• About

Desperado's Outpost

Desperado's Outpost

Category Archives: Obama

The Rule of Law or the Rule of Political Expediency

06 Wednesday May 2009

Posted by Craig in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

conspires, criminal law, laws, no exceptional circumstances, prosecution, torture, treaties, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.S. Code

I know there are those who are tired of the subject of torture and the prosecution of those who either committed, authorized, or provided legal justification for these acts, but to my mind there is no more important topic.

It gets to the heart of what the United States of America stands for. Are we a country that abides by our own laws and international treaties which we signed and pledged to uphold, or do   adherence to the law and treaty obligations cease in the aftermath of a terrorist attack and in the name of political expediency?

If we are the former and not the latter, then this should be unacceptable:

“An internal Justice Department inquiry has concluded that Bush administration lawyers committed serious lapses of judgment in writing secret memorandums authorizing brutal interrogations but that they should not be prosecuted, according to government officials briefed on its findings.

The findings, growing out of an inquiry that started in 2004, would represent a stinging rebuke of the lawyers and their legal arguments.

But they would stop short of the criminal referral sought by some human rights advocates, who have suggested that the lawyers could be prosecuted as part of a criminal conspiracy to violate the anti-torture statute.”

U.S. Code, Title 18,2340A says:

(a)  Offense.— Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

b)  Jurisdiction.— There is jurisdiction over the activity prohibited in subsection (a) if—
(1) the alleged offender is a national of the United States; or
(2) the alleged offender is present in the United States, irrespective of the nationality of the victim or alleged offender.

(c)  Conspiracy.— A person who conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties (other than the penalty of death) as the penalties prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.

Article 4 of the U.N, Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment signed by President Reagan in 1988 clearly states:

“Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.”

Article 2 of the same document:

“No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.”

So I’ll ask again, are we a country where the rule of law prevails or not? Is the United States a country that can be trusted to keep it’s word or not? To me the answer is clear.

If We Sink to the Level of the Terrorists, Haven’t They Won?

22 Wednesday Apr 2009

Posted by Craig in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

CIA, CNS News, Dennis Blair, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, memo, New York Times, Obama, Osama bin Laden, remarks, waterboarding

There are a couple of articles in the news this morning that are bringing cries of ‘See, we told you so’ from the defenders of the so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

One is from CNS News, which says that the waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed yielded information that prevented a terrorist attack on Los Angeles.

The other is from the New York Times, which contains this quote from a memo sent by national intelligence director Admiral Dennis Blair to his staff:

“High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country.”

Those are headlines you are likely to see from those who seek to justify the use of torture. What you aren’t likely to read in those same places is this quote, also from Admiral Blair, also in the NYT article:

“The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.”

So I’ll ask you, should the policy of the United States of America regarding interrogation be ‘whatever it takes?’ Do we adopt the tactics, such as waterboarding, used by Imperial Japan in WWII, tactics which were later prosecuted as war crimes, and which were common in Pol Pot’s Cambodia?

Personally, I’ll side with President Obama, who said this in his remarks to the CIA:

“What makes the United States special, and what makes you special, is precisely the fact that we are willing to uphold our values and ideals even when it’s hard — not just when it’s easy; even when we are afraid and under threat — not just when it’s expedient to do so. That’s what makes us different.”

One more question. If we sink to the level of Osama bin Laden and his followers who seek to do us harm, haven’t they won?

Prosecute The Torturers

19 Sunday Apr 2009

Posted by Craig in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

accountable, CIA, Justice Department, look forward, Marquis de Cheney, memos, Obama, torture, waterboarding

To prosecute or not to prosecute, that is the question. With the release of the Justice Department memos last week detailing the so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” (aka torture) used by the CIA, the debate has begun over what to do to those who were involved.

I fully understand the desire of the administration to, as the President said, “look forward and not backward.” We are facing the most serious economic crisis since the Great Depression and the President wants the focus to be on getting our economy back on a solid footing. I get that.

But at the same time I believe that the people responsible for the despicable acts described in those memos need to be held accountable. Not only the people who carried out those acts but those who approved and condoned their use.

The reason being that if we don’t hold them accountable it seems to me we are setting a dangerous precedent for (God forbid) a future administration with a vice-president like the Marquis de Cheney.

A vice-president who would have this to say about waterboarding:

“I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the process cleared, as the agency in effect came in and wanted to know what they could and couldn’t do. And they talked to me, as well as others, to explain what they wanted to do. And I supported it. ”

And this:

“We proceeded very cautiously; we checked, we had the Justice Department issue the requisite opinions in order to know where the bright lines were that you could not cross. The professionals involved in that program were very, very cautious, very careful, wouldn’t do anything without making certain it was authorized and that it was legal. And any suggestion to the contrary is just wrong.”

