The Light: Hillary

We’ll add more later as we find them.

(Editor’s Note: Late last night, Larry Johnson opined on the cartoon brouhaha in “More Sanctimonious Leftist Bullshit.” Little did we know that American Girl In Italy had also done her own RIFF on it. This is great! Read it too!)

Seriously, who wrote the stimulus bill?

Was it Obama? Pelosi? Members of Congress? Harry Reid? Lobbyists?

Who wrote the stimulus bill that was signed Tuesday?

Answer that question, and then click here:

This cartoon appeared in the New York Post. Al Sharpton is up in arms calling it racist. What say you?

Mr. Sharpton, who has been a subject in cartoons in The Post, said in a statement on his Web site:

The cartoon in today’s New York Post is troubling at best, given the racist attacks throughout history that have made African-Americans synonymous with monkeys. One has to question whether the cartoonist is making a less than casual inference to this form of racism when, in the cartoon, the police say after shooting a chimpanzee, “now they will have to find someone else to write the stimulus bill.”

Being that the stimulus bill has been the first legislative victory of President Barack Obama (the first African American president) and has become synonymous with him it is not a reach to wonder whether the Post cartoonist was inferring that a monkey wrote it?

Yes, he is inferring a monkey wrote the bill. But, Obama didn’t write the bill. Pelosi did, with the help of members of Congress, and lobbyists. (He was mocking politicians in DC that wrote the bill, much like people called Bush a monkey for eight years!)

Al Sharpton is the one saying Obama is the monkey, not the cartoonist. I would never have put two and two together and assumed the monkey was supposed to be Obama. Obama didn’t write the stimulus bill.

“Gov. David A. Paterson, the Rev. Al Sharpton and others expressed concern on Wednesday morning over an editorial cartoon in The New York Post that showed a police officer telling his colleague who just shot a chimpanzee, “They’ll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill.”

Critics said the cartoon, drawn by Sean Delonas, implicitly compared President Obama with the primate and evoked a history of racist imagery of blacks. The chimpanzee was an apparent reference to the 200-pound pet chimpanzee that was shot dead by a police officer in Stamford, Conn., on Monday evening, after it mauled a friend of his owner.”

“What does shooting a chimpanzee have to do with a stimulus bill?” Mr. Sharpton said. “This raises all the racial stereotypes we are trying to get away from this in this country.” He added: “I’m not speaking on behalf of the president or the chimpanzee. I‘m speaking on behalf of the offended African-American community.”

Has Sharpton just been sitting on the edge of his seat, waiting for a reason to be relevant again? Had Obama written the bill, ok. It would totally be offensive! (even more offensive than comparing Bush to a monkey) But Obama didn’t write it.

In a statement, Col Allan, editor in chief of The Post, denied Mr. Sharpton’s assertion that the cartoon was “racially charged.” Mr. Allan said:

The cartoon is a clear parody of a current news event, to wit the shooting of a violent chimpanzee in Connecticut. It broadly mocks Washington’s efforts to revive the economy. Again, Al Sharpton reveals himself as nothing more than a publicity opportunist.

City Councilman Leroy G. Comrie Jr., a Queens Democrat, called for a boycott of the newspaper. “To run such a violent, racist cartoon is an insult to all New Yorkers,” he said in a statement. “This was an unfortunate incident in which a human being was seriously injured- not an opportunity to sling dangerous rhetoric. It is my belief that The New York Post owes an immediate apology to this city for demonstrating such terrible judgment and insensitivity.”

Now, I will agree that the monkey attack was a horrible incident, and perhaps it is much too soon to be making light of the situation. But, I think calling it racist is off the mark. I can’t imagine they would have been that blatantly stupid. The cartoon was calling Congress a bunch of monkeys. Just like people have done for as long as I can remember.

And like I said, Obama didn’t write the bill. Dumb cartoon? Sure. Racist? If Obama had written the bill, yes. But he didn’t.
What do you say?

Update: Since writing this post, on Wednesday morning, Al Sharpton has organized a protest to shut down the Post. I guess hundreds of people were there. I’m sorry, but to me, THEY are the ones comparing Obama to, and calling him an ape. Sharpton is the one who made this all about Obama and racism.

They want to shut down the New York Post, and throw hundreds of people out of work, because they don’t understand who rote the $800 Billion stimulus bill?

