1000 Days: Brilliant But No Management Skills

Our current President, Barack Obama is a brilliant man. Personally I would rank him as one of the smartest Presidents we have had since Richard Nixon and in the same breath with Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson and Woodrow Wilson. But as history has shown us, to be a brilliant President does not necessarily translate into being and effective or efficient one. Yes Obama is brilliant, but just using the example of his efforts to gain traction with our current economic conundrum, it is obvious he lacks the management skills required to astutely address this nation’s economic woes.

Now I am no Obama cognoscenti nor is this to state that he cannot manage, sure he can however much remains to be said of management skills regarding economics. Sure he is a competent jurist and astute in constitutional law, but one can simply examine how he works with his economic team to objectively examine his skill set in terms of management ergo concluding something is lacking. For the record before I proceed, I want to say I stated before and now that Tim Geithner was the wrong man for the job of Treasury secretary and I still stand by this. First I still maintain distrust for former Republicans that turn democrat in particular if they once worked for Kissinger and Associates. Second he is and foremost a banker and will always be as opposed to those of us on main street. I also had a problem when Geithner was living with Daniel Zelikow, as a top JP Morgan Chase executive, while he was overseeing the bailout of several huge Wall Street banks, including JPMorgan, which received $25 billion in federal rescue funds from the TARP program.

I can use the dysfunction of Obama's retinue of economic advisors to demonstrate why I have this opinion and come to the aforementioned conclusion. To start off with, Larry Summers (former Director of National Economic Council), Paul Volcker (former Federal Reserve Chairman), Christina Romer (former Economic Advisor), Elizabeth Warren (former Special Advisor to the Treasury Secretary), Peter Orszag (former Budget Director), and Tim Geithner (Secretary of the Treasury) alone provide me with more than enough substance to make this argument. Just looking at documented occurrences covering the Volcker rule, issues regarding Citibank, the bailout and the first stimulus, gives one an additional layer for discussion.

With respect to Larry Summers, it could be implied that the reason he resigned as director of the National Economic Council was his incessant economic blunders and what some could assert criminal actions. As an economist at Harvard and at the World Bank, Summers argued for privatization and deregulation in several areas, including finance. Prior to this under Clinton, he Summers oversaw passage of both the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed Glass-Steagall and Commodity Futures Modernization Act (which banned all regulation of derivatives, including exempting them from state antigambling laws) as well as permitted the previously illegal merger that created Citigroup. Not to mention, Summers, in concert with Greenspan, and Rubin and dismissed all warnings regarding the impending economic turmoil that we currently experience.

It was a major mistake to place Summers in an advisory role as a man who one did not perceive America’s economic crisis as a serious threat and two, as a man that developed many of the rules in which began this crisis.But this was more the fault of Obama obviously not having studied his past thoroughly and accepting on face value recommendations from his fat cat Wall Street donors.

In concert with Geithner, Summers cost us regular taxpaying citizens up to a trillion dollars or more. How because Obama puts on a front in front of the regular citizen hammering out loud at the banking industry and its faults, yet employs the very same men who rigged this game on behalf of the banking industry. Thus it is hard to say you are hard on banks and want them to get their acts together when behind closed doors you give them everything they ask for and more. Even with respect to Elizabeth Warren, the woman Obama wanted to head his Consumer Protection Agency, Geithner worked against the President wishes, for he insured the Banking industry and Wall Street she would not be approved for nomination, against the wishes of the President.

For example, the Obama administration’s $500 billion plus proposal was only beneficial to the banks and big dollar investors at the expense of the US tax payer. Why? Because we gave money to bailout make believe a false alarm problem contrived by bankers singularly. If one consider a toxic asset held by Citibank with a face value of $1 million, but with zero probability of any payout and therefore with a zero market value, most investors would not purchase such an asset. However, if Citibank itself sets up a Citibank Public-Private Investment Fund (under the Geithner-Summers plan), this allowed the bank to bid the full face value of $1 million for the worthless asset because it can borrow $850K from the FDIC, and get $75K from the Treasury (BAILOUT) to make the purchase - meaning the bank will only have to come $75K out of pocket. This means the bank (Citibank in this instance) would get $1 million for the worthless asset, while the fund in its name ends up with a pile of worthless assets against $850K in debt to the FDIC – allowing the fund to declare bankruptcy and make an easy $1 million. This is the best hustle since buying Newports in the South and selling up North.

I know I said I would present a discussion on the Volcker rule, but I do not want to bore you any further. In summary, regardless of being a President, Mayor, or Governor, Obama does not seem to have or display the management skills required to understand the creative use or utility of power at his hands. Unlike Maynard Jackson, Coleman Young, Richard Nixon, Willie Brown or even a Hank Parker, Obama appears to lack in terms of economic prowess and maybe even social acumen, the apperception that he is in a distinctive place in which the suitable exercising of influence can gather immense efficacy. Unlike the other African Americans mentioned above, although not serving as the President, Obama, has not shown he knows how to use power creatively and find the balance to take chances to correct existing inequities regardless of the political risk.

Like I said Obama is smart, but his management skills lack something: what I cannot say. The turnaround of the members of his economic top advisors suggest this alone. It is one thing to have high turnover, but if any other business or organization showed similar levels of turnover, they would go out of business or become inoperable. Moreover, it is clear that no other parts of his top advisors in other areas (state department, or Justice for example) have displayed similar high rates of attrition. No wonder the economy is in shambles.

I agree the prior presidents from Reagan to Bush 43 got us in this mess, but I also acknowledge that trying to suppurate consensus is not the same as making a decision. Selecting the wrong people (smart folks who do not get along or see eye to eye) is not helpful either and doesn’t equals being able to make a decision. Obama may be too smart for his own good, thinking that coming to a consensus is more important than making a decision. Sometimes a president or a governor or mayor must manage situations accordingly and decide on one policy over another. Can Obama do this has yet to be determined pertaining to his economic policy.

New York City Criminalizes Food Stamp Recipients By Requiring Fingerprints

When we think of fingerprinting, the first thing that often comes to fruition is its use in criminal investigations and its strong association with one being considered a criminal. It is so powerful a tool in tracking alleged suspects of criminal activity that last spring, the Federal Bureau of Investigation began the roll-out of a nationwide biometric identification system for suspects, inclusive of a new fingerprinting database for law enforcement.

However, now it seems that fingerprinting is being used for less than criminal activity. In New York City, the Bloomberg Administration has implemented a program that will require applicants for food stamps to be electronically fingerprinted. This requirement makes the city one of only two jurisdictions in the country that require applicants to be fingerprinted along with Arizona. Approximately 1.8 million people receive food stamps in New York City.

California used to have this requirement, but just this month, Gov. Jerry Brown acted to eliminate the requirement that food stamp recipients in California be fingerprinted. Brown signed a bill that ended the Statewide Finger Imaging System for the 3.8 million Californians participating in the federally funded Cal Fresh program, starting Jan. 1 – a program that is designed to increase participation in programs to feed the poorest residents.

Politicians, in particular suggest that fingerprinting is an effective way to reduce and prevent fraud. However there has yet to be any evidence that such is the case with respect to efficacy and utility. Not to mention that economist have pointed out that the process cost an estimated $187,364 a year to implement for the already cash-strapped city and state.

Research from the Urban Institute, as cited by New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, estimates that around 30,000 people are deterred from getting food stamps because of the fingerprinting requirement.

Use of fingerprinting in the current economy in which a majority of African Americans are disproportionately impacted, will only serves to criminalize being poor.In addition, there are no guarantees that this information will not end up in the data bases of law enforcement agencies bring to the fore a forth and fourteenth amendment concerns. Last, it adds more to the already existing stigma around applying for federal aid by treating poor and minority individuals like criminals for trying to access a legal program.

The question is why it does in New York City when it is not required anywhere else in the state of New York?

SWAT Teams in St. Louis Protecting Bank of America; Refusing Customer Withdrawals

Israel’s New Bouncer

The first time I read about it, I doubted its truth on historical and political merits alone. Not saying it was not true, but rather it was questionable with respect to the aforementioned and its timely manifestation. I am referring to the recent and weird allegation made suggesting that Iran was behind a plot to assassinate Adel al Jubeir and bomb the Israeli embassy. According to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, the plot was "directed and approved by elements of the Iranian government and, specifically, senior members of the Quds Force." But the catch is that according to U.S. officials, the suspect would pay $1.5 million to the Los Zetas drug cartel to kill the Saudi ambassador at a Washington restaurant also frequented by congressmen and senators.

I have written in this very forum about the US and Iran, most recently as it concerned our inability to be consistent with our positions taken concerning how we decided who should be ousted and what citizenry we supported during the unrest in the Middle East and North Africa starting with Tunisia last year and more specifically, how we tend to look the other way in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain but not Libya or Uganda. Not to mention the taciturn neglect the current administration shows to African Americans while kowtowing to the American Zionist lobby.

Even our own history should have the less than average reader concerned about our allegations concerning this plot. First, we should be reminded that the US government gave Saddam Hussein biological weapons and urged him to use them against Iran. Although Hussein decided that biological weapons went too far and backed down from the US plan, we used the same biological weapons we gave to Hussein as a basis to invade Iraq, even though UN monitors had already verified that the weapons had been destroyed.

Then there was the recent fiasco in which we provided support and approval for Israel to assassinate several leading Iranian nuclear scientist over the past two years in an attempt to impede Iran’s progression toward nuclear self sufficiency.

Like I am actually supposed to believe that Iran is a threat to us. We are just another bouncer under the auspice of a new administrative head. We already fund Israel's military, why should we fight wars for them as well? Maybe it is a ploy to take some heat away from Eric Holder is getting slammed for the illegal “fast and furious” gun running activities. After all who else better to assert that Iran tried to recruit a Mexican drug cartel to kill the ambassador of Saudi Arabia via a weed smoking used car salesman from Texas than Holder? Maybe it is a way for us to justify the Obama administrations giving cluster bombs to Israel just a week after Former New York mayor Ed Koch stated openly that Obama was no friend of Israel.

Maybe Iranian parliament member Alaeddin Boroujerdi was right when he said the accusation “a plot to divert the public opinion from the crisis Obama is grappling with.” Plus the informant is dubious to say the least seeing he was “previously charged in connection with narcotics offenses….in exchange for … various narcotics investigations” being dismissed. This based on the indictment of course.

The case made by the US is more media PR than actual fact since they are not supported by any hard evidence. The only evidence we have, which isn’t even related to this adduced collusion is the history of our relationship with this Persian nation - the only Persian nation in the world who happens to be surrounded by nations who hate Persians. Also they are the only Shia run regime in the world, surrounded by regimes that hate Shia. True they are a major producer of oil, but still have to import gasoline.

My question is why the suspect would even ask if the others involved were “any good with explosives?” We know that the US Intelligence indicates Iran's Qods Force are the best in the world when it comes to improvised explosive devices and explosively formed penetrators into Iraq. Seems as if Obama wants to show Israel we will do anything for them even start a war with Iran. Seems as well that we have been doing all in our might to fabricate a reason for such a war just to appease the Israel lobby. The only query that remains is why now and I suspect we will be finding out more real soon. But I am skeptical seeing this is the week we have a masive airlift drill in mediternanian with Saudi Arabia and Israel.

For the media and common idiots who dont understand #occupywallstreet

How Did Obama Know About 'Fast And Furious' Before Holder?

Nec Spe, Nec Metu

An associate of mine who I have grown sincere admiration and respect for and a friend used twitter yesterday to foster a discussion regarding President Obama and why people would or would not decide to support him during the 2012 election. What I noticed was that people, in particular African Americans have a real strong conviction and evince such with passion. In addition, I also noticed that it was frequent that people would challenge individuals to “check their facts” or charge “racism” if one disagreed with the President or ANY of his policies.

As you may or may not know, I am a free thinker and a habitual call-it-like-I-think-it-err. Just stating this because regardless of race or political affiliation, or rather one is a racist or a punk (synonymous in my purview) - I call them as I see them. I was reminded of this when a fellow blogger called in on my radio show and indicated that it was funny to him how when I was writing about George W. Bush, my post obtained anywhere from 80 to 100 comments daily but that when I held Obama to the same critical standard, they dropped to less than 5 comments a post.

Getting back to my associate, the results of his forum indicated just how much as a populous we 1] neglect significance in being politically astute, 2] how defensive we get when the person (especially if he is black) is the politician we support and 3] how quick all logic is disregarded when the information or point of contention has a negative impact on African Americans in particular and is accurate.

For example, for me to openly criticize the economic approach of President Obama is tantamount to being an uncle tom, racist or something even worse. Albeit it has nothing to do with the person, his race and/or political affiliation, and more a dissonance with Keynesian economic philosophy, because I am an African American my position is untenable and unreasonable.

Even if I state what I agree with and approve of that the President has implemented thus far, I am still considered against the President just because I am in disagreement with a single policy. I was supportive of the administration’s efforts to implement tougher regulations that would have reduced the amount of federal financial aid flowing to for-profit colleges that prey on mainly low income African Americans. However, I eventually became disappointed when his administration caved to the industry’s lobbyists and their campaign against the Obama administration. I was able to applaud the first bill he signed into law on approving legislation that expands workers' rights to sue over discrimination and the fact that so far he is setting records for the number of women and minorities nominated to lifetime appointments at the level of the Federal Courts. Nearly half of the 73 candidates he has tapped for the bench have been women. In all, 25% have been African Americans, 10% Hispanics and 11% Asian Americans. He is the first president who hasn't selected a majority of white males for lifetime judgeships, far exceeding the percentages in the two-term administrations of Bill Clinton (48.1 percent) and George W. Bush (32.9 percent).

I was also supportive of President Obama’s $1.15 billion measure to fund a settlement for African American farmers reached more than a decade ago via the 1997 Pigford v. Glickman case against the U.S. Agriculture Department over claims of discrimination. This made it possible for approximately 70,000 African American farmers to receive cash payments and debt relief from the federal government. However when I question the decision to pander to #ocupywallstreet protesters and the same night attend an upper East Side DNC $35,800 a plate fundraiser resulting in $2.4 million added to his rer-election campaign from Wall Street financiers and call it hypocrisy, my position was vilified. When I spoke out against the President’s policy decision to ask Congress to make it easier for private debt collectors to call the cellphones of consumers delinquent on student loans and other debt owed the federal government using robo calls I was condemned.

If I speak out and say I disagree with the Obama’s administration decision to waive legally mandated penalties for countries that use child soldiers and provide those countries U.S. military assistance, just like he did last year I am a hatter. The White House will issue a series of waivers for the Child Soldiers Protection Act, a 2008 law that is meant to stop the United States from giving military aid to countries that recruit soldiers under the age of 15 and use them to fight wars, for Yemen, South Sudan, Chad, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Last year, the White House didn't even tell Congress when it ended the Child Soldiers Prevention Act penalties. Their rational was suspect at best.

The truth is that I have problems with the policies and not the man. I would have had the same problems if they were implemented by a man or woman, republican or democrat of any race and ethnicity. The problem is to be an African American and voice these concerns means accepting the vilification asserted in the opening paragraphs. Unfortunately, like politicians the people who support selected candidates do not use binary decision to make responses that respond to logic gates like computers and tend to ignore transient memory for better or for worse. As in football, they will accept a holding called missed by a referee if their team scores but scorn and excoriate the same referee that misses the same call on the other team.

This is the world of the astute and adroit individual of color who examines the etiology of the political actions (especially if they pertain to President Obama). For being objectives means we can examine and understand this dystopian political frontier as the malicious state it is. It portends a dark future in which all power is concentrated in the hands of a few turning our nation into an oppressive state. The sad reality is that the voting populous and pundits in their sciolism do not have a clue that for us it is “Nec Spe, Nec Metu” - Without hope, without fear. For we know that Bacillus cannot live with antibodies.

Obama Panders to Cantor’s Mob

With the recent protest across America, one single observation that can be drawn is the level of two-faced hypocrisy evident in the elected leadership residing in Washington, D.C. The only consistent factor is the irony that both President Obama and the Tea Party Republicans were elected to implement change. Unfortunately neither has produced and continue to serve the oligarchs and plutocrats that fill their campaign coffers instead of the common citizenry of this once great nation.

Obama has done every shuck and jive dance move to pass his jobs bill that he only needs to wear black face to complete his vaudvillesque act. The Republicans namely Eric Canto and John Boehner have done everything in their power to make it seem as if they are actually working for the people when they are not, seeming to always leave their white sheets hanging in the closet at home as opposed to showing their true colors.

Eric Cantor and Barack Obama are both bought and paid for by the people they claim to dislike on behalf of Obama, and protect on behalf of Cantor. From the recent discussion on Israel, it is obvious that they care and want to give more loot without any query to Israel equally than they do the American people. Just ask Benjamin Netanyahu who Eric Cantor tried to play against the President. The problem is that American voters, in particular black folk do not understand that people like Eric Cantor or Barack Obama do not represent mainstream American interests or the interest of the American citizenry in generally.

Obama talks a better game about main street and the common man but all the ambassadors he has appointed and the majority of his cabinet members all gave his campaign $500,000 or more. He as cantor, have stood by and enabled America's Wall Street and Corporate criminal elite resulting in this economic imbalance in our nation. Do not get me wrong, this includes every national politicians since Andrew Jackson since in my locution, he was the last President who genuinely understood the plight of the people albeit he was a crooked white supremacist. The sad reality is that with the assistance of the media, both the leadership of the democratic and Republican Party’s act as if their only public duty is to tell us regular folk what and how to think.

We on the ground level see what our elected leadership does not – that our social structure only is efficient and works to service the desires of a few and is inequitable for the majority. In addition it is more than obvious that this approach they foster is not sustainable forever, unless they intend to rule by brute force.

These, our elected official via policy are more concerned with the views and support of the market manipulators on Wall Street than the American people. The same Wall Street that has bought our Congress and the President for they are merely corrupted element within an otherwise legitimate system. So what he have learned from the occupy Wall Street protest is that the America police will do what these oligarchs of wealth and power desire before they serve the poor and middle class. They will arrest, beat and pepper spray regular Americans who only desire to exercise their constitutional rights to assembly and free speech although they are paid to protect and serve the innocent.

To Eric Cantor and the police departments around the USA we are mobs and in the eyes of Obama, we only deserve to be pandered to in an effort to be re-elected. Mobs as opposed to Americans protesting injustice, political corruption and corporate fascism. House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, who openly states that flood, hurricane and tornado victims must pay for their own recovery by cutting social programs so his party and their supporters can continue to rape the middle class. It is clear that Eric Cantor, from his voting record and spends without repute his donations, that he represents big business, executives on Wall Street, and those who have power no differently than the democrats who go to Washington.

Cantor serves to helps companies abuse their employees by opposing unemployment benefits. He has consistently with banks that fund his campaign even voting to bail out a bank that his wife works for, and sits on the board of directors. A bank in which the minimum account balance for its wealth management division is $40 million. He has side with big oil and is one of the best fund raisers in the Republican Party. Open records indicate that he spent $7,400 of donor money on gourmet chocolates last year alone. But that is possible when you are getting money from lobbyist for Genworth Financial and AstraZeneca PLC. When asked if he would pass any elements of the Obama Jobs bill, he said yes - a provision that allows government contractors to collect all the money that is due to them rather than have 3% withheld for taxes (costing US tax payers $14 million over next ten years).

Obama is just as bad. As I wrote earlier this year, “ though Obama vowed to end “special interests” from his administration, nearly 200 of his biggest donors have landed plum government jobs and advisory posts, and/or won federal contracts worth millions of dollars for their business interests. Just for raising $50,000 to $500,000 for his campaign. In total, 184 of 556, or about one-third, of Obama bundlers or their spouses joined the administration in some role. In fact, 80 percent of those who collected more than $500,000 for Obama took key administration posts. Also, President Obama's appointment of William Daley as his chief of staff is another example. Daley was an executive at JPMorgan Chase, the investment bank that received a $12 billion bailout during the financial crisis”

As I write this, forty-six states are trying to keep the poor, elderly and minorities from voting in the next election by putting up roadblocks to them getting a "valid" photo ID, all under the guise of republican leadership. Just last night, Obama, after he said he understood the protestors, attended an Upper East Side DNC fundraiser to wine and dine Wall Street big wigs that cost attendees $35,800 each. An event that raised him $2.4 million from more than 60 financiers running the top funds on Wall Street. Yes, our current President claims to be for change and the people but he gives billions to Banks and corporations like Solyndra.Wall Street has trampled the American dream and politicians on both sides of the aisle are the reason us regular folks continue to have night mares.

America’s Celebration of Disease and Genocide

It is not uncommon for people to offer praise to individuals for their historical impact. The consternation however begins when we applaud these individuals in complete absence of their entire body of work. The case can be made for example with Confederate General and the mass murdering founder of the Ku Klux Klan Nathan Bedford in several states across the south. But more prescient is the inchoate historical record of Christophoro Colombo , who we know better as Christopher Columbus.

Americans the descendent of the first illegal immigrants will give national praise to this man today for reasons I cannot ascertain, although the excuse is that he discovered America – a place where people had already occupied and had been living for centuries prior to his first voyage.

A holiday in theory is a day of celebration or honor.If this is the case, let us be clear of what there is to honor or celebrate Columbus for. Outside of making Europeans happy and proud, the only reality was that his voyage to the new world was a “harbinger of genocide” to non Europeans. We honor a ruthless slave master and a plundering megalomaniac. He schemed support from the Spanish crown in a manner that would make Wall Street Bankers seeking a bailout proud.

History informs us he discovered America in October 1492, but it was that month on the 12^th in the Bahamas’ and from their sailed his three infamous ships to the coast of Cuba and Hispaniola (I always wondered why the people already there renamed their island after Spain). I called him a megalomaniac because his fellow Europeans of the time, his main interest was women, conquest and gold. In fact, among the individuals he called “Indians” in Hispaniola, he decreed that they must offer tributes of Gold to him or suffer death. His options were either convert and accept Christianity or be exploited or enslaved. Ironically he did not convert as many to Christianity for it reduced the number of folks he could make slaves.

Way I see it, giving Columbus a holiday means you should give one to the man who enslaved, killed and stripped inhabitants of their flesh in Mexico and feed them to the dogs – Bartolome de Las Casas a holiday too. The celebration of this man is merely a celebration of greed and the near total annihilation of the indigenous people of the places he landed. Thus this Columbus day as all of the ones before and in the future is just another way for America to honor and celebrate disease and genocide in what they termed the new world.

Non-Performing Papers

The present global economic crisis is the result of black market economics. By black market, I mean the same economic practices that allow the criminal underworld to function. A world in which few if any records exist regarding their profits – a shadow economy.

The new business of America and much of Europe operates without standards or oversight and the known value of most paper assets or financial instruments. Such to the extent that they cannot even be used to guarantee credit, a consistent observation in plain view in the US market and those in Europe. If one was to ask what were these papers and why they cannot be given accurate value, I could not answer because there are so many and no regulation for them that the only proof that they exist is reduced to growing unemployment, homelessness and protestors in the streets worldwide. I can say this because it has been “estimated” there combined value to be between $600 and $700 trillion – ten times the GDP of the entire world.

We see their weight on all markets. Take America for example, it is difficult not to see the impact of derivatives, mortgage backed securities, interest rate swaps or credit default swaps on the destruction of our economy. Both nongovernmental credit and private lending has dropped and contracted more than 20 percent since 2007. Namely because regulations that once existed that may have prevented this crisis have been reduced to nonexistent. Used be a time when people knew who own a mortgage for a house. Now such is impossible because the paper trail does not exist since most have been pooled and packaged into liquid Mortgage backed securities that allowed for them to get around the usual means to record the owners of said mortgages. Now most are hidden in a “shell company (MERS)” instead of banks or companies that have an actual interest in reclaiming the mortgage debt. This means that the value of even the bonds backed by mortgage backed securities will always be questionable and housing prices will continue to fall.

The same is true with default swaps. In an effort to avoid the tedious processes involved in recording and tracking the value of paper products and the foolish leveraging practices that created MBS’s, credit default swaps were invented. These “made out of thin air” papers were created so that lenders could insure the risk of papers with no know value and sell them to others. Now it is impossible for anyone to know who bears the risk for these instruments they are supposed to guarantee. This overlapping of paper means that no one can even accurately say what is owed or what their value are.

I intentionally did not include “off-balance sheet accounting “because it would show how our current fiscal crisis is truly the consequence of criminal activity, although our President says there are now laws to suggest that criminal activity was conducted by large Wall Street banks. I would disagree.

It is criminal because their actions has resulted in the number of Americans on food stamps increasing 74 percent since 2007 and 77 percent of US citizens now living from pay check to paycheck to date. Yet no such increases have proffered by bankers and corporate big wigs and their precious hedge funds created around these complex papers although most are none performing – not worth their stated value.

It is criminal when we question the rationale for the intense dislike for Wall Street when the President and Congress, who are recipients of large donation from this group and their K street lobbyist, are connected at the hip. We are a nation where the ratio of household debt to personal income is 154 percent. Yet the average CEO made 343 times more money than the average American did last year.

Yes it is criminal and unfortunately the President, Congress and Senate are criminal as well if they cannot see or understand such. But what can one expect when the percentage of millionaires in congress is more than 50 times those in the general public? Yes our crisis is the result of lawmakers who made money from rules that created these non-performing papers. Papers that obviously perform for politicians, CEOs and Wall Street bankers, but not for us.