“Very cautiously” and knowing “where the lines were that you could not cross.” Really? See if you think this sounds cautious and does not cross any lines.

“According to the May 30, 2005 Bradbury memo, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003 and Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times in August 2002″.

That’s 6 times a day, every day for a month for Mohammed. That’s cautious and not crossing lines?

A couple of conclusions with which I agree. First from Donklephant:

“The point isn’t whether or not Mohammed is a bad man. There’s no doubt he is. The point is that we can’t allow ourselves to act just as despicable as him. I mean, Bush said they hate our freedoms, right? Well what happens when we compromise our values to mirror theirs? Doesn’t that make us less free?”
And this from Emptywheel:
“The CIA wants you to believe waterboarding is effective. Yet somehow, it took them 183 applications of the waterboard in a one month period to get what they claimed was cooperation out of KSM.

That doesn’t sound very effective to me.”

So back to the question, to prosecute or not to prosecute?

Despite the possible loss of focus on economic issues, I see the option of not prosecuting having far greater repercussions than that of going forward with prosecution.

The Financial Industry-Congressional Complex

28 Saturday Mar 2009

Posted by Craig in Election 2008, Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

congressional, Eisenhower, financial industry, military-industrial complex, Sold Out, Wall Street, Washington D.C.

In his farewell address to the nation on January 17, 1961 President Eisenhower warned the country to be vigilant about the relationship between the government, the armed forces, and the industries and commercial interests they support–what he called the “military-industrial complex.”

Eisenhower spoke of what he called the “grave implications” of allowing the power and influence of that triad to get out of control:

“Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

 

I would submit to you that if the words “financial industry” and “congressional” are substituted for “military-industrial” that is exactly what we have seen take place over the last decade and has led to our current economic situation.

We have the financial services industry and all it’s associated tentacles, Wall Street for short, motivated by greed, aided and abetted by policy makers in Washington, D.C. driven by their lust for campaign contributions and power, who have, in either their shortsightedness or outright corruption, sold us all out.

Speaking of sold out, here is an article in Wall Street Watch which summarizes a 231-page report by Essential Information and the Consumer Education Foundation with those words in the title.

 “The report, “Sold Out: How Wall Street and Washington Betrayed America,” shows that, from 1998-2008, Wall Street investment firms, commercial banks, hedge funds, real estate companies and insurance conglomerates made $1.725 billion in political contributions and spent another $3.4 billion on lobbyists, a financial juggernaut aimed at undercutting federal regulation.

 

Nearly 3,000 officially registered federal lobbyists worked for the industry in 2007 alone. The report documents a dozen distinct deregulatory moves that, together, led to the financial meltdown.

These include prohibitions on regulating financial derivatives; the repeal of regulatory barriers between commercial banks and investment banks; a voluntary regulation scheme for big investment banks; and federal refusal to act to stop predatory subprime lending.”

Here are some of the deregulatory steps taken between 1998 and 2008:

* In 1999, Congress repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, which had prohibited the merger of commercial banking and investment banking.

* Regulatory rules permitted off-balance sheet accounting — tricks that enabled banks to hide their liabilities.

* The Clinton administration blocked the Commodity Futures Trading Commission from regulating financial derivatives — which became the basis for massive speculation.

* Congress in 2000 prohibited regulation of financial derivatives when it passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.

* The Securities and Exchange Commission in 2004 adopted a voluntary regulation scheme for investment banks that enabled them to incur much higher levels of debt.

* Rules adopted by global regulators at the behest of the financial industry would enable commercial banks to determine their own capital reserve requirements, based on their internal “risk-assessment models.”

* Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac expanded beyond their traditional scope of business and entered the subprime market, ultimately costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.

* The abandonment of antitrust and related regulatory principles enabled the creation of too-big-to-fail megabanks, which engaged in much riskier practices than smaller banks.

* Beset by conflicts of interest, private credit rating companies incorrectly assessed the quality of mortgage-backed securities; a 2006 law handcuffed the SEC from properly regulating the firms.

Not so coincidentally, during the same period, 1998-2008:

* Commercial banks spent more than $154 million on campaign contributions, while investing $363 million in officially registered lobbying:

* Accounting firms spent $68 million on campaign contributions and $115 million on lobbying;

* Insurance companies donated more than $218 million and spent more than $1.1 billion on lobbying;

* Securities firms invested more than $504 million in campaign contributions, and an additional $576 million in lobbying. Included in this total: private equity firms contributed $56 million to federal candidates and spent $33 million on lobbying; and hedge funds spent $32 million on campaign contributions (about half in the 2008 election cycle).

