Bookmark and Share

Who: Kimball Corson. Text and Photos not disclaimed or that are obviously not mine are copyright (c) Kimball Corson 2004-2013
Port: Lake Pleasant, AZ
View Complete Profile »
SailBlogs Friends
An Expanded Overview on the Effects of Deflation
Kimball Corson
12/19/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

An initial response might well be, "Oh Goody, now I can buy things cheaper and I can save more, without inflation undermining my saved dollars" And that is true, but, knowing prices are dropping, perhaps you will delay your larger purchases as well, thinking prices will be lower next month and save even more now. Now what if everyone started doing that? That is a whole lot of lower current consumption spending in the economy and that means aggregate demand will fall, slowing growth or perhaps even shrinking the economy.

Remember today's government and consumer spending and volume of exports are tomorrows income. Reduce any or all of those spending categories and growth in the economy slows or, if there is no growth, the the economy just shrinks into recession or worse, a depression, depending on how vicious the deflationary spiral becomes. The situation can truly become nasty.

Your "Oh, Goody" might also change, as you think about the impact of falling prices on your mortgage and credit card debt. You now have to pay those debts back with dollars that buy more, which is to say you have to give up more purchasing power to make your debt payments, which hurts you but helps your creditors, assuming you don't default. So falling prices hurt debtors and might help creditors, as well.

Presently, we know commodity prices are falling especially oil which is used to manufacture a lot of things. Other commodities -- metals, lumber, etc. -- are also used in manufacturing and their prices are falling too. That means manufacturing costs are dropping so manufacturers and retailers can drop their prices too while still maintaining their margins, causing prices to fall further. But as prices fall, so does consumer demand for goods and services, as explained, Manufacturers and retailers like higher, not lower prices prices. Lower prices tend to squeeze their margins because of lower sales from reduced aggregate demand. Also, greater uncertainty attends the situation, and people curb their business and entrepreneurial activities in the face of rising uncertainty. This slows or shrinks the economy further.

As the economy slows or shrinks, manufacturers and retailers then tend to lay off employees mostly and/or sometimes reduce their wages. This further shrinks the economy and reduces aggregate demand further. This also reduces the demand for raw materials or commodities to manufacture goods and cause their prices to drop even further, exacerbating the problem. Creditor defaults and bankruptcies rise further injuring consumers. A vicious accelerating circle attends, with a growing downward spiral. This is the major downside of the ups and downs that are capitalism's Achilles heel.

Economic growth is greatest with slight inflation in the range of 1 to 2 percent. Economic contraction is greater, the greater the rate of deflation. Economic collapse is the end game of deflation. We are clearly headed toward deflation just now (Republican predictions of inflation notwithstanding). How serious it will become remains to be seen.

Misconceptions About Gold
Kimball Corson
12/19/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

Gold, like many other commodities is in a bear market, meaning its price is falling relative to stable currencies. Some claim this is a mistaken view because when a currency collapses, the price of gold in that currency rises so gold is a good store of value.

This is nonsense.

If gold prices are falling in terms of other stable currencies, gold is a quite generally poor store of value. US bonds and dollars are better, as is any currency that has significant price stability. All are better than gold even in terms of the collapsing currency. The fact gold's price has risen in terms of the collapsing currency does not negate this.

Specifically, that many should prefer gold to Rubles just now does not mean US dollars and bonds are not better holdings than gold because gold's price is falling in US dollars. and other currencies. The thinking of some folks over on ZeroHedge is badly muddled on this point. If Russians might wish they held gold just now instead of Rubles, they should instead wish even harder they held dollars and US bonds instead of Rubles. Both are better stores of value because gold prices measured in dollars are falling.

Will Oil Exacerbate Other Deflationary Pressures?
Kimball Corson
12/19/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

The fall in oil prices is creating havoc in Russia and oil production in other parts of the world. Petrodollars are becoming increasingly scarce and Arab oil nations are restraining their flow of influence money to the fundamentalist regimes they have supported. But is the downward pressure on prices just restricted to oil? The quick answer is no.

The price of oil, metals, foodstuffs, grains, and other commodities have risen sharply beginning over a decade ago. However, typically, commodity booms come to an end as global economic growth slows, as is the case in recent years Indeed, the overall commodity price index for 2014 has fallen by almost 18 percent, with large drops in indices unrelated to oil. The trend is largely down and this fact puts tremendous downward pressure on retail prices.

The Fed has for the last several years had a hard time reaching its inflation target of 2 percent. It has failed to hit 2 percent for 28 consecutive months. With Russia wobbling from sanctions and the oil price drop, with the Eurozone about to have a triple dip recession, with Germany just barely hanging on, and with China's growth estimates being cut back sharply from just under 7 percent to just under 5 percent., we are approaching a danger zone, where we have quickly slowing global growth, cheaper commodities and falling real wages. Deflation looms.

Therefore oil is likely to be the precursor of a broader deflation in the world economy. Many producers can have price drops while maintaining profits just from the decline in oil prices. Deflation is a strong leading indicator of recession and depression, unfortunately, which is why the Fed is so worried and concerned but not candidly saying so. Here is why it worries.

An inflation rate approaching zero or lower is bad for the economy because of its impact on the behavior of businesses and consumers. Companies are unable to maintain their sales and prices. This hurts profits, and companies usually compensate by cutting wages and firing workers instead. Consumers anticipating falling prices also tend to postpone discretionary purchases thinking they can buy more cheaply later. This can combine to create a vicious circle of less spending and further downward pressure on prices.

It is a deflationary cycle and it can accelerate if it gets out of hand. That is why the Fed is worrying so.

Two Very Fundamental Ideas: Open Discussion and Transparency
Kimball Corson
12/19/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

In a private conversation, a friend raised the question of whether any good can come from discussion of the the hot button topic of IQ that I have been writing about. I thought a public response would be worthwhile.

I think so. I see three reasons for it. First, as a matter of policy, I don't think any topic should be off limits for discussion, Political correctness, if given the reins, can too quickly become a fascism of the mind where control of thought becomes the goal of too many and discussion is driven out or underground and political power moves in to dictate.

Secondly, where IQ discussion is ducked, as in the recent article I criticized on why Asian Americans Do Better Academically, misunderstandings can ensue, and consequences get confused with causes. Muddled thinking is the result and we are are deprived of the true insights which can ensue, such as those attending the consideration of how should we deal with the rise of a more intelligent China as a possible hegemonic threat.

Third, and most importantly, serious and important discussions can come from assessments of IQ. For example, with a quasi Rawlsian approach to the subject of lower IQ's , much can come of it. Not exactly, "each according to their need," but moving in that direction can result in much good. The policy goal could well be a mandate to get everyone functioning well within their limitations, cuing for the start on IQ and Executive Function as the measure. A life based. not-just-academic, affirmative action of sorts, if you will. These matter should be discussed.

Open discussion of how to deal with existing and true situations and their causes is always best, I suggest. Understanding causation is always fundamental. We have to get smarter about things or reality will outrun us. I realize many disagree here, but these are my views, just as I want transparency in place of secrecy, which is also rejected by most Americans. I accept I am in a minority on these issues.

An Atheist's View of Christmas
Kimball Corson
12/19/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

Without its commercial press, Christmas is just fine and should be enjoyed and celebrated by all. Why all, inasmuch as we all are not Christians? Well, Christian ethics have something almost all other religions don't. Something very valuable.
It has the idea of turning the other cheek which is a real fight and war stopper. Islam and Judaism, for examples, find that ethic bizarre and like instead the Old Testament rule of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, a real guarantee of continued fighting.

The Christian notion is not to say we should roll over in the face of the Hitlers of this world. It is to say we act with moderation, restraint and be most slow to anger and react in response. It requires strength and temperance.
Even as an atheist, I can quickly sign on to that idea. So we should all celebrate and enjoy Christmas.

That idea alone justifies doing so to my way of thinking.

An Open Letter to My Alma Mater, Chicago
Kimball Corson
12/16/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

Getting straight to the point, Chicago has an elephant in its parlor and it is a bigger one than at most other top universities. Chicago and its law school distribute to alumni and others fine quarterlies with many glossy and other prints mixed in with articles about how Chicago is at the cutting edge of attacking the world's problems and has multiple outreach programs doing wonderful things in every direction. But the elephant I address here squats unceremoniously in Chicago's parlor. I explain.

