GMT+1 rarmst01 There are several factors that caused and are influencing the crisis. Saying it was only either the Fed or deregulation is not enough the answer the question. From all the information out there, one gathers it was a combination of several factors, including mismanagement on the Fed's part and loose regulation, as well as consumer irresponsibility and several other causes we could point to.The bottom line is that is that this meltdown is a lesson about the need of a separation of the interests of the state and the interest of the capitalist entities of the world. Foresight and reponsibilty is what we need to start demanding, both from our leaders in government as well as from the private institutions that have so much influence over our lives. Tue 07 Oct 2008 21:36:33 GMT+1 mcdv-1975 Obama: bail out Wall StreetMcCain: bail out Wall Streetwhere's the difference? Tue 07 Oct 2008 21:26:55 GMT+1 british-ish This post has been Removed Tue 07 Oct 2008 21:22:55 GMT+1 MagicKirin ref #229Great Resturants, Museums and music, and the transit system goes to the airport.My point regarding tenure is why should it allowed protection for Academics who should be fired. Tue 07 Oct 2008 21:20:15 GMT+1 krebbe Great articles with food for thought. It's just a shame the candidates aren't debating this.I also find it amusing that some of the commentators who advocate regulation over anarcho-capitalism don't seem to realise that this implies a reduction in freedom for the big companies and a deviation from the free market ideology. Not that all kinds of freedom are sacrosanct: I, for one, don't mind losing the freedom to murder other people in exchange for a government that prevents others from killing me! Tue 07 Oct 2008 20:37:27 GMT+1 jrubenol I have to say that I am amazed at the intellect of the readers of this blog. I live in the States and am frequently irritated when there is a blatant disregard to facts in the frequent attacks against President Bush. I'm no fan of the President, but, being honest and well read I must admit that he is only partly (and even at that, only a very small part) at fault for the current crisis. I am a research assistant focused on the failures which happened in the Great Depression in our banking industry. Current policy of de-regulation did not start in 2000 when President Bush took office but instead in his father's years (a slight push) then President Clinton finished it off, making sure that the corporate giants would be able to control the market. President Bush has contributed to the process but it was already spiraling out of control by the time he took office.Like so many other things, people in general fail to acknowledge when their own parties make mistakes. I appreciate those who have left unbiased comments, contributing the failure to President's Bush Sr., Reagan and Clinton, it was a bi-partisan failure, and a failure which I believe will happen over and over again as long as we fail to instill some virtue to control the human desire for wealth and power. Tue 07 Oct 2008 20:31:12 GMT+1 AndreainNY 195. The Notting Hill Hammer:"Clutching at straws now? Also avoiding the Keating issue, which is one of substance unlike this canard. The fact is most people neither know or care who Ayers was 30 years ago. This is an issue strictly for the lunatic fringe."Keating did not advocate killing innocent civilians. McCain attended a meeting with him, was investigated and exonerated. He spent the rest of his career advocating against special interests.You may not care what Ayers did, but I can assure you many Americans do -- just not people who are willing to overlook anything in Obama's past. Labeling people who believe Obama's relationship with Ayers is suspect as the "lunatic fringe" is childish. Tue 07 Oct 2008 20:22:09 GMT+1 MagicKirin ref 227Jody NC you make is sound like this is first time there has been harsh campaign rhetoric.There has been contiued smear from the Dems especially on Palin.If you are from North Carolina you have some of the most infamous hate mongers in Academia: The Duke 88 Tue 07 Oct 2008 20:16:45 GMT+1 RedWhiteandermblue Yes, it wasn't really deregulation that caused the crisis, however well-documented the SEC's decision to allow some of the biggest banks to get farther into debt may be. (Read last weeks New York Review of Books). In fact the Republicans aren't really for deregulation at all, or, if they are, this had nothing to do with the bottom falling out of the economy. Also, Iraq really had WMD and Bush has been an excellent president.I don't really understand why you'd post a WUM thread like this. Tue 07 Oct 2008 20:13:53 GMT+1 U12831485 188, AndreainNY :The issue with Ayers has to do with Obama's blind eye for people's integrity when it comes to his own advancement.If you can explain why Obama would hide his relationship with Ayers, you'll understand why the relationship matters.etc,..._______Andrea, with all due respect, you are spamming.Every time you have an opinion on a matter, you stubbornly repeat it numerous times, it really is a nuisance.If Obama was caught poking his nose , we'd hear about it from you over the next few weeks, day by day.I got another one for you - Obama the evil drug user.When admitting he had smoked marihuana as a youngster, and asked if he had inhaled, his answer was : 'I thought that was the whole point.'There, that should keep you busy for a while, and hopefully distract you from that silly Ayers 'issue'.Speaking of which, I think any actual or fabricated connection between Obama and Ayers is irrelevant, and so is the Keating scandal, to be fair.Both Obama and McCain have since moved along; Obama has appearently not had any close ties to Ayers, and certainly wasn't in any way involved in terrorist activities.McCain has - 20 years ago - made a grave mistake and seems to have regretted it, but who cares.It's all water under the bridge. Tue 07 Oct 2008 20:08:11 GMT+1 british-ish 222:It was, effectively, one of the consequences of the deal done to secure the 5 billion dollar loan Britain negotiated with the US in 1948, after previous loan arrangements were cancelled, when we were effectively bankrupt after the War.