And before any finger-pointing begins, Wall Street doesn’t care about party, they are willing to purchase whoever is in power at the time. .

“The betrayal was bipartisan: about 55 percent of the political donations went to Republicans and 45 percent to Democrats, primarily reflecting the balance of power over the decade. Democrats took just more than half of the financial sector’s 2008 election cycle contributions.

The financial sector buttressed its political strength by placing Wall Street expatriates in top regulatory positions, including the post of Treasury Secretary held by two former Goldman Sachs chairs, Robert Rubin and Henry Paulson.

These companies drew heavily from government in choosing their lobbyists. Surveying 20 leading financial firms, “Sold Out” finds 142 of the lobbyists they employed from 1998-2008 were previously high-ranking officials or employees in the Executive Branch or Congress.”

 

In a 3 word summation ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we’ve been had.

The President and the Teleprompter

26 Thursday Mar 2009

Posted by Craig in Election 2008, McCain, Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Hinderaker. Power Line, McCain, Obama, Palin, Sean, teleprompter

A recurring theme among the detractors of President Obama has been his reliance on a teleprompter. Anyone who spends time on the internet has seen it on an almost daily basis.

In the minds of some this apparently is an indicator of a lack of intelligence, as ridiculous as that is when speaking about a Harvard graduate, editor of The Law Review, and author of 2 books.

One of the bloggers on the far-right, John Hinderaker, who writes for Power Line, said this about a recent speech by President Obama in which he mis-pronounced the word “Orion.”

“Everyone knows that Barack Obama is lost without his teleprompter, but his latest blunder, courtesy of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, via the Corner, suggests that the teleprompter may not be enough unless it includes phonetic spellings.

So evidently we have to add astronomy to history and economics as subjects of which Obama is remarkably ignorant. I’m beginning to fear that our President has below-average knowledge of the world. Not for a President, but for a middle-aged American.”

 

Just as a point of reference, this is the same Mr. Hinderaker who wrote this shortly after last year’s election:

“Obama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn’t raise his standards, he will exceed Bush’s total before he is inaugurated.”

 

But you know, the more I think about it, the more I tend to agree with Hinderaker and others. Only a complete idiot would have to rely on a teleprompter when speaking to the country. Right, Senator McCain?

 mccaitele

 

Right, Governor Palin?

 palintele

 

Right, Sean?

hannitytele 

 

Oh no, say it ain’t so.

 reaganteleprompter

 

Oh well, I guess it’s back to the birth certificate nonsense.

Brevity Is The Soul of Wit

24 Saturday Jan 2009

Posted by Craig in Election 2008, Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

economic stimulus package, I won, Obama, Republicans

“Brevity is the soul of wit.”

President Obama yesterday confirmed these words, spoken by Lord Polonius in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, in this two word retort to would-be Republican obstructionists and heel-draggers who are question the size and scope of his proposed economic stimulus package.

“I won.”

From Politico:

“President Obama listened to Republican gripes about his stimulus package during a meeting with congressional leaders Friday morning – but he also left no doubt about who’s in charge of these negotiations. “I won,” Obama noted matter-of-factly, according to sources familiar with the conversation.

The exchange arose as top House and Senate Republicans expressed concern to the president about the amount of spending in the package.”

More from the New York Post:

“Not that Obama was gloating. He was just explaining that he aims to get his way on stimulus package and all other legislation, sources said, noting his unrivaled one-party control of both congressional chambers.

“We are experiencing an unprecedented economic crisis that has to be dealt with and dealt with rapidly,” Obama said during the meeting.”

But the Republicans, whose symbol of an elephant needs to be replaced by an ostrich, apparently don’t think economic stimulus is necessary. According to the National Republican Congressional Committee web site:

“Thanks to Republican economic policies, the U.S. economy is robust and job creation is strong.”

As someone commented here earlier this week, I wonder what color the sky is in the Republican’s world.

But President Obama wasn’t finished with Republicans, adding this:

“You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,” he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.”

I don’t know about you, but I’ve been sleeping better at night since January 20th. My country is once again in good hands.

Right-Wing Whackos, Pt. 2

22 Thursday Jan 2009

Posted by Craig in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh

Speaking of right-wing whackos, here’s a couple more. Glenn Beck said this about the Reverend Joseph Lowery’s benediction at President Obama’s inauguration on Tuesday;

“America is with you today, Mr. President. And you’re right, we are all tired of the partisan bickering, the racial divides, the greed and the corruption. There are many people in this country who didn’t vote for you, myself included, that actually want you to succeed. My family has been down on our knees for the last month praying for you and your family and your safety. You may be fascinated to learn that many of us don’t hate minorities. That we don’t want to starve the poor. And we’re perfectly fine with brown sticking around.”

Tired of the racial divides? Don’t hate minorities? No problem with Latinos? Mr. Beck’s memory is a short one.

“Every undocumented worker is an illegal immigrant, a criminal and a drain on our dwindling resources.”

“I’ve got a quick message for illegal aliens if you happen to be watching. You better start packing your bags. And to the politicians in Washington who are soft on illegal immigration, start packing up your office, because when the terrorists strike, which they will, and we find out that they’re here illegally from some other country, we will be telling all of you to get the hell out.”

“Somebody comes across the border in the middle of the night, why are they doing that? Really, three reasons: One, they’re terrorists; two, they’re escaping the law; or three, they’re hungry. They can’t make a living in their own dirtbag country.”

But not to be outdone, the Grand Poobah of the Organization of Big Mouth Blowhards, Rush Limbaugh spewed this about his hopes and dreams for the Obama administration:

Somebody say something about the Republican Party reaching out to minorities? Pistol-packin’ mama?

Memo to Democrats: No Guts, No Glory

05 Monday Jan 2009

Posted by Craig in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

economic stimulus package, government spending, Obama, Republicans, tax cuts

The details of President-elect Barack Obama’s proposed economic stimulus package are starting to emerge, and to be frank, I am less than impressed by what I have seen so far. From the New York Times:

“President-elect Barack Obama plans to include about $300 billion in tax cuts for workers and businesses in his economic recovery program, advisers said Sunday, as his team seeks to win over Congressional skeptics worried that he was too focused on government spending.

The legislation Mr. Obama is developing with Congressional Democrats will devote about 40 percent of the cost to tax cuts, including his centerpiece campaign promise to provide credits up to $500 for most workers, costing roughly $150 billion. The package will also include more than $100 billion in tax incentives for businesses to create jobs and invest in equipment or factories.”

I understand the need to fulfill the campaign promise of a middle-class tax cut, and giving businesses incentives for creating jobs, but it seems to me that devoting 40% of the stimulus package to tax cuts is too much.

Here’s a chart from Moody’s that shows “bang for the buck” when it comes to tax cuts vs. government spending. The figures are dollars added to the GDP in relation to dollars spent.

bang-for-the-buck

As you can see, the greater boost to the GDP comes from the last four spending increases rather than tax cuts or rebates.

But the thing that bothers me most about the proposed package is the reason for making tax cuts such a large part. From the Wall Street Journal:

“The size of the proposed tax cuts — which would account for about 40% of a stimulus package that could reach $775 billion over two years — is greater than many on both sides of the aisle in Congress had anticipated. It may make it easier to win over Republicans who have stressed that any initiative should rely more heavily on tax cuts rather than spending.”

I respect President-elect Obama’s desire for bi-partisanship, but isn’t it the suddenly fiscally conservative Republicans, whose policies of big tax cuts, un-regulated markets, and laissez-faire capitalism, have put us into the economic ditch in which we now find ourselves?

Also, the President-elect, and virtually every economist worthy of the title has said that our current economic predicament calls for unprecedented, bold actions. I don’t see kowtowing to Republicans as either unprecedented or bold. It reeks of same old, same old to me.

I realize that Democrats passing a stimulus package by a straight party line vote in the House, and by picking off one or two moderate Republicans in the Senate, is a big gamble. If it works, Democrats get all the credit, if it doesn’t they get all the blame.

But to bring it down to simple terms that I can understand, every gym that I have ever walked into in my 52 years has a sign with some variation of the theme, “No guts, no glory.” I think that’s what the majority of us voted for in November, and that’s what we expect, a different way of how business is done in D.C. Isn’t that what “change” is all about?

Corrupt. Arrogant. Stupid. Blagojevich Is Three for Three

10 Wednesday Dec 2008

Posted by Craig in Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Blagojevich, corrupt, governors, Illinois

Corrupt politicians are nothing new to Americans, and are as familiar as an old pair of shoes to the people of the state of Illinois when it comes to their governors. Consider Rod Blagojevich’s four immediate predecessors.