The elephant's description in a nut shell runs like this: only 47 percent of working age Americans have full time jobs. 41.3 percent of that labor force has been classified more broadly as unemployed. Labors' share of national income has dropped from 66 percent in 1982 to 58 percent now. Our middle class is disappearing, as its real mean income drops sharply. Millennials, loaded with debt from second rate and on line colleges, sleep without jobs on their parents' couches. The income and wealth distributions in America have been and are skewing badly and rapidly. After much off-shoring of America's productive capability, robotics is coming at us like a freight train and those machines are designed to displace most mid-level and many high level jobs, including many in the already squeezed service sector -- all to further clobber Labor's share, increase Capital's and worsen the skews. A Marxian surplus of labor obtains to depress wages and Labor's share, and Capital's interest based share increases rapidly. With inheritance taxes and top effective income tax rates in the toilet, multiple dynasties of quadrillionairs loom, as Bill Gates has hinted. That is the elephant in the parlor noted briefly.

It comprises a basic taboo set of topics at Chicago when these topics should be at the top of the list for serious research and discussion, especially for the social science departments which instead much more apologize for and rationalize the dynamics of the status quo.

For example, Claudia Golden, a classmate, a Chicago PhD, and now a named professor of economics at Harvard, featured here in a recent article, would have us believe the income skew is due to many losing the race between education and technology. I don't believe it for a heartbeat. To be sure, IQ and educational differentials matter, but not nearly enough, within the structure of things, to explain what we see going on. Thomas Piketty, in "Capital in the 21st Century," explains much more, more cogently.

We have mega problems, I mean a really big elephant in the parlor. Why did Piketty's book have to be written by a professor at the University of Paris and not in America? No bit of happenstance, I suggest. And look at the reactionary ruckus it caused. Why he even said the no-no words, "income distribution" and "wealth distribution" and he offered an explanation for why Labor's share has been shrinking and Capital's growing and suggested both will continue. Heresy, for sure, not to speak of his wealth redistributive remedies. A major uproar; how dare the outsider. His data and analysis are clearly all wrong, was the pundits' saw.

But there are major economic implications here, too. The fact is the rich and wealthy have more than they can spend to the point they hoard and off-shore much income, relatively reducing consumption and investment in American and seriously braking the US economy. For now, they depend significantly on emerging middle class consumers in other countries and global capitalism to close the consumption gap and maintain production and profits. But there are big limits ahead if trends continue.

What we observe is a bought off arch apologist's position in the Academy, especially at Chicago where, for example, Chicago's Nobel Laureate economics professor Robert Lucas, Jr. has argued, based on his models, that all unemployment is voluntary, simply people taking a self-willed vacation. Republican reactionaries of course picked up on that as authority for their "lazy good-for-nothing bums" theory of unemployment . No matter that American jobs were off shored in droves.. But, like turtles, at Chicago, it is apologetics all the way down.

I was at MIT hiring an economics professor as an expert witness in a large antitrust case in 1978, at the time of the big snow blizzard. I asked him why MIT's economics department did not have at least a few Marxists economists on its faculty, like the top European econ departments. He quickly replied, no top econ department in the US could do that because university donors and corporate research sponsors would not tolerate it for a minute. When I arrived at his office, after much difficulty navigating the snow from nearby lodgings, I was shocked to find about 10 econ faculty members in their offices. I asked how and why. The answer was rented helicopters and to have minimal staffing so as to avoid losing a couple of hundred thousand dollars in corporate and other research funding for that day. And that was in 1978.

This story comports with another reason for the skews and the elephant in Chicago's parlor. It was well explained by Harvard's renegade law professor, Lawrence Lessig, who presented, in October and November of this year, the Berlin series of lectures at Chicago on "America: Compromised -- Studies in Institutional Corruption," with the paradigmatic case being Congress, then Finance, the Media and, lastly, but perhaps most importantly, the Academy. Lawrence walked into the lion's den to open the debate which basically went nowhere. The bottom line he presents is these institutions have been bought off, corrupted if you will by the money of the oligarchs who control too much in the economy.