(We paid the final instalment off on 29th December 2006, by the way. American aid to Britain for the second world war did not actually come free.)The US wanted to ensure that the dollar would become a reserve currency and either suoercede or replace sterling, though the dollar I think wasn't finally totally recognised as de facto supreme until 1972. Tue 07 Oct 2008 20:04:08 GMT+1 Gary_A_Hill JodyNC (#227), I don't see where you get the idea that Justin is "spokesperson for the American people." Who appointed him that? He certainly hasn't claimed to be, as far as I know. Tue 07 Oct 2008 20:01:00 GMT+1 SCexpat You are a Republican propagandist. Bushs' right hand. Tue 07 Oct 2008 19:48:59 GMT+1 lawchicago BBC breaking news :Bush urges joint crisis response President Bush said the US economy would 'come through'US President George W Bush has called for co-ordinated action by leading industrialised countries to tackle the worldwide credit crunch. His response is like his long pause after being informed of the 9/11 attack god help us all What has W been doing lately ?packing ? Tue 07 Oct 2008 19:46:59 GMT+1 stwl "170. At 3:59pm on 07 Oct 2008, AndreainNY wrote:I will repeat that you are very much mistaken. Ayers' behavior was anathema to many Americans. Any relationship with him is unacceptable to them."Possibly true. But don't Palin's links to Alaskan independence activism render her equally unacceptable to those same Americans? Or - dare I say it - does her patriotism go unquestioned on account of her skin color? Tue 07 Oct 2008 19:36:31 GMT+1 seanspa What did the Weathermen stand for? This was no rebellion against white america, it was simply an attempt to overthrow a democratically elected government and impose a communist regime. This was not rooted in civil rights, but in a failed ideology. Yes, I know capitalism as practised recently doesn't look great right now, but that doesn't make communism any better than democracy. The reason Ayers keeps coming up is because he is supposedly unrepentant. We have dealt with policticians who were once 'terrorists' because they were subsequently elected to office. Ayers wasn't interested in elections, democracy or free choice. He wanted to impose his ideology on others. Now that to me is fascism.He is quoted as claiming the group's ideology was "Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, Kill your parents". Nothing about racial equality or civil rights.What I am looking for from Obama is a denunciation of what Ayers stood for, and not just a claim that they are accidental acquaintances. Tue 07 Oct 2008 19:35:47 GMT+1 british-ish What on earth is the point of all this pfaffing around trying to find someone to blame? I see from the news this is what Congress is doing, instead of inquiring into linger term solutions.This could be the only time anyone will see me quoting Margaret Thatcher approvingly. She is said to have addressed civil servants thus: "I don't want to hear about problems, I want to hear about solutions."So do I; so does a large portion of the rest of the world. Apparently America doesn't. Too scared of the implications of the solutions, are we?You can leave the rest to the historians. And let them make the comparisons with Nero, Tue 07 Oct 2008 19:31:51 GMT+1 hackdaddy It makes a great political strategy to blame your opponent for whatever problems currently exist while taking credit for anything whatsoever positive.It may be true that in hindsight the right regulations at the right time might have averted this crisis. On the other hand to my knowledge no member of any political party ever proposed specific regulations that would have done so. No member of any party rescinded existing regulations that would have done much to help either.When a sub-prime mortgage is offered to an a less than credit worthy customer is this the fault of the greedy lending executive? The shareholders failure to oversee said executive? The governments failure to put in place regulations that discourage lending to said customer or worse to encourage that lending? The customer who accepts credit without full understanding of the cost or worse, irresponibly, in full knowledge of the cost?The answer of course is all of the above.The same sort of scenario hold true when a derivative security based on the aforementioned sub-prime loan is offered.The question then becomes just how far are we willing to go in granting government power to avoid all problems and crises that may arise? "Big Brother", "Lord of the Flies" or should we try to strike some balance?Balance is of course what everyone would answer but the current state of polarization in politics around the world is leading us ever closer to choosing one or the other extreme instead. The crisis has happened. We will get through it. We will know what sensible regulations need to be put in place to avoid a recurrence. We don't need to place blame there is plenty to go around. Tue 07 Oct 2008 19:29:20 GMT+1 Gary_A_Hill I think someone who cannot construct a coherent paragraph, and who has not mastered elementary spelling and punctuation, is in no position to lecture "so called educated people." Tue 07 Oct 2008 19:23:31 GMT+1 fmccain Yes, deregulation of the housing market by Bill Clinton is the root of the problem. Tue 07 Oct 2008 19:05:03 GMT+1 joriejulia Are you being paid in some way to say this?? Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:56:54 GMT+1 MarcusAureliusII At the moment, if the election were held today, it appears that Obama would win. A month is a long time in American politics but there is a fair bet he will win. I wonder how long it will take once he assumes office for buyer's remorse to set in, not just at home but around the world. Like most charismatic aspirants to political power, he will undoubtedly prove very much less adequate as a leader then those who support him expect of him. At best he would have a difficult road to hoe even if he knew what he was doing. But the truth is, on ability he is very lacking in virtually every regard. He has little real knowledge, being new to the federal government. He has no knowledge of the economy or foreign affairs. His associations with terrorists like Ayers and other disreputable people will not help him any. He's a protectionist. He is not a pacifist. The reason he wants to get out of Iraq is so that he can go to war with Pakistan. He'll be facing crisis after crisis. His economy is in a shambles and nobody really knows how to fix it. He may inherit a deep recession headed for a depression. I predict that within a year, most people who voted for him will regret it. I also predict that at some point more than a few people outside the US will say he is even worse than Bush. But for the time being, a lot of people can enjoy their illusions and hopes. Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:52:41 GMT+1 Gary_A_Hill invisibleserendipity (#208), Ted Kaczynski, Eric Rudolph, and Timothy McVeigh are "not on the same level as Ayers." They are people who have been convicted of murders, and who have received appropriate justice.As regards Ayers and Dohrn, justice has run its course, unless something new comes up. In the meantime, they are very old news. Some may think they got off easy for things they did or may have done in the 1970s. Maybe, maybe not. Things don't always turn out the way you might like, particularly when politics is involved. That's life.The crux of the controversy for me is that McCain and Palin like to dwell on this because they have nothing of substance to talk about. They are grasping at straws. Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:49:57 GMT+1 DougTexan What do 'Osama Bin Laden' and 'Barry Obama' have in common?They both know someone that bombed the Pentagon.That said,are or should you to be judged by the company you keep?Would not a 'known' bank thief, albeit unconvicted, be the best at protecting your life savings?Should not a 'known' bomber be in your cabinet, using his abilities enhancing your safety?Or is prophecy,.. "America, your chickens are coming home to roost!" Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:49:42 GMT+1 newbriton Looking for a single factor that precipitated the current economic implosion is a little naive. However it is clear that the suspension of rules and lack of oversight allowed leading members of the economic community to suspend traditional levels of qualification for borrowers. The motivation for this was greed, get rich quick, get out and let someone else mop up the mess. The reckless atmosphere that has been bred at the leadership level of many government agencies and private corporations by this administration is also to blame. Free competition and democratic values do not operate best when left entirely alone, as we now see. Correct oversight and lawful operation is necessary for them to operate efficiently and in the best interest of the greatest number of people. Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:38:05 GMT+1 Gary_A_Hill David_de_Jong (#216), we don't know that. We know only that neither Ayers not Dohrn have been convicted of homicide. There is one unsolved murder of a San Francisco police officer, Sgt. McDonnell, in 1970 which some think may be related to the Weather Underground. I have no opinion one way or the other on this question, except that I hope the crime is solved. For now, a presumption of innocence applies. Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:35:59 GMT+1 lawchicago MagicKirinI dont think that tenure for Ayres was a matter of right .I think by the criteria of the University of Illinois at Chicago he earned it by academic performance . As its not the University where I taught or attended , I would only surmise that his educational qualifications justified the postion.I myself would have had issues with his backround but that goes to show you there are a multitude of opinions in Chicagops glad you enjoyed Chi Town Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:22:41 GMT+1 Paulitex Need evidence that US deregulation played a big part in the crisis?Here's a link about "Naked Short Selling", a widespread criminal practice on Wall Street: also exposes the suppression of info about "Naked Short Selling" practices in Wikipedia Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:20:20 GMT+1 JodyNC Justin,It's surprising that you are the spokesperson for the American people on the BBC website. I would think that the BBC would continue their excellence of reporting world news and would want to uphold that same standard to their website. Your post with the subtitle "Are Democrats getting away with a big lie? " is incoherent and only serves to incite rather than educate. Inciting hatred through misinformation and outright lies however has become the platform for the McCain/Palin campaign which you are following. Gov. Palin will be speaking at East Carolina University in Greenville, NC sometime this evening. They are not releasing the exact time since law enforcement is concerned about campus security. She will again not be speaking with the press. The press is not allowed to interview students or anyone in attendance inside Minges Coliseum. The Governor will be speaking at a University that has recently had increased racial tensions due to nooses being hung from trees on campus. Her remarks serve to incite racial hatred and fear. Over the weekend she condones someone in the audience yelling "kill him" (meaning