George Ryan (1999-2003) was convicted of 16 charges of conspiracy, fraud, and lying under oath, and now makes his home in federal prison. By the way, the prosecutor who put Ryan in the crossbar hotel was none other than Patrick Fitzgerald. Does that name ring a bell, Blago?

James Edgar (1991-1999) was indicted, but not charged, with giving a sweetheart deal to a major campaign contributor.

James Thompson (1977-1991) appears to be the cleanest of the recent lot. He never had any legal problems, but his law firm did represent Ryan. By comparison to the other governors, that would make Thompson Snow White.

Daniel Walker (1973-1977) was sentenced to 7 years in a federal prison for participating in a savings and loan scandal after he left office.

So if Blagojevich goes to jail the state of Illinois will be 3 for 5 in governors spending time behind bars. And before anyone screams “liberal Democrats” just for the record the corruption is bi-partisan, Blagojevich and Walker are Democrats, Ryan and Edgar are Republicans.

But corrupt is one thing. Corrupt, arrogant, and stupid is the trifecta that will ensure some serious time in the federal pen, and on these counts Blagojevich is 3 for 3. Consider that he said this on Monday:

 

Blagojevich made these remarks knowing that; (a) he has long been in the cross-hairs of the US Attorney who put his predecessor behind bars, and ( b) that US Attorney has a well-established reputation for being a pit bull when it comes to prosecuting corruption involving public officials.

Corrupt, check. Arrogant, check. Stupid, check and checkmate. Congratulations Governor Blagojevich, the next position for you to sell to the highest bidder will be that of cell mate.

Paul Krugman: “What Do You Mean We”?

01 Monday Dec 2008

Posted by Craig in Election 2008, Obama, Politics, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Lawrence Summers, New York Times, op-ed, Paul Krugman, President-elect Obama, Timothy Geithner

With all due respect to Timothy Geithner, Lawrence Summers, and the rest of President-elect Obama’s economic team, there is one name I would like to have seen included on that list–that of Nobel prize winning economist Paul Krugman.

Here’s why. From a Krugman op-ed piece in the New York Times recently:

“A few months ago I found myself at a meeting of economists and finance officials, discussing — what else? — the crisis. There was a lot of soul-searching going on. One senior policy maker asked, “Why didn’t we see this coming?”

There was, of course, only one thing to say in reply, so I said it: “What do you mean ‘we,’ white man?”

Seriously, though, the official had a point. Some people say that the current crisis is unprecedented, but the truth is that there were plenty of precedents, some of them of very recent vintage. Yet these precedents were ignored. And the story of how “we” failed to see this coming has a clear policy implication — namely, that financial market reform should be pressed quickly, that it shouldn’t wait until the crisis is resolved.

About those precedents: Why did so many observers dismiss the obvious signs of a housing bubble, even though the 1990s dot-com bubble was fresh in our memories?

Why did so many people insist that our financial system was “resilient,” as Alan Greenspan put it, when in 1998 the collapse of a single hedge fund, Long-Term Capital Management, temporarily paralyzed credit markets around the world?

Why did almost everyone believe in the omnipotence of the Federal Reserve when its counterpart, the Bank of Japan, spent a decade trying and failing to jump-start a stalled economy?

One answer to these questions is that nobody likes a party pooper. While the housing bubble was still inflating, lenders were making lots of money issuing mortgages to anyone who walked in the door; investment banks were making even more money repackaging those mortgages into shiny new securities; and money managers who booked big paper profits by buying those securities with borrowed funds looked like geniuses, and were paid accordingly. Who wanted to hear from dismal economists warning that the whole thing was, in effect, a giant Ponzi scheme?”

Put more succinctly by Upton Sinclair:

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”

Mr. Krugman’s conclusion, and one I hope is heeded by the Obama administration, is that now is the time not only to focus on the short-term crisis, but to make the long-term fixes that will prevent the next one from occurring.

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Recent Posts

  • Turn Out the Lights, the Revolution’s Over
  • Climbing Aboard the Hillary Train
  • You Say You Want a Revolution…
  • Proud to be a War Criminal
  • Drug Testing Welfare Applicants Struck Down in Florida

Archives

  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • April 2014
  • January 2014
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008

Blogroll

  • Bankster USA
  • Down With Tyranny
  • Firedoglake
  • Memeorandum
  • naked capitalism
  • Newshoggers
  • Obsidian Wings
  • Taylor Marsh
  • The Market Ticker
  • Tom Dispatch
  • Zero Hedge

Categories

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 7 other subscribers
  • RSS - Posts
  • RSS - Comments

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Desperado's Outpost
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Desperado's Outpost
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...