These corrupted institutions, especially government which enacts laws and dispenses favors, work hard 1) to skew and protect the skewing of the income and wealth distributions, 2) protect Capital's growing share of national income and 3) to protect the corrupt systems involved. This is a big part of Chicago's elephant in the parlor, but aside from renegades like Lawrence or untouchables like Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz at Columbia, there is nary a useful peep out of Chicago or too much of the rest of the Academy on point.

Chicago especially needs, if not a renaissance, at least an honest, house cleaning reformation, I am sad to say.

Politically Correct, Bogus Research and the Media
Kimball Corson
12/16/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

Bogus, Indoctrinating Research and Reporting

Here is an article reporting research concluding Asian American relative academic success is attributable to working harder, pushy parents, expecting more of themselves and being more optimistic about their prospects.

It is highly fashionable intellectually to ignore IQ, which is 65% to 85% heritable in people over 18, and argue academic success is attributable largely to other factors. This research and the article reporting it do exactly that. The fact is Asians from China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan have rather homogeneous populations and higher average IQ's of about 106 whereas America generally has a mixed population of about 14 % black, 17 % Hispanic and the balance mostly white with an average IQ honestly estimated to be from 92% to 95%, with the white mean of 100. Immigrant Asians in the US likely also have IQ's above their country means.

No surprise then that American Asians do better academically than other (non-Jewish) Americans with that big a gap. The highest high school test scores worldwide in math, reading and science are found in Hong Kong (China), Shanghai (China) and Singapore (75% Chinese), with Japan, Korea, Taiwan close behind. Just as Jews do better academically with a mean IQ of 116 and are very dominant in our top universities although they are less than 2% of the population. So who are we kidding here?

Would it seriously come as a shock to discover that high IQ immigrant students tend to work harder, are more encouraged by their parents to do so, have more stable homes, expect more of themselves and are more optimistic about their futures? Also, these Asians often speak English only as a second language and are immersed at least part time in a foreign culture and language at home, yet have no trouble with the supposed cultural biases claimed for standardized English IQ tests or American classroom exams.

What a crock.

Interested Cruisers take Day Hike to Lower of Seven Sisters Falls
Kimball Corson
12/15/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

Decent hiking footwear for cris-crossing streams was needed as several of us wearing thongs learned. For the last bit, I went barefoot. All enjoyed themselves and had sandwiches and snacks when we were through and had returned to a near by friend's house.

Fascism of the Mind
Kimball Corson
12/14/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

There is a fascism of the mind afoot these days. It is not government imposed, but rather self imposed. It runs among people of all political persuasions. In conservatives it is the result of indoctrination. In liberals, it is acquired orthodox dogma. It ranges across a broad range of topics.

The desire in every instance is to control or dictate the thinking of others on the relevant topic or, if that is too difficult, to ban classes of spoken thoughts on the subject. The topic becomes a verboten. Speaking the unspeakable is a big no-no, independently of any unhappy truths involved.

Free speech is only really free if we collectively like what we hear. In this
manner, we box ourselves in and render life much less interesting and us, commensurately less effective in dealing with the world around us.

Elephants sit in parlors and Emperors have no clothes on. And we like that. It avoids conflicts in discussion. It is a new sort of good manners. A political correctness, if you will.

A Note on Prejudice and Bias
Kimball Corson
12/14/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

The word prejudice is much bandied about, but few understand the concept. It is deemed to be negative, for sure. The best definition of prejudice I think is the idea of preconceived opinion, usually negative, about a defined group, usually of people, that is not adequately based on facts and reason from those facts. That seems simple enough, but is a tricky concept in practice. Group definition is key.

For example, the statement blacks are looters is nonsense because they are many blacks who clearly are not. But the statement looters engage in criminal behavior and many in Ferguson are black is a statement based on fact and reason with those facts. Here is another one. Blacks, as measured by IQ tests, are less intelligent than whites. This is patently false, even though the normally distributed mean IQ of blacks is lower than whites. The fact of normal distribution means there are very many blacks who, by this measure, are in fact smarter than very many whites so such global statements may not be accurately made.

IQ tests are also claimed to be prejudicial and biased. By biased we mean designed, deliberately or not, to favor one group over another based on cultural differences. Great efforts have been made to remove bias from IQ tests and with considerable success. Asian Americans, whose first language is not English, now do very well on such tests, although culturally they are quite different than most Americans. The reason IQ tests are not deemed prejudiced themselves and banned as such is because of their predictive validity along so many dimensions.

This is the comment of a liberal commentator -- Without a doubt, the skills assessed on modern IQ tests are widely applicable and highly valued in contemporary American society. Accordingly, . . . IQ scores clearly tell us something of genuine importance. They are a reasonably good predictor not only of performance in the classroom but of income, health, and other important life outcomes. I add, they can even be used to predict who will live in which zip codes.

But the point is IQ tests do not get the boot as being prejudicial (as opposed to sometimes biased in some uses -- standard English test given to Hispanics who speak mostly Spanish) precisely because they have predictive validity and therefore are based on fact and reason. Recall, that is the test for prejudice.

Americans, especially liberals who do not understand science, often get the concept of prejudice quite wrong, often by jumping to unsupportable conclusions. People too much believe what they want to believe, regardless. That itself is often prejudice.

Selective, Self-Serving Memories
Kimball Corson
12/14/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

When looking back at World War II, the countries seriously involved see their own military contributions the clearest. Hence --

1) the United Kingdom, with 450,000 war dead, spotlights the Battle of Britain,

2) the Russians, with about 15 million dead from the war, Stalin and the harsh winter, mostly recalls Stalingrad,

3) the Japanese, with 3 million war dead, focuses on defeat, and occupation,

4) the Americans, with 420,000 war dead, remembers D-Day and Midway.

5) But what of China?

It was attacked by the Japanese, first in 1931 and then seriously invaded in 1937 to 1944, right in the middle of its civil war between the Nationalists (Chiang Kai-shek) and the Communists (Mao Zedong).

Had China not continued the good fight, in a united fashion, against the Japanese, but instead folded, we would have had a much harder war against the Japanese. Knowing that, we sent China much aid and the flying tigers, fighter pilot squadrons, to help. China remembers well. But we don't

Nor do we remember China's losses or the impact the ruthless invasion has had on the Chinese people. China's World War II was the longest, bloodiest and most ruthless of all, causing China's war dead to rise to 17 million, a staggering number to be so ruthlessly and mercilessly slaughtered.

The most we seem to remember is Nanking, with 300,000 Chinese slaughtered and 80,000 women raped in short order. We remember it less for those facts than for the protective heroism of Minnie Vautrin, an American teacher, who helped to found China's Ginling Girls College for 300 girls and who used it during the invasion of Nanking to protect up to 10,000 girls, women and some men from Japanese atrocities.

We should do and understand better.

The Wall Street Give Away Bill aka the $1.1 Trillion Spending Bill
Kimball Corson
12/12/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

It passed 219 to 206, with Obama and Jamie Dimon of Morgan Chase both pitching hard for it to pass. It will keep the government running until next September. But only 57 Democrats voted for the bill, and 67 Republicans broke ranks with their party to oppose it. Warren vocally opposed the bill, explaining the main piece of it was written word for word by CitiCorp and it was a disaster for the American people.

Obama and Reid are very embarrassed, especially to be in this particular spotlight with Jamie Dimon.

There are big rumblings now in Washington over it and Elizabeth Warren's stock has shot up hugely. Unlike Obama, she is a good fighter who believes that even if she loses "there should be teeth and blood on the floor" when its over. Obama has no fight in him and caves to Republicans all the time. The world is beginning to see that now.

His legacy is being destroyed, even before Obamacare goes back before the Court.

The Big Banks Are Setting Us Up Again
Kimball Corson
12/12/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

Greed is one thing and self-interest another. Self-interest can entail working very hard to give others more goods and services at fair value to get more money. There is no problem with that. That is proper, self-interested ambition.

Greed is different. The measure of greed is what is the burden in losses and costs placed on others, who receive no proportional benefit, of a person's effort to obtain an additional money for himself. Wall Street exemplifies this measure best. Here is a poignant example.

Those on Wall Street, including mostly the Jewish big bankers -- knowing they would not be held personally accountable by individual prosecutions and knowing that they would not have to cough up their personal gains from the augmented profits they earned from doing so -- had their banks take obscene, but highly profitable risks which then lead to the 2008 crash and Great Recession. Both of those events, with the predictable bailouts, made those personal bankers obscenely rich, but seriously injured millions of other people and the economy. Driven by greed and the lack of accountability, they had every incentive to do it They DIDN'T EVEN LOSE THEIR JOBS. Why? Because they made a lot of others in their banks rich, too.

That was a study in what can happen when financial markets are not well regulated, like the $1.1 quadrillion derivative market currently into which banks have move big time these days. The putative regulator -- congress -- has been bought off by Wall Street. Indeed, right this minute, we see the teeth being pulled from the Dodd-Frank financial regulations for Wall Street in the new $1.1 trillion spending bill working its way through congress as I write -- a bill which -- by the way -- also now allows Wall Street to gamble with bank depositors' money which is insured by the federal government. They couldn't before.

The bankers plan a second round of the same game and are building bailout protection provisions and more deregulation into the new legislation, as they reach for maximal super high risk profits again, to again line their personal pockets. The question is not whether another crash and recession will occur, it is a question of when. Also, this crash will be worldwide because the unbacked, derivatives market is worldwide and almost totally unregulated.

The best way to think about derivatives --for those not knowledgeable about their intricacies -- and to understand what the banks are doing big time now, is to think of a derivative as a mini price-guarantee insurance policy for an individual asset purchase which no reserves are held to pay out on losses. In good times, derivative losses can be managed by payments out of general operating revenues. They are super profitable because costs are almost zip and the fees or premiums are quite high. In bad times, then losses become general and widespread, this mega system will crash and take the world economy down with it.

But bankers personal pockets will get heavily lined before that happens and then, when the house of cards starts to collapse, they will pull their private funds and just side on the sidelines while everyone else gets economically murdered. That is the game the big bankers played in round one and this is the game they are setting up for now, in round two.

All of this is clearly and hugely just an example of run-away greed as I have defined it.

On American and Foreign Films
Kimball Corson
12/12/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

For the last year or so, I have been renting and watching three movies a day or rather, night. Many, I watch at 4x speed if they are bad; or 32x speed, if they are exceptionally bad. But most I just watch at normal speed straight through. By movies, I include TV series. I have deliberately split my viewing preferences roughly equally across 1) American films, 2) Korean films and 3) other foreign films as my video store is well stocked on all three. I have some observations.

In comparative terms, American films are distinctly more violent, with much fisticuffs and blowing things up. It is a hallmark of our cinema. Japanese movies involve much more choreographed personal fighting. Korean films are by far the most civilized, have little fighting depicted and have complicated but summary plots and sub-plots. The language is efficient to the point that even with good subtitles, they fly by so quickly it is hard to read fast enough to keep up and I read very fast. Other foreign films are highly varied ranging from excellent to terrible.

With American films, some film companies do consistently better than others. Lionsgate is at the bottom, but Lionsgate Millennium is better. Sony, Columbia and Universal are the best, with Dreamworks and Disney below them and others lower yet. Knowing the production studio or distributor is a help in selecting better movies.

The dominant impressions I have are American films are most violent by far. Together with European films, they are the most realistic and have relationships which are also more realistic, except and this is a big one, American films are afraid of the topic of sex, as are Korean films, but not many foreign films are, especially from Europe. American's proclivity toward realism faints at sight of real, not plastic, nudity and with real sex. Korean films don't even get close. Europe does best by far. Korean films are most civilized and have myriad plots and subplots. Occasionally some subplots and romantic scenes are corny by our standards, but everyone is human, even villains. who often have virtues and face personal conflicts. Americans prefer black and white characters, especially in action flicks.

Movies are an interesting world.

Obama as the Quintessential Kiss Ass of Wall Street
Kimball Corson
12/12/2014, Pago Pago, American Samoa

The split in the Democratic Party dramatically burst into view during the turmoil over the $1.1 Trillion spending bill "when Representative Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader and one of President Obama's most loyal supporters, broke with the administration [to oppose] a provision in the bill that would roll back regulation of the Dodd-Frank Act, which Ms. Pelosi said was a giveaway to big banks whose practices helped fuel the Great Recession."

"The public support of the sweeping spending bill by the White House -- which came just as Ms. Pelosi was making her speech on the House floor opposing it -- was a rare public break with the minority leader and infuriated many of her loyalists." NY Times

Would America have voted for Obama a second time had the nation realized he was such a patsy for Wall Street?


Powered by SailBlogs