Obama) by not speaking out or saying that that this not acceptable. Her speech which will try to tie Obama to a "terrorist" only has one meaning in the south: Fear the BLACK Man. It doesn't matter if the accusation is true or not. The Republicans are getting away with the biggest lie!Her hate filled speech will only add lighter fuel to a simmering college campus. If McCain and Palin truly cared about "Country First" then they would want to ensure that another Kent State doesn't happen in NC. If McCain and Palin truly cared about "Country First" then they would stick to the issues of the economy and dispense with their hate filled racist rhetoric. If McCain and Palin truly cared about "Country First" then they would assist law enforcement and campus officials and help to ensure that students would be safe on campus by not INCITING a riot through Palin's rhetoric. If any type of riot occurs tonight or at any other planned McCain/Palin event it will not be the fault of those in attendance. McCain/Palin and some Editors such as yourself have whipped up the hate, increased existing racial tensions and have garnered the support of neo-nazis and extremist groups as well as Republicans. The responsibility of any injuries or deaths that occur at any McCain/Palin political rally will be squarely on their shoulders and yours. I said it here first. The stage is set. All McCain/Palin need is a match. Obama=terrorist. Obama=Antichrist. Guess you haven't gotten these emails yet, Justin? Guess you haven't gotten the Obsession DVD in your mailbox yet? The American Republican party has now become the equivalent of the German Republikaner. The Biggest Lie of the campaign you ask rhetorically I presume? The Republican's platform of catering to white middle America's hate and fear of blacks while using the slogan "Country First". They are running on a platform that will tear this country apart at the very fabric of our seams unless we diligently fight those who incite racism in every corner.We must diligently fight the smear such as your post and subtitle "Democrats are getting away with the biggest lie"You should say it more succinctly Justin. Just say it: Democrats are liars. Shame on you Justin. Shame on McCain and shame on Palin. Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:09:34 GMT+1 DavidD Oh no, GWB is currently explaining, in simple examples, what the credit crunch is. Probably the same way it was explained to him. Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:08:43 GMT+1 DavidD 215. At 6:09pm on 07 Oct 2008, niceapplepye wrote:Nicely summarised. Also, don't forget the rise of the daytraders who took out mortgages to finace their levered positions during the dotcom boom.This isn't just an american problem, though. In England the majority of banks were offering up to 120% mortgages, based on the assumption that prices would continue rising. They're the ones who should carry the downside of the risk. Tue 07 Oct 2008 18:03:11 GMT+1 jacksforge Justin why do the mods not print the letter that says your useless. you'll been falling hook line and sinker for hillery. it was under clinton that america started being sold off.Hippies all protested got tear gassed and beaten all round the world, but here is Justin and some "friends" of his starting to recognise what the hippies noticed ten years ago.longer.catch up so called educated people. Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:58:01 GMT+1 jacksforge 208. At 5:53pm on 07 Oct 2008, invisibleserendipity wrote:Let me pose this question as I am quite interested in the response.Re: AyersFor those who it seems are not in the least bit rankled by his actions - how do you feel about the Unibomber, Oklahoma City, the Atlanta Olympics or, even the IRA for that matter? Do these folks bother you or are they just not on the same level as Ayers?Not the same.For starters the Ira were way above the level of ayres., and secondly he is now an elected official. is he not. .If white america was so great in the 60's people would not have needed to fight.Americans always referred to IRA bombers as freedom fighters and up to the attacks of 9/11 they were protected by american courts as freedom fighters free speech etc.And that was while they were still bombing.PS America I guarantee if you think the weather underground was bad you just wait till Mc implailim gets in if they do. the weather will be the last subject of discussion.Go america your heading down and I 'm loving the show. Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:55:31 GMT+1 DavidD I'm no authority on this so I'd appreciate some help.As I understand it, after WWII, America demaded that Briton and France (possibly others) pay back their war debt in gold. In the 60s President de Gaulle wanted to repratriate all the Euro Dollars that had flooded Europe, in exchange for their gold backed value. America refused and subsequently unilaterally abandoned the gold standard which led, almost overnight, to a massive increase in the gold price. This was rumoured, at the time, to bring America's gold assets closer to the value of their issued dollars. Closer, but nowhere near the true value. This, to a certain extent, provided the impetus that made the dollar king in the world markets, and replaced the Swiss Franc as the dominant standard currency. Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:54:03 GMT+1 moderate_observer the associations of politicians is a very trivial topic, because if you were to look closely at the associations of all politicians on both sides you would probably be appalled.being someone influential anywhere you know and meet some of the worst types of people sometimes the obama relationship with rezco, its very easy to be an associate of a person like rezco and not be aware of his illegal activites. the same goes for Mccains relationship with Keating. What should matter is if these politicians knowingly assisted these people in anything illegal. criminal charges would apply. Everyone is capable of misjudging someones character so if we as voters attempt to use this to cast judgement on another individual it makes us hypocrites.As for Obama's relationship with Ayers, if he wasnt a close friend with this man then why does it matter? was obama suppose to quit the charity board when ayers joined or was he suppose to sell his house and move because Ayers lived in the same neighborhood? I also havnt heard any criticism about the university of illinois for hiring ayers as a professor, or was it obama who hired him too? lets talk about something that really affects the daily operation of the country, constantly voting based on soap opera and gossip is what got bush elected in the first place, and look how that turned out? even his supporters are paying for his 'great leadership' now. Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:42:29 GMT+1 Twilighttrail To the people who think that banks were "forced to give loans to people who couldn't afford them," please check your facts. Bank were forced to stop relining whole neighborhoods -- usually minority neighborhoods -- meaning that no one living there could get a loan, even if they had perfect credit. Yes, some borrowers made rash decisions, but no one FORCED the banks to do anything but judge people on an individual basis, rather than lump everyone in one area into a pariah category. Above all, no one forced lenders to give out no-asset-no-income loans. Yes, the borrowers should have known better too, but aren't the lenders supposed to to be the most educated about the consequences of making foolish loans? They just figured they would make a pile of dough by bundling up loans they knew were rotten and selling them off to the next buyer, and investors seemed not to know or care that they were engaged in a game of "hot potato." There is plenty of blame to go around without just making stuff up. Lately I meditate a lot on a friend's remark: "I think some of the filthiest words in the English language are 'It's just business.'" A lot of us worldside are now paying for the notion that somehow our personal ethics and our business ethics need have no relationship to one another. Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:28:34 GMT+1 Simon21 208. At 5:53pm on 07 Oct 2008, invisibleserendipity wrote:Let me pose this question as I am quite interested in the response.Re: AyersFor those who it seems are not in the least bit rankled by his actions - how do you feel about the Unibomber, Oklahoma City, the Atlanta Olympics or, even the IRA for that matter? Do these folks bother you or are they just not on the same level as Ayers?"Well Nelson Mandela was a convicted terrorist (unlike Ayers) as well wasn't he and he had been welcomed by Presidents and spoken in the COngress Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:26:07 GMT+1 MagicKirin ref #211I visit Chicago every year on business and enjoy is a great deal.But my perspective and this is not to cast aspersions on your city or any other but why does this guy deserve a job at the University?I would love to see the law saying tenure is a right.I don't think Ayers, Churchill or the Duke 88 deserve to have high paying educational jobs.But back to Obama there is supposidly more information being revealed about William Ayers connection on of all places CNN.I know most Obamaphiles would disregard a Fox News reference Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:15:42 GMT+1 eightypercent # 211 LqwchicagoThank you for your post confirming to us that tolerance and understanding do still exist in America. Some of us have been getting alarmed - particularly by the reports of behaviour at recent McCain/Palin rallies which smack more of 1930's Germany than the rainbow country which we have loved. Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:13:44 GMT+1 DavidD 208Ayers never actually killed or attempted to kill anyone. His bombings were directed at symbolic buildings. Whether he knew what Robbins, and his girlfriend Oughton, were intending when they blew themselves up is another matter.What he did, though, can't be condoned. However, his later projects and acceptance by Illinois University put him back into the mainstream of society. Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:13:28 GMT+1 niceapplepye It is possible, I suppose, that the deregulation movement which began in earnest during the Reagan administration and subsequent proliferation of too-easy credit for everything from automobiles to houses is simply a coincidence. Of course, there were a number of factors in this financial mess we find ourselves in now. However, the easy credit and the tactics used to make it all seem okay did a great deal of economic harm. I recall the true stories of graduates of prestigious business colleges going straight into positions in large brokerage companies, insurance companies, and into investment banking and earning at least a million dollars a month. Some of that largesse went away inthe late Eighties, but much of it kept going behind the scenes. Even the way in which credit card companies exacerbated the growing problem. Soon there were also real estate schemes which involved prchasing a house and taking out a mortgage as large as the bank or other institution would allow. Then the house was sold or rented to own. The equity was used to do more of the same. People were told they could earn so much money in this way they could quit their day jobs and live like millionaires. Then came the loan companies giving a mortgage loan to anyone who was still beathing. This goes on and on.Meanwhile, no one was watching and government did nothing. It was a trainwreck waiting to happen. Now there are people who lived way beyond their means, people who bought homes way beyond their means. Too many people are in debt up to their eyeballs just as one of the old advertisements used to say. I am not persuaded that the lack of oversight and lack of regulation combined with the Me Generation mentality did not cause this disaster. The Democrats did not invent this story to make Republicans look bad. Republicans had most of the legislative control while this entire problem was developing and no one on either side had enough sense or courage to say thisimpending disaster must be stopped must be stopped. That is, they turned a blind eye and some politicians benefitted until the financial system began falling apart like a poorly constructed garment.. Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:09:50 GMT+1 Galed07 Origins of the crisis. In 1972, President Nixon took the USD off the gold standard and opened the door for the international movement of capital. In the 80s, Thatcher and Reagan brought us monetarism and the primacy of the free market. New communication technology further facilitated the international movement of capital, the export of jobs out of the US (and Europe) and the weakening of organised labour, viz a viz, the owners of capital. For example, as Robert Reich has observed, in the 1970s, the top 1% of americans had just 8% of the nations wealth. Today they have 20%, thus reducing markedly the consumer base that economists claim to be the engine of the economy. Their real incomes reduced, working americans resorted to various coping mechanisms to stay in the consumer game, one of these being the increasing use of credit and loans they could ill afford. The origins of the crisis?, the greed of the rich. Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:07:19 GMT+1 dceilar #166 Endorfin#161, dceilarI understand your point, but given that we've had fractional reserve banking in place for over 200 years, I can't think that it's the cause.If we're to have full-reserve banking, we might as well return to the Gold Standard or something like it......which is never going to happen.What we can do, however, is ensure that the reserve percentages are set at higher levels, and that there's far better regulation of the esoteric financial instruments which have been employed in the recent past.Excellent intelligent reply. Fractional-Reserve banking though is not completely innocent in all this. Banks have always had more loans (assets) then deposits (liabilities) (if all savers withdraw their deposits at the same time the bank will run out of money), but when much of its assets turn out bad and savers start withdrawing their deposits something unpleasant starts hitting the fan.The Gold Standard is certainly not an option as you correctly stated.I believe the standard ratio for Fractional-Reserve banking in the past has been 1 to 10; presently, I hear, its 1 to 30 or 40! Can we regulate banks to the 1 to 10 ratio without stifling competition? All this is hypothetical until the current problems are solved. Is Keynesianism the way to go presently? Tue 07 Oct 2008 17:00:47 GMT+1 DavidD A few years ago Henry Kissinger bemoaned the lack of intelligent and thoughtful public discourse and remarked that the men who crafted the constitution must be turning in their graves. I wonder how those men would have regarded Palin? I'd love to hear Kissingers private thoughts on the subject. This woman is an embarrassment to everthing that Americans say they value about their country. Is this what the founding fathers envisaged. What really irks me is that both McCain and Obama have fought long campaigns and been chosen by their party to represent them. Palin has done neither, yet she has taken it upon herself to insult and besmirch the Democratic candidate with nothing other than innuendo and spite. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:59:30 GMT+1 lawchicago As a Chicagoan maybe I can lend some insight about the city with broad shoulders.I like many ,here in the windy city,come into contact with a multitude of people poltitically covering the spectrum .In a diverse and multicultural city Chicago much like London is a polygot of people and perspectives , One finds oneself with people of various stripes on a routine basis . We may not agree with all perspectives but they do repesent an opinion . We have become a tolerant lot ( maybe not as tolerant as London but a great evolution from the days of the 1968 convention riot ).Ayers is a professor of Education at the University of Illinois Chicago . Dispite what he may have done as a young man he seems to have made a reputaion for himself that has earned him a place in the the community.His wife is a Associate Professor at Northwestern University Law School and also has had issues as a young woman.Hyde Park, the neighborhood of Obama is in the backyard of the University of Chicago where Obama taught for years .It would not be uncommon for any academic to be in contact in some sense with people of a wide a variety of orientations and opinions.Merely being there does not make any of us fellow travelers .If my math is correct ,Obama was eight and in Hawaii when Ayers had his issues of radicalism . I also have taught at a University in Chicago . It is inevitable that we brush against many who we may not share the same world perspective .Thats what makes Chicago interesting I invite anyone who has not been to Chicago to take a look . You might be suprised at how far we have come . Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:57:44 GMT+1 Gary_A_Hill The Notting Hill Hammer (#195), you hit the nail on the head. Ayers, Dohrn, and the "Weather Underground" were consigned to the dustbin of history long ago. Hardly anybody remembers them. The irony is that they are now probably enjoying their extra 15 minutes of fame. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:57:15 GMT+1 neil_a2 Hmm, "If ignorance is bliss", then surely many posters here must be very happy.The "balanced budget" under Clinton was a result of revisionist accounting practices and extrapolation of unrealized savings. It sounded good, but was not real.Did Bush waste enormous resources on Iraq? Absolutely! The US did not have resources to fund this mess. Iraq did not cause the financial crisis. China, Oil, and India did.HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo and President Clinton caused mortgage changes (imposed on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) in the early 1990's to expand home ownership for lower incomes. Clinton made it worse in August, 1999 by raising borrowing limits.Very poor banking/loan/mortgage broker practices in the 2000's allowed the earlier bad-idea to manifest to the current mess.It was worsened even more in 2004 when the lending ceilings were raised further to sustain the inflated prices. (I understand Obama voted for this, but have not verified. I really do not care.)Why did it happen under Bush instead of Clinton? Because the realization that the value of real estate is coupled to the income base that can pay for it. As long as real estate went up price (not value), the bloated loans were coverable.America enjoyed a credit frenzy under Clinton. It was perceived as "prosperity". The wealth never really existed. We passed stock ownership and real estate ownership back and forth at ever increasing prices. America borrowed against the higher prices.Now that the dust is settling, it is most unfortunate that those who lived within their means have to fund those who did not.Why did the confidence fall? It is not Bush.It is because American manufacturing, services, and killed professions that produce goods and services were all outsourced or diluted by the H1B and L1B programs.Clinton's making China the most favored nation completely and thoroughly destroyed entire American industries. (Textile, furniture, much manufacturing) It created industries, such as the export of raw and reclaimed materials.The 1990's and 2000's diluted the American ability to actually generate goods and services (produce wealth).The 1990's and 2000's diluted the American ability to pay for (mortgaged) real estate.So much for Clinton's, "new economy and end of the business cycle". Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:55:59 GMT+1 invisibleserendipity Let me pose this question as I am quite interested in the response.Re: AyersFor those who it seems are not in the least bit rankled by his actions - how do you feel about the Unibomber, Oklahoma City, the Atlanta Olympics or, even the IRA for that matter? Do these folks bother you or are they just not on the same level as Ayers? Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:53:19 GMT+1 OhNeverMind Oh and well done Mr Webb. You seem to be getting the picture in focus this time. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:51:32 GMT+1 OhNeverMind Hi all. Suggest you all go over to YouTube.It has a nice piece there which explains it all. It goes a tad fast, so you just have to use the pause button occasionally to get the details. Here's the link. And I hope it works on you like it did me: Pip! Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:50:35 GMT+1 DavidD AndreaThere are also a number of Americans who regard the Kent State shootings in the same way as others regard Ayers. The difference, though, is that it was the state that killed its' citizens, not the other way round. Or do you agree with the words of Ohio Gov. Rhodes describing the protesting students that:"They're worse than the brown shirts and the communist element and also the nightriders and the vigilantes," Rhodes said. "They're the worst type of people that we harbor in America. I think that we're up against the strongest, well-trained, militant, revolutionary group that has ever assembled in America."America always has been a divided society, on many levels, and and your America is not the America that other citizens see and experience. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:39:43 GMT+1 jacksforge This post has been Removed Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:28:45 GMT+1 jacksforge Get caught up.Anti globalisation supporters will not be as surprised as you all seem to be. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:28:34 GMT+1 jacksforge This post has been Removed Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:28:18 GMT+1 jacksforge This post has been Removed Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:28:02 GMT+1 jacksforge This post has been Removed Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:27:41 GMT+1 jacksforge This post has been Removed Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:27:25 GMT+1 jacksforge This post has been Removed Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:26:48 GMT+1 jacksforge ninny really come back with a defence you, never seem to be very careful in your answer. or lack of answer. it was me that mentioned your people lynching.-----------------------"Ninny Your fellow White Folk were lynching people."You both are very troubled. Why not take it somewhere else. -------------------Your troubled you psychotic weirdo. Your about to vote for a bimbo because your too mock me for mentioning the lynchings. DID THEY NOT HAPPEN?DID YOU ANSWER WHAT WOULD BE THE RESPONSE TO PEOPLE THAT ASSOCIATED WITH THE CLAN. NOAs always, just call US freaks and sit back feeling happy with your racist self.If she was not racist she might have said all clan activity is wrong. she ignored it AGAIN.Every time I have asked you a question likje this Ninny you run from it. so tell me what you think of ex clan members being in the house or senate? Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:23:55 GMT+1 goleooo AndreainNY, you BETCHA!you betcha i am troubled. YOu know what troubles me?It troubles me that my country is full of people like you. It troubles me that ignorant people decide the fate of my family, it troubles me that angry religious extremists (christians in this case) manipulate the ignorants in my country to go and call terrorist one of their own countryman. It troubles me that my country no longer is a symbol of freedom in the world but a symbol of hatred. It troubles me to hear from international friends that America is part of the problem in the world rather than a solution. It troubles me that people are killing their families because they can't get a job and with dignity do the sacred job of keeping a family alive. It troubles me that this country is full of haters like you, who hate non-whites, and hide behind your religious primitive ideas. God does not want you, God does not want people like you. People like you, liars, hypocrites, rich who take advantage of the poor of the world were the ones who killed what you like to call your god. It troubles me that this country of my fathers, is so near its doom that my ignorant country men do not realize. Rome was not destroyed in one day either, but America has started its day the moment Palin was brought on stage. Ignorance is valued more than knowledge in this once great country. I know it doesn't trouble your type. But I hope that if you have a family to follow you, you live long enough to see their lives destroyed by your ignorance. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:23:34 GMT+1 The Notting Hill Hammer 180 AndreainNY wrote:The issue with Ayers has to do with Obama's blind eye for people's integrity when it comes to his own advancement.If you can explain why Obama would hide his relationship with Ayers, you'll understand why the relationship matters.As for why Ayers has been accepted in Chicago, this is probably better explained by someone from Chicago. His acceptance there doesn't mean that he's acceptable to people in other parts of the country...................................................Clutching at straws now? Also avoiding the Keating issue, which is one of substance unlike this canard. The fact is most people neither know or care who Ayers was 30 years ago. This is an issue strictly for the lunatic fringe. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:16:26 GMT+1 jacksforge mods put one up. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:15:47 GMT+1 jacksforge mods can offer no reason for striking a letter just because it says get a life to justin Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:15:09 GMT+1 jacksforge This post has been Removed Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:14:34 GMT+1 jacksforge Tina fey does not even deserve credit for doing palin well, she happens to look similar and she just repeats the dumb palins words.SNL "may " have palin back on. Bull put the witch in coventry. Ignore her.Spitting image reamed people every week. it was satire. this SNL fawning to get viewing figures, will just play in to the "oh look she can take a joke "rubbish.She is a joke that should be a given.If they want to make a point why not "red Wedge "it and just say." palin is appaling stupid windup doll in bith ways.Winds people up. and speaks like she has had something twisted in the lower part of her body.I wonder where they put the key in. but not for long.Right wingers. WIN I love to see your country crumble under Palin.That would amuse us commies so much.Vote Palin-- End America.Oh and J mc criminallyinsane is irrelevant. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:11:52 GMT+1 AndreainNY "Only psychopaths like AndreainNY would vote for Palin. These people would love to burn a cross!""Ninny Your fellow White Folk were lynching people."You both are very troubled. Why not take it somewhere else. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:10:22 GMT+1 DavidD One of the few benefits to come out of this, is that the futures speculators who bought long in the oil and corn market are really seeing their backsides. I wonder when these losses will hit the market? Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:08:14 GMT+1 AndreainNY 177. eightypercent:AndreaYou insist that the Omaba's knowledge of Ayers in that they lived near to each other and both were working in the field of educational improvement is "important to many Americans".In the same vein, the Keating Five scandal, being on the board of an ultra right wing organisation with links to the Iran Contras, and associating with members of the Alaska Independence Group are also "important to many Americans".Why, if Ayers is such a toxic person, has he been left in peace to work in the public arena for more nearly thirty years ?**************************The issue with Ayers has to do with Obama's blind eye for people's integrity when it comes to his own advancement.If you can explain why Obama would hide his relationship with Ayers, you'll understand why the relationship matters.As for why Ayers has been accepted in Chicago, this is probably better explained by someone from Chicago. His acceptance there doesn't mean that he's acceptable to people in other parts of the country. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:08:11 GMT+1 jacksforge 175 Ninny you are about to vote for a vacuous bimbo with a geriatric old frump because she makes a good cheer leader.again get real. Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:05:32 GMT+1 jacksforge Bill Ayres is a hero to america. or he should be. Just as those throwing rocks in seattle should be heros.These people told you things were wrong, you ignored them, now we or you'll suffer.Ninny Your fellow White Folk were lynching people.lets get the dirt of every southern senator see how many associated with the clan.BET YOU THATS A HIGH NUMBER.Clan were they terrorist in your eyes?Or are they just misguided good old boys.start digging Tue 07 Oct 2008 16:02:39 GMT+1