Lagging Way Behind Portugal on Gay Marriage

Many religious groups have been fighting vigorously against the passage of legislation that would allow gay marriage in the USA: the Mormons, the Catholics, and several Protestant denominations. The very size of the Catholic church, though, make its objections particularly influential.

Frankly, all these religious objections seem entirely bogus to me. Not all religions have to define marriage the same way. That is what religious freedom means. For example, although people of other faiths can get divorced and then marry other people in their churches, this does not force the Catholic church to perform, recognize or permit these unions for their congregants. Catholics who wish to remarry must do so outside the church.

So, even if gay marriages were recognized by our civil institutions, the Catholic church and all these other faiths could keep right on not defining marriage that way for their own congregants.

In fact, it is a grotesque violation of the separation of church and state for the State to prefer the definitions of marriage of some denominations over others. Many religions already accept a definition of marriage that includes gay unions, so all these faiths are being discriminated against by our government's policy.

The Catholic church is now throwing its weight around again, threatening to stop feeding the homeless over objections to a city provision (in DC)that would allow same sex marriage. Read (and enjoy) Allison Kilkenny's offensive (in a good way) screed about this flap.

Here is a snippet:

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.

Yup, that's right. If gay folk can marry, the Catholic church refuses to feed the homeless.

Well, that all seems very reasonable. After all, the state would force the Catholic church to perform gay marriages, and celebrate the beastly unions, right?

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Oh. So this "Please Stop Being An Asshole, You Guys" law is really the thing that has sent the Archdiocese flying off a cliff. The child molestations, and filing sticky-fingered priests from diocese to diocese is all part of God's grand plan, but showing the slightest bit of consideration for gay couples is just too much.

Meanwhile, Portugal (not a city, nor a state, but an entire country, and a Catholic one at that!) is poised to accept gay marriage.

Rupet Murdoch Is A Liar

Earlier this year Beck accused Obama of exhibiting racism "...over and over and over again." This prompted a campaign to encourage advertisers to boycott his show.

Then Rupert Murdoch (Fox News is part of his media empire.) stepped in and said that although Beck was right factually about Obama's racism, Beck should not have said such a thing about the President. (Yet another point of disagreement here; if a President is guilty of such a thing, then the media have a responsibility to cover it!!!)

Now, of course, Murdoch is backpedaling through the cowardly use of a spokesperson. He says that Obama made a racist comment, so Beck was right to make such a claim although he, Rupert Murdoch, does not agree.

So, just what is this racist comment? The two of them keep insisting that he has done racist things, and they never back it up with anything substantial. Just like the rest of their "news"...

Please visit this site to complain to advertisers about Murdoch's complicity in promoting racism and other misleading news coverage. It's time to pull their plug.



But also take a minute to enjoy Stewart revealing yet another example of the unprincipled, deceptive practices employed at Fox News.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Sean Hannity Uses Glenn Beck's Protest Footage
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Nailed. And ready for Prime Time..

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Nailed 'Em - Mormon Church Trespassing
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor U.S. Speedskating

My dear friend Troy made his prime time debut as the cute missionary on the couch. Watch, laugh, mock.

Breaking: US has less freedom than Socialist countries

I have heard the argument that providing a public option for health care will somehow reduce "our freedoms." I confess confusion. However, I've tried to wrap my head around what people might be talking about, and decided to figure out what might be meant by "freedom." This is what I've come up with. Part of American Exceptionalism is the Horatio Alger myth; that is, a poor boy, through the judicious use of his own bootstraps and a medium-to-heavy application of cliche, can become rich. This freedom is the freedom of self-creation. But it's not true. Almost half of an adult's wealth is dependent upon his parents' money. Half. In Denmark (socialist, scary), in contrast, only 15% is. What does this mean? There's way more social mobility in pretty much every other Western European country other than Great Britian, the one with the hereditary ruling class.

Here's the numbers from 2006, (found here.) 1 means the children's monetary worth is 100% dependent on their family's monetary worth; 0 means that how well the children do is completely independent of the family of origin. Denmark's .15 indicates that only 15% of a child's success is dependent upon the family of origin. In Denmark, people are self-made. Contrast that with the .47 in the US; a full half of a person's success has to do with the family they were born into. As an example, what, exactly, did Jenna Bush do to get that sweet, sweet gig on the Today show. Oh, wait, I think I know.

Denmark 0.15
Norway 0.17
Finland 0.18
Canada 0.19
Sweden 0.27
Germany 0.32
France 0.41
United States 0.47
United Kingdom 0.50

Things weren't always this bad in the US, as can be seen here. The '70's were more equitable than the 80's, which in turn were more equitable than the 90's. I'm guessing the '00's are even worse.

There's this myth afoot in the land that somehow if you're poor you're by definition undeserving, and shouldn't be helped. But there's actual evidence that what help does is lift people from poverty. This chart shows that people stay poor for shorter periods of time in Scandinavian countries where they're given help, and poor for longer times when they're not, like here. So, being mean just increases the misery of the poor, being nice lifts people out of poverty. Remind me again of what the problem is with peace, love, and understaning, please.

Worthless Wingnut Resolution In Oklahoma Legislature

This is the actual text of the resolution introduced in the Oklahoma legislative session. Don't feel like you have to read all of it, but I will highlight some words in boldface to make skimming it easier. Basically they are saying that our economic woes are because God is displeased with Obama's leadership of our debauched country. This resolution is basically a prayer of contrition so God will forgive us and make us prosperous again. Of course there is no acknowledgment that the economic troubles began before Obama took office.

Honestly, this whole tract is so religious in nature that it seems completely inappropriate to be a resolution in a legislature-----even in Oklahoma!

We the People of Oklahoma, Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessing of Liberty; to secure just and rightful Government; to promote our mutual Welfare and Happiness, do establish this proclamation and call upon the people of the great State of Oklahoma, and our fellow Patriots in these United States of America who look to the Lord for guidance, to acknowledge the need for a national awakening of righteousness in our land.

WHEREAS, "It is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon
which Freedom can securely stand" (John Adams); and

WHEREAS, "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with
human passions unbridled by Religion and Morality" (John Adams); and

WHEREAS, "Our Constitution was made only for a Moral and Religious people" (John
Adams); and

WHEREAS, "We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the
power of government...but upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God" (James Madison); and

WHEREAS, "Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that
belongs to us by the laws of God (Benjamin Franklin); and

WHEREAS, "God who gave us life gave us liberty and can the liberties of a nation be
thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the
people that these liberties are of the Gift of God" (Thomas Jefferson); and

WHEREAS, "Whether any free government can be permanent, where the public
worship of God, and the support of Religion, constitute no part of the policy or duty of the state" (Joseph Story); and

WHEREAS, "We hold sacred the rights of conscience, and promise to the people...the
free and undisturbed exercise of their religion" (Roger Sherman); and

WHEREAS, "This great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians"
(Patrick Henry); and

WHEREAS, "When you...exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be
impressed upon your mind that God commands you to choose just men who will rule in the fear of God" (Noah Webster); and

WHEREAS, "The principles of genuine Liberty and of wise laws and administrations
are to be drawn from the Bible" (Noah Webster); and

WHEREAS, the people of Oklahoma have a strong tradition of reliance upon the
Creator of the Universe; and thought secure when we have removed

WHEREAS, we believe our economic woes are consequences of our greater national
moral crisis; and

WHEREAS, this nation has become a world leader in promoting abortion,
pornography, same sex marriage, sex trafficking, divorce, illegitimate births, child abuse, and
many other forms of debauchery; and

WHEREAS, alarmed that the Government of the United States of America is forsaking
the rich Christian heritage upon which this nation was built; and

WHEREAS, grieved that the Office of the president of these United States has refused
to uphold the long held tradition of past presidents in giving recognition to our National Day of
Prayer; and

WHEREAS, deeply disturbed that the Office of the president of these United States
disregards the biblical admonitions to live clean and pure lives by proclaiming an entire month to an immoral behavior;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that we the undersigned elected officials of the people of Oklahoma, religious leaders and citizens of the State of Oklahoma, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world, solemnly declare that the HOPE of the great State of Oklahoma and of these United States, rests upon the Principles of Religion and Morality as put forth in the HOLY BIBLE; and

BE IT RESOLVED that we, the undersigned, believers in the One True God and His
only Son, call upon all to join with us in recognizing that "Blessed is the Nation whose God is the Lord," and humbly implore all who love Truth and Virtue to live above reproach in the sight of God and man with a firm reliance on the leadership and protection of Almighty God; and

BE IT RESOLVED that we, the undersigned, humbly call upon Holy God, our
Creator, Sustainer, and Redeemer, to have mercy on this nation, to stay His hand of judgment,
and grant a national awakening of righteousness and Christian renewal as we repent of our great sin.