I think Obama needs to step forward and say that this was not about him. He needs to tell them that he did not write the bill. The cartoonist was mocking Congress for authoring what some are calling the greatest generational theft in history. And last time I checked, we can still mock our elected officials.

If Obama had written the bill, I would agree, it was horrible. I don’t like the cartoon anyway, because it is violent, and the poor lady is still in intensive care.

But I think Sharpton is totally wrong on this one.

Amazed by the news that Barack’s nominee to head up Health Care reform, one Tommy Daschle, forgot to pay taxes and did not realize a free limo constituted income? Astonished that Barack’s boy to rescue the nation from the collapse of the world’s economy, Turbo Tax Timmy Geithner, could not figure out how to pay back taxes until he is nominated to head up the IRS? Well, sit your ass down and grab your blood pressure meds or a stiff drink.

Today we learned that another of the really, really smart guys–a Ph.D. in physics and a Noble laureate no less–who was named to head the Department of Energy did not realize that he was in charge of oil policy for the U.S. Government. Meet Steven Chu.

Just one question–Steven Chu, how fucking clueless are you?

Here’s MSNBC’s take:

The day before, reporters asked him about OPEC output levels after a speech to a group of utility regulators. He responded that the issue was “not in my domain.”

Later, in a conference call to reporters, he said his answer reflected “more of my naiveté than anything else.”

Now, if you are smart like a nuclear physicist what is it about being put in charge of the Department of Energy that would lead you to believe that oil has nothing to do with energy? You are in charge of energy and “oil” is not in your domain? WHAT THE FUCK!!!!

What next? A nominee for Health and Human Services who does not realize they have a responsibility for health care? If you are in charge of the Department of Defense do you think it far out to assume that you might have some responsibility for the military?

Just when you thought no one could surpass Bush for assembling a crowd of mediocrities Barack Obama shows up to give him a run for his money. And the country gets screwed in the process.

UPDATE: And in case you forgot, boy wonder couldn’t figure out that if you condemn a company like Countrywide Mortgage then you should not put a guy linked to Countrywide in charge of your Vice Presidential search committee:

Let’s see this about Barky–at least he’s consistent. He consistently chooses people for jobs who don’t know much about their job, including himself.

In response to a passing comment in an earlier piece on NQ about the debate over global warning, one of the readers responded that the issue was settled, and suggested that all independent serious scientists were unanimous in their conclusions that the “fact” of global warming could not be disputed.

Yet here is a video by a respected TV weatherman that claims that no fewer than 30,000 leading scientists dispute this supposed consensus. So why has so little been heard about these dissenting voices when so much media coverage has been given to Al Gore, who even won a Nobel prize for what could be the promulgation of dubious science?

The answer, of course, is that global warming is an issue dear to the hearts of the green lobby, which in turn is dear to the hearts of the “save the planet” Hollywood chatocracy and the left-dominated media. Meanwhile, rational and objective debate is being stifled.

But this is only the tip of the iceberg. It seems to me that there are a wide range of issues and events that continue to be swept under the carpet, or at least not conclusively investigated by the media, like the question of Obama’s relationships with some strange people (including Larry Sinclair), where his $1 billion campaign funding came from, Barney Frank’s relationships with Freddy Mac, Acorn and a whole raft of other issues.

The mainstream media silence on these questions is deafening, except for the independent media channels and Fox.

My very first blog post on NQ was about Indian Muslims and how they reacted to the horrible Mumbai attacks on November 26, 2008. In it I reported how an Indian Muslim Organization was refusing to bury the terrorists. Tom Friedman at NYT wrote this in his Op-Ed on Tuesday:

There are nine bodies — all of them young men — that have been lying in a Mumbai hospital morgue since Nov. 29. They may be stranded there for a while because no local Muslim charity is willing to bury them in its cemetery. This is good news.

The nine are the Pakistani Muslim terrorists who went on an utterly senseless killing rampage in Mumbai on 26/11 — India’s 9/11 — gunning down more than 170 people, including 33 Muslims, scores of Hindus, as well as Christians and Jews. It was killing for killing’s sake. They didn’t even bother to leave a note.

All nine are still in the morgue because the leadership of India’s Muslim community has called them by their real name — “murderers” not “martyrs” — