TheAgitator.com
33 Responses to “Morning Links”
Leave a Reply
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivs 2.5 License.
Site Features
- Home
- About Radley Balko
- Publications
- Speaking Info
- Multimedia
- Resume
- Picasa Photos
- Recommendations
- RSS Feed
- Buy Agitator Gear
-
-
$12/month Recurring Donation
$6/month Recurring Donation
- My Amazon wishlist
-
Site Credits
If 1 to 28 drinks a week is moderate, then I easily fit into that category even when I was in college. The fact that I had all 28 drinks in the same sitting on Saturday nights wouldn’t be a factor, would it?
Man…Seagal got all puffy!
You’re scaring me – are you suggesting we’re not there yet?
“I recognize that all of you have an obligation to ask questions knowing that there’s none of you smart enough to frame it in such a way that I’m going to respond,” Rangel said.’
We should all be entitled to one free kick to his arrogant head. We should be able to kick Steven Seagal in the head, too.
TARP: How to make a billion? First, start with several trillion…
Marty,
By “head” you mean his marble bag, right?
Boyd-
The kicker gets the free kick… it can be to the marble bag or the cement block!
I wish it was “only” an idiocracy. What we have is actually a scatocracy.
OMG!! Seagal – COPS – Lawman!!! Yikes, it looks like no donut is safe within several miles of this guy. Make mine a chocolate frosted please. Is A&E where old B actors go when they have no place else?
Hahahahaha! Love the Rangel story. I think it’s hilarious that a Congressman would actually have to be on the consumer side of government corruption.
Ow, Steven Seagal’s Balls!
Great … now Seagal is a ‘law man’ …. we can thank Elvis for starting the whole ‘entertainers as cops’ thing ……
In regards to the persecution of pain doctors, the article linked makes some points I’ve heard recently elsewhere….oh yeah ! in the healthcare debate where conservatives are all concerned about government making decisions in the medical care field.
Funny how the War on Drugs is in no way the same issue, and most of those same conservatives have NO problem with the government interfering with medical decisions that relate to drug prescription.
I know there are a FEW conservatives who are consistent about this point, but not many.
I found the TARP piece thoroughly unpersuasive. Money is coming back. Not all them money yet, but its a start. And some of it we probably won’t see. Doesn’t mean that its not good news when we do get some back. The article reads like: “I hate everything about TARP, so any news about it is bad. Bah!”
Man, that Steven Seagal: Lawman makes me want to go to Jefferson Parish just to get arrested by Seagal, so I can talk a bunch of shit to him.
(looking at the dashcam) “Hey, deputy Seagal, it looks the record of this event is a lot like your film career – it’s going straight to video.”
I am disappointed to see Radley invoke Idiocracy.
Segal has also working with Larry Godwin, Memphis (TN) Police Department Director. He’s been staying here while his child is undergoing treatment at St. Jude Children’s Research hospital. MPD has severe problems with officer misconduct including almost 70 felony indictments over the last 5 years. I guess action movies aren’t enough, he wants to play with real people’s lives.
#14
I think maybe you missed the point of the Reason piece. They’re pointing out that contrary to the view of the NYTimes and left-leaning pundits, just because some of the money has been paid back (generally by banks that didn’t need or want the money to begin with) doesn’t mean it’s been a rousing success and well worth the cost and effort. We’re going to start hearing a lot of stories coming out of the Times that prop up the belief that bailouts are a good idea and proven winners when the evidence for that argument seems to be nonexistent.
How about we drop Segal on Rangle from a high place? You know kill two birds with one dork.
Tokin42,
I understood the point of the piece. I just disagree with it. Money coming back in may or may not be a sign of success — but it certainly is better than no money coming back and worth reporting.
Personally, I think the fact that the system didn’t fall into further collapse, and the fact that we are in a simple recession rather than a fundamental and systemic meltdown is the strongest evidence that the TARP was successful. I understand that since we don’t know what would have happened “but for” TARP there is no way to know for sure. And I know that most here will disagree (but please note that I am not defending the stimulus at all or the arguing that the size and reach of the TARP bailout was perfect.) Still, I think most on the inside, who saw the lack of lending and understood the implications for the broader economy (outside banks and wall street and in all the other businesses that need regular access to capital) believed at the time that we were on the verge of a much bigger calamity than we have seen. You can say that their fears were overblown, but I think its also fair to say that maybe the program worked.
Lastly, I disagree that the Reason piece is needed to contradict misconceptions from the NYT or other left-leaning pundits. Most of them didn’t want the bailout either (they wanted the stimulus for ordinary Americans). I actually think that this reporting is necessary to correct the misconception by a lot of people (left and right) that this bailout money was a gift that we would never see again. Some of it is coming back, and as the economy improves, a lot more may come back. That should lower the deficit somewhat.
This could be the best Seagal vehicle since Cockpuncher!
[...] Morning Links [...]
Bryan,
I disagree. (1) I think the NYTimes is trying to lay the philosophical foundation for another bailout and (2) I don’t think that banks repaying money they didn’t need but were forced to take anyway is a sign of success.
From a Contractor standpoint I’m seeing the TARP/stimulus money slowing any recovery down. Banks are still unwilling to loan, they’re putting all kinds of new restrictions on money they are lending, and builders are still holding out wondering if they can get their hands in the pot for whatever project they’re trying to build.
We do a lot of rental properties for a variety of customers. Some buy complexes to remodel and some build from the ground up. The 3 properties I had lined up for this year are still on hold trying to figure out how to get fed money. Contractors are all but giving work away but with banks tying up their lending and owners trying to get the feds to pay for their projects, nothing is getting built.
Nice how the second-to-last clip is an officer (presumably Seagal) taking an obviously handcuffed individual who appears to be compliant and bouncing his face off a car. If a clip surfaced the other way around, the guy would be in jail for assault of an officer, or if you and I did it to someone it would be plain old assault. But since they get to legally put the guy in cuffs when he doesn’t want to be, they get to assault him, laugh it off, feel good about themselves for it, AND get it on TV. Wins all around!
And then they wonder why people would want to resist arrest.
Tokin42,
I am a real estate investor myself. I just bought a new house a few weeks ago and have some rental property. I hear what you are saying about the lending market right now — there were only a few lenders in Chicago that could give me a product that would allow me to close. But I respectfully disagree that this has been slowed down by TARP. Were you trying to do anything back in September/October of 08? The markets here (and most other places) were much worse then. I had a home equity line that was cut to 0 for no other reason than the banks did not want any potential liabilities outstanding. My line was paid off completely at the time, I always over paid my payments and I had a large salary. They said they needed 70 LTV (including the home equity line). That is insane.
TARP helped open things up, but there is still a long way to go. I think most people don’t understand this and think that the TARP program is a failure because they don’t see (like we do) how much better it is now than it was — even if its not perfect.
I don’t think the fed is tying up banks’ lending. It think they are waiting to see which banks fail, because they might potentially have more liability. Had some more of the banks been allowed to fail initially, the remaining banks would have pulled back even further been more gun-shy about lending. Banks don’t like risk, so as long as they don’t know what their potential liabilities are, they will assume the worst and not lend.
As to you other points. I disagree with (1) but agree with (2). I don’t think the Times are trying to lay the groundwork for another bailout. Especially their reporters. Maybe some of the opinion columnist would like another stimulus plan, but that is very different than another bailout. And I don’t think the reporting arm has a position on it.
I encourage you to read more about how the financial system and banks work, understand more about our economic system and how it is enforced on the world. Then consider how the system we have of candy for everyone is wrong and unsustainable. Then consider whether the government can do anything right, especially with a body of evidence forty thousand miles long that they CAN’T, and consider how it just might be intentional and that “government” isn’t just a bunch of bumbling idiots like Roscoe and Enos from Dukes of Hazzard.
Starting data points: http://www.theagitator.com/2009/09/02/life-expectancy/#comment-352237
BamBam,
I encourage you to read more about how the financial system and banks work, to avoid hyperbole and condescension, and to try to give concrete examples of instead of nonsensical generalizations that include simplistic pop cultural references if you want to convince someone they are wrong.
[...] tip: The Agitator.) CBS 2 HD has discovered that since ethics probes began last year the 79-year-old congressman has [...]
TARP was a huge success! All the billionaire bankers got through the recession without having to give up the Cuban cigars, Napoleon brandy or their villas in the alps. Mission accomplished!
I agree with you there – money coming back in is a good thing and it is worth reporting on. But reporting it as a profit? It’s not a profit until we recover all of it and then some. I don’t know if this is deliberate obfuscation or just really sloppy reporting, but either way it is simply wrong.
But Idiocracy’s got what plants crave! It’s got electrolytes!
#5
I seem to remember an episode of 2 Stupid Dogs that was VERY similar…
‘Nother, Scotch grandpa?
“Just keep bringing them to ‘m ’til he remembers the last one.”