Signed on the second day of July in the year of our Lord Christ Two Thousand and Nine.

Straights win rights to string of 8 letters -- M A R R I A G E

Congrats!

We now all know that the California Supreme Court ruled for Proposition 8. However, the ruling was on the narrowest possible grounds. To quote (page 37) "Proposition 8 reasonably must be interpreted in a limited fashion as eliminating only the right of same-sex couples to equal access to the designation of marriage, and as not otherwise affecting the constitutional right of those couples to establish an officially recognized family
relationship." (Emphasis added.)

In non-lawyer-speak, opposite couples get the sequence of letters M * A * R * R * I * A * G *E, Same sex couples get all the rights that "traditionally" go with the word marriage. So, the battle was over a couple of phonemes.

But wait, there's more!

in all other respects same-sex couples retain the same substantive protections embodied in the state constitutional rights of privacy and due process as those accorded to opposite-sex couples and the same broad protections under the state equal protection clause that are set forth in the majority opinion in the Marriage Cases, including the general principle that sexual orientation constitutes a suspect classification and that statutes according differential treatment on the basis of sexual orientation are constitutionally permissible only if they satisfy the strict scrutiny standard of review.

p. 41
Shorter version: second verse, same as the first. Except louder and stronger. Same-sex, uh, nuptials, have exactly the same rights as those other ones.

Oh, but this is not sufficient. Why is actual marriage (I'm looking at you DOMA) important? Read this story of a woman and her three chidren unable to visit their dying partner/mother Lisa Pond because they had the misfortune of being in Florida when Lisa collapsed with a brain aneurysm. Family values? As I have said previously, only for very small values of "family."

Just another example of those that rather mysteriously call themselves "Pro-Family" kneecapping actual families.

Actual child vs. NOM child

The National Organization for Marriage (whose founder, Maggie Gallagher, currently gets 42% of the fundraising essentially deposited directly into her bank account) has a shiny new ad, where we are warned about the dangers of, and I kid you not, our kids "learning a new way of thinking." I didn't realize thinking, even, heavens, new thinking, was so very very dangerous. I wonder what these NOM people think happens in those buildings that kids go to occassionaly, and have the quaint name of "schools?" Oh, and one of the kids admits to that problem we all know is destructive of western culture as we know it--that would be, wait for it, confusion. Yeah. Eeek! Better outlaw Geometry while we're at it. Don't believe me? Watch it yourself. No sniggering now. (Well, some light mocking and derision just can't be helped.)


What are actual children up to? One 3rd grader in Colorado is organizing a pro gay marriage rally after he learned a gay couple in his neighborhood can't get married.

We have a winner! Real children 1, scripted children 0.

(on edit) Whe Calla lily and Apricot blossom were just tykes (about 1991) and we were living in Ann Arbor, MI; I overheard the following: To set the stage, Apricot blossom was playing with two Barbies; they were getting married. Calla Lily stormed in, watched the goings on and the following dialog ensued:
Calla Lily: Those two Barbies can't get married.
Apricot Blossom: Oh yes they can.
Apricot Blossom (for the win) Not when they're wearing swim suits!

My take? Will kids be confused by same sex marriage? Not if the appropriate clothing is involved. I also suspect the presence of cake is more important than the genders of the parties involved.

Spain opens Guantanamo war crimes investigation

Read about it here.

Judge Baltasar Garzon would probe the "perpetrators, the instigators, the necessary collaborators and accomplices" to crimes of torture at the prison at the U.S. naval base in southern Cuba, it said.
The judge based his decision on statements by Hamed Abderrahman Ahmed, known as the "Spanish Taleban" and three other former Guantanamo detainees - a Moroccan, a Palestinian and a Libyan - who alleged they had suffered torture at the camp.
"It seems that the documents declassified by the U.S. administration mentioned by the media have revealed what was previously a suspicion - the existence of an authorized and systematic program of torture" at Guantanamo and other prisons including that in Bagram in Afghanistan, Garzon said.

Ah ha! No wonder the Bush administration did their level best to hide those pesky torture memos.

Portugal finds drug decriminalization works!

Scientific American has an article up, here, about Portugal's five year experience with decriminalizing all formerly illegal drugs. Short answer, all good.

"Now instead of being put into prison, addicts are going to treatment centers and they're learning how to control their drug usage or getting off drugs entirely," report author Glenn Greenwald, a former New York State constitutional litigator, said during a press briefing at Cato last week.

Under the Portuguese plan, penalties for people caught dealing and trafficking drugs are unchanged; dealers are still jailed and subjected to fines depending on the crime. But people caught using or possessing small amounts—defined as the amount needed for 10 days of personal use—are brought before what's known as a "Dissuasion Commission," an administrative body created by the 2001 law.

But the results are much more positive than the article indicates. Glenn Greenwald also talks about Portugal's success here.

For every drug that was in use since 2001 -- every one -- absolute drug usage rates declined in the five years following decriminalization, and that occurred as drug usage rates in most other EU member-states was increasing, often severely.

We here in the United States are bankrupting ourselves with the money used to house non-violent drug users. For example, California spends 9 Billion dollars annually on prisons (with a recidivism rate of 70%! You learn how to be an even better criminal in prison, who would have thunk?)

The Pew Center report reveals that, nationwide, corrections spending outpaces funding for education, transportation and public assistance.

Not to mention our fourth amendment rights, which have atropied to close-to-noexistence due to the aforementioned drug war. And (there's always an 'and'), people in the US caught with drugs often then have their lives thrown away even after they've done their time; yet another casualty of the drug war.

Additionally, (one does get tired of 'and' occasionally) let's not even talk about the growing problem of the spillover violence from Mexican drug cartels that would disappear instantly (for all practical purposes)if drugs were legal--see our own dalliance with alcohol prohibition for support.

So, decriminalizing drugs would lead to less addicts, less money burned up in the prison system and less violence. Any possibility we'd implement this? I'm guessing Naaaaah.

A Behavioral Economist on what went wrong with the economy.

And, why often, our intuitions are wrong, wrong, wrong. Highly recommended.

Miserable Lie: or, why aren't we all furious?

First, read this.
Key quote:

Like feudal lords claiming the economic surplus for themselves while administering austerity for the population at large, the wealthiest 1 per cent of the population has raised their appropriation of the nationwide returns to wealth – dividends, interest, rent and capital gains – from 37 per cent of the total ten years ago to 57 per cent five years ago and it seems nearly 70 per cent today. This is the highest proportion since records have been kept. We are approaching Russian kleptocratic levels.

Did you get that? The top 1% of Americans has SEVENTY PERCENT OF THE WEALTH. We no no longer have a middle class, thanks to Reagan, Bush, and Bush, and a bit of Clinton, too. We are, officially, a banana republic, and headed, with the new treasury plan, deeper into third world territory.


The new wall street - bank bailout plan has been disclosed and it is totally totally off the rails. It allows companies to pay 3% of the price of an asset, and have the government loan them the other 97%, at very good terms.

Here's the pithiest summary that I could find of what's so terribly wrong with this, from a poster named anonymous at naked capitalism here. Basically, we, the poor wage earner taxpayer give even more hunka-hunka-burnin' money to the filthy rich hedge and other financial funds that got us into this mess; the money continues to flow upward.

I am SAC Capital. I get to be one of the bidders on bank assets covered by the program

Citi holds $100mm of face-value securities, carried at $80mm.

The market bid on these securities is $30mm. Say with perfect foresight the value of all cash flows is $50mm.

I bid Citi $75mm. I put up $2.25mm or 3%, Treasury funds the rest.

I then buy $10mm in CDS directly from Citi [or another participant(BOA, GS, etc)] on the bonds for a premium of $1mm.

In the fullness of time, we get the final outcome, the bonds are worth $50mm

SAC loses $2.25mm of principal, but gets $9mm net in CDS proceeds, so recovers $6.75mm on a $2.25mm investment. Profit is $4.5mm

Citi writes down $5mm from the initial sale of the securities, and a $9mm CDS loss. Total loss, $14mm (against a potential $30mm loss without the program)

U.S. Treasury loses $22.75mm

Great program.

Its just a scheme to transfer losses from the bank to the taxpayer with an egregious payout to a middleman (SAC) to effectively money launder the transaction.

You've also transmuted a $30mm economic loss into a $36.75mm economic loss because of the laundering. So its incredibly inefficient.

How did fraud and money laundering become the national economic policy of the US?

One would have to be a criminal to participate in this.

How did we get into this mess? Rachel Maddow has an excellent 7 minute summary of the deregulations that culminated in the current financial meltdown.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Commenter Nick at naked capitalism has another, even more bleak take on what is going to happen to the american taxpayer under the new treasury plan.

Say Bank A has already marked down a portfolio of toxic mortgage securities from its $100M face value down to $80M. Under TALF 2.0 provisions, Hedge Fund B buys this portfolio for $80M with a 3%, or $2.4M, equity stake. The rest comes in the form of non-recourse loans and "gifts" from the Treasury Dept. Bank A gets these toxic mortgage securities off the books and makes a cool $80M.

In reality, on the open markets, a similar portfolio of mortgages recently sells for about 20% of face value. The execs at Bank A know this.

The following week Bank A comes to Hedge Fund B and offers to buy the MBS portfolio from the hedge fund for $20M. Initially, the hedge fund's 3% equity stake would now only be worth $600K. However Bank A offers to pay the hedge fund, say, a $3M "transaction fee" or some other shady payment/purchasing method to go through with the deal.

Hedge Fund B's equity stake is essentially bought for $3.6M ($600K+$3M). In only a week's time, Hedge Fund B has made $1.2M on its initial $2.4M investment. It pays the Feds back the principal on the non-recourse loan it took out and has made more than enough $ to pay whatever miniscule amount it owes for a week's worth of interest payments on the loan.

Bank A has now not only bought back this MBS portfolio actually worth 20 cents on the dollar, it only had to pay $3.6 million or 3.6 cents on the dollar to Hedge Fund B to get it back. Bank A nets $16.4M dollars and has a sweet party. As an added bonus, Bank A believes the portfolio will in time be worth 50% of face value when it matures/the markets recover and makes Vegas money on that 30-point spread.

Meanwhile, the taxpayer gets the epically-sized shaft. The Fed facilitates enormous losses for the taxpayer by making up the vast majority of the differences between current and/or eventual actual market prices and the paid fake/inflated auction price of 80% of face value--or approaching $60M for this portfolio. Add a whole lot of zeros to this number and that’s where taxpayers will be at when all is said and done. Meanwhile the banks make astonishing profits on what could become the greatest bait-n’-switch in modern history and taxpayers wonder why they have to pay $10 for a loaf of brad.

On the plus side, I hear beachside huts in Palau are cheap these days.

Missing White House Emails Found in the Chattanooga Choo-Choo?

Look What I found on the magical internets!!!!

The Locust Fork News Journal has discovered the location of back-up copies of the missing White House Emails!!!!! (Rubs hands together while cackling.) They're in Chattanooga, TN

I located this link while reading through a comment thread about the clearest case of illegal Governmental wiretapping out there that happened right here in the lovely, if somewhat damp, state of Oregon, the al Haramain case. Here. I recommend everyone to read, at least, the original post. Shortish, to-the-point, fascinating.

Oh, and the post and the brilliant brilliant comment thread, which includes two lawyers involved in the case, clearly spell out the problems with the war-on-terror and more specifically, warrentless wiretapping, that is, if the President makes a mistake he/she can simply classify the documents as state secrets and get off scott-free.

Obama administration, you filed a brief reiterating the Bush doctrine that the PREAZ RULZE!!!1!!!! What? 3 prongs (legislative, executive, judicial), OH NOES, you wrong. In non LOLCAT, the Obama admin has been siding with the Bush admin aka the idea that the president trumps the other two prongs of our gov't. Totally. If the President says that documents are secret, who are we mere Judges to disobey him? No No No No NO NO NO.

So depressing. I'm really afraid that Obama got a taste of power and thought, OOOhhh yummy!

This post is sort of a mess, sorry, so much to say, so few words.

Torture! Or, it's about time.

[NO PIC THIS TIME]

We now have proof (minutes from a meeting in Guantanamo in 2002, released by Sen. Levin's office) that we tortured,

money quote: (not for even the remotely squeamish, and from among many possibilities)

Yes, if someone dies while aggressive techniques are being used, regardless of cause of death, the backlash of attention would be extremely detrimental. Everything must be approved and documented.

and that there was a coverup.
money quote:

We may need to curb the harsher operations while ICRC [International Committee of the Red Cross -- added by transcriber] is around. It is better not to expose them to any controversial techniques. We must have the support of the DOD.

Daily Kos link here.
Good news? Well, Nancy Pelosi has decided that criminal investigations about torture are no longer off the table.

MADDOW: ... you support a call for a criminal investigation, potential investigation.
PELOSI: Absolutely.

From Glenzilla, here.

So, just maybe.....

A most awesome rant

Geebee has posted a righteous rant over at his site, somesense and nonsense. Plus it's funny. You should dash right over and read it.

Just Quoting Sullivan

13 Feb 2009 12:37 pm
If The Right Were Intellectually Honest ...

"This Manzi post would be their argument going forward. Here's why they are not being intellectually honest, and Manzi's post includes the relevant facts. The GOP has passed what amounts to a spending and tax-cutting and borrowing stimulus package every year since George W. Bush came to office. They have added tens of trillions to future liabilities and they turned a surplus into a trillion dollar deficit - all in a time of growth. They then pick the one moment when demand is collapsing in an alarming spiral to argue that fiscal conservatism is non-negotiable. I mean: seriously."

Read all of Sullivan's post to appreciate the cynical partisanship of the Republicans in Congress.

The Banks are Insolvent, Duh.

If those banks out there swallowed up $350 billion with nary a burp, what insane brain-dead rich important stupid-head thinks another $350 billion will have some magical effect? It will be delivered by Unicorns, perhaps? Really? Really?

How did Obama put the people responsible for this mess in positions of responsibility to get us out? Will it work? No. And why is Tim Geitner being quizzed about a paultry $35,000 in back taxes?

Notice, no links. The analysis can be performed as a thought experiment.

H/T Bosch plus this site for the pic., The Unicorn of Earthly Delights, or something.

Election judge is dumbfounded her ballot was rejected

I swear, not from the Onion, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

Shirley Graham was astonished to learn that a lawyer from Norm Coleman's campaign on Tuesday blocked her absentee ballot from being added to the U.S. Senate recount.

"I'm an election judge," said Graham, of Duluth. "I expected to be the last person whose ballot wouldn't be counted."

Stay Classy, Israel

Israel "accidentally" rams three times, and almost sinks, a boatfull of doctors and relief supplies sailing to Gaza.

I see your Kennedy and raise you a gay man.

Perhaps Gov. Patterson will make an end-run around Caroline Kennedy and appoint an openly gay man, Danny O'Donnell (plus, bonus celebrity tie -- Rosie O'Donnell's brother), as Senator. Read about it here.

Geitner - Summers = Obama Economy FAIL

Oh, and Happy New Year!

The New York Times has an article, so useful, which shows precicely when Larry Summers, with his co-conspirators Alan Greenspan and Robert Rubin tanked our economy.

In 1997, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, a federal agency that regulates options and futures trading, began exploring derivatives regulation. The commission, then led by a lawyer named Brooksley E. Born, invited comments about how best to oversee certain derivatives. Ms. Born was concerned that unfettered, opaque trading could “threaten our regulated markets or, indeed, our economy without any federal agency knowing about it,” she said in Congressional testimony. She called for greater disclosure of trades and reserves to cushion against losses. ... In early 1998, Mr. Rubin’s deputy, Lawrence H. Summers, called Ms. Born and chastised her for taking steps he said would lead to a financial crisis, according to Mr. Greenberger. Mr. Summers said he could not recall the conversation but agreed with Mr. Greenspan and Mr. Rubin that Ms. Born’s proposal was “highly problematic.”

And then, in 2008, due pretty much entirely to unfettered derivitive proliferation, our economy tanked. The same article, mentions, delicately, that

The Wall Street debacle that swallowed firms like Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, and imperiled the insurance giant American International Group, has been driven by the fact that they and their customers were linked to one another by derivatives.

As to Tim Geithner, he just handed over somewhere around $320 billion to a friends' company.

Tim Geithner, former President of the Federal Reserve, has been appointed Secretary of the Treasury. He's a protégé of Robert Rubin, who is now director and senior advisor of Citigroup. Luckily for Rubin, the government has-completely coincidentally-agreed to insure Citigroup against losses of upwards $300 billion. This is in addition to an allocation of $20 billion from the $700 billion bailout package, which followed an earlier $25 billion injection. Quite an expensive coincidence.

From Laney Tower.