Cknolls

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 23, 2008 -> 12:54 PM) Perhaps the media is just as enamored with Obama as most of the nation/world is? Lets face it, even polling of Republicans shows little enthusiasm for McCain. I bought Sara Lee because I thought with everyone wetting their pants over Obama, the stock can only go higher.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 23, 2008 -> 12:31 PM) we'll ignore the 8 years of McCain love then. McCain's tour was pretty heavily covered, that's when the big Colombia hostage rescue happened. I guess we missed Gibson, Couric, and Williams' reports then.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 23, 2008 -> 07:31 AM) Just so things are clear this is the COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION who came to this conclusion. Needless to say they have a little bit more knowledge of the ground situation than the Congress does. Blasphemy!

David Evans was a consultant to the "Australian Greenhouse Office" from 1999 to 2005. He is a former global warming alarmist; however, he is also a scientist who goes where the evidence leads him. In this important article in The Australian, he blows the whistle on the fraud that many of the world's governments are in the midst of perpetrating: I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector. FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I've been following the global warming debate closely for years. When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects. The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet. But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts. You really need to read the whole thing to get the full impact, but here are a few highlights: 1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it. Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever. If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. ... 2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. ... 3. The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980). ... 4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect. ... The last point was known and past dispute by 2003, yet Al Gore made his movie in 2005 and presented the ice cores as the sole reason for believing that carbon emissions cause global warming. In any other political context our cynical and experienced press corps would surely have called this dishonest and widely questioned the politician's assertion. .. What is going to happen over the next decade as global temperatures continue not to rise? The Labor Government is about to deliberately wreck the economy in order to reduce carbon emissions. If the reasons later turn out to be bogus, the electorate is not going to re-elect a Labor government for a long time. When it comes to light that the carbon scare was known to be bogus in 2008, the ALP is going to be regarded as criminally negligent or ideologically stupid for not having seen through it. The same will be said of any American government that ruins our economy is service of the global warming ideology.

Freddie is likely to get approval to register with the SEC and raise $5.5 billion.... and the stock is UP $1.14 now. F***ing insane. The SEC is not allowing shorting in these 19 stocks so they can raise capital and dilute their shareholders. It is pretty apparent the FED cares not a lick about the shareholders of these companies. The credit markets are NOT BUYING IT, and they are usually more realistic about deteriorating fundementals. The stock market is emotional. As I have been saying in here for quite a while, it is only a matter of time for nationalization of FNM and FRE.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 10, 2008 -> 10:11 PM) Too big too fail. It would cripple the economy if the US allowed them to fail. But none of their officers and senior management should come out of this with any sort of bonus, golden parachute, etc. Like James Johnson, Franklin Raines, and Jamie Gorelick? The latter two should be prosecuted like the Enron boys for the accounting tricks that occurred on their watch.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 17, 2008 -> 01:13 PM) Down 11%, this was the biggest 3 day percentage drop in crude since 2003. Those damn speculators.

WFC and JPM beat beaten down earnings expectations. Yippy! But how did they do it? By being very aggressive on their loan loss reserves(WFC), and actually decreasing them(JPM). Lower loan loss reserves = higher profits.

For all of you writing (or reading about) how much ANWR, OCS and other increased domestic production would affect the price of gas, please note what Sen. Schumer just said on the floor about the impact of increased production in Saudi Arabia. “If they produced half a million barrels more oil a day the price would come down a very significant amount and, at the same time, it would stop the speculation that keeps driving up the price of oil.” Keep in mind, ANWR alone is projected to produce one million barrels a day, every day. In fact, if President Clinton had not vetoed legislation opening up a small portion of ANWR thirteen years ago (1995), a million barrels a day would be flowing from ANWR right now, helping to keep prices down at the pump. So if Sen. Schumer believes that a half million barrels a day from SAUDIA ARABIA would cause the price of oil to “come down a very significant amount,” just think what a million barrels—produced here in AMERICA through AMERICAN jobs—would do to lower the price of gas. Don’t take it from me, take it from the chairman of the Joint Economic Committee.

From Congress Daily: Democratic and Republican congressional aides say there is turmoil within the the House Homeland Security Committee's majority staff and that oversight work is being eclipsed by a focus on promoting contracting opportunities for small and minority-owned businesses. Sources who spoke only if they could remain anonymous said they are particularly concerned that the committee's new staff director, I. Lanier Avant, does not have the qualifications to lead the committee and faces a conflict of interest because he continues to serve as chief of staff in House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson's congressional office. They expressed concern that Avant must balance his duties on Thompson's personal staff, which includes attention to politics and fundraising, and managing the heavy responsibilities of running the committee, which he began doing last month. Avant does not have a security clearance. Sources said that raises questions about his ability to make decisions on issues involving classified information. Speaking candidly with CongressDaily, Avant said he does "the bulk of [Thompson's] political work."

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 16, 2008 -> 09:22 AM) Recognizing bad fundamentals and a failing business = predicting outcome of the Dow? How much money was withdrawn by customers before the distinguished Senator from New York opened his pie hole?

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jul 15, 2008 -> 03:21 PM) Another question, where was Schumer and the Senate banking committee when this problem was developing? Asleep at the wheel, as usual. And this is the government we are going to trust with covering all these companies? greeaaat Getting loans fron Fannie.

QUOTE (jackie hayes @ Jul 15, 2008 -> 09:30 AM) Laughable. And you're the one talking about faux outrage. Show me a credible source of your claim that Fannie and Freddie will cost the federal government $1 trillion. Not that they'll have financing available, blah blah blah, but that the END COST will be $1 trillion. You are comparing it to other costs, so unless you're just being flagrantly dishonest, that's what you should mean. Can't wait. If you look at what IMB itself said in the wake of Schumer's comments, the worst case version of the story goes like this -- IMB was already teetering on the brink of failure, and Schumer's comments triggered a fairly small number of withdrawals which pushed them into an area where automatically-triggered additional regulation prevented them from being able to raise capital. They certainly would have failed anyway (they'd been losing money for a long time, reflected in the stock price plummeting 80-90% over the last 6 mo; the default rate on their mortgages was most recently at 8%, and there was little hope it would get better soon). A think-tank report blasting IMB that came out the following Tuesday would have been enough, or a moth flapping its wings in Sacramento. Can't wait for you next post of Republican cant: how this all could have been avoided with lower taxes and less regulation. Since you say they would have failed anyway, what does your crystal ball tell you about the closing price of the Dow today?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 15, 2008 -> 02:49 PM) Financials are a tremendous 5 year play, imo. How are they going to make money while they are de-leveraging?

This seems like a good place for this: There was a great presentation recently at the National Press Club about the dangerous effects of medical socialism. From The Politico: Shona Robertson-Holmes was a mess. She had crushing headaches, insomnia and adrenaline levels so high that she constantly felt as if she had just stepped in front of a speeding bus. And that’s not to mention her rapidly deteriorating eyesight. She headed to her family doctor, who recommended that she see two specialists. But Robertson-Holmes is Canadian, and her state-provided health care gave her a wait time of four months to see a neurologist and six months to see an endocrinologist. Unable to get an expedited appointment, and with her eyesight worsening, Robertson-Holmes called the Mayo Clinic in Arizona and went in for tests and a diagnosis within a week. The doctors there told her she had a four-to-six-week window to have a marble-sized tumor on her pituitary gland removed before her vision loss would be irreversible. Returning home with the diagnosis, the Ontario native was still unable to expedite the surgery. Three weeks later, she came back to Mayo for brain surgery. And she took out a second mortgage to pay for the $100,000 ordeal. “Universal coverage” is not the same thing as timely access to high-quality care.

QUOTE (santo=dorf @ Jul 7, 2008 -> 06:21 PM) Probably what every union contract states regarding outsourcing work. It has to be offered to them first before sending it to someone else. The union is correct in this case. Outsourced to?......... Another UNION!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 10:40 AM) Interesting note I saw on another site speculates that the deal was structured with the 100 million up front as to avoid the Obama tax increases. By taking the money today he would save $17 million in taxes as opposed to if Obama passes the tax increases he has proposed. That will buy a lot of fuel for the new G550 he is buying.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Jul 6, 2008 -> 09:04 PM) Chalk up another reason why I dislike unions and why they are losing ground in America. I hope even their members are embarrassed by this. Don't hold your breath on that one.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 10:53 AM) I bet he was taking sniper fire. Nice!!!

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 10:50 AM) That would seem odd. If they are trapped in shorts, they would probably be liquidating as fast as they could, and that would glut the market (thus lowering prices). Unless, you are saying that they are all sticking it out, waiting for a correction before expiry. ETA: Or, do you mean they are offsetting into long positions as a makeup? And flooding the market with buys that way? As in, a failed wave of shorts? Short covering.

Rumor has it Premiere?Clear Channel is trying to lure Hannity with a $200 million/8yr deal.

Was McCain piloting the helicopter that freed the hostages? He is/was in Colombia.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 09:19 AM) http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion...0,5041638.story I believe the speculation that has driven up oil in the last month has been from trapped shorts.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 3, 2008 -> 09:38 AM) oh shoosh! I meant VP running mate. Just funning ya.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Jul 2, 2008 -> 06:39 PM) The average rate was all of 30 basis points higher than the rate than what Obama got. Having a better than average FICO score and a secure job history gets you that. What were the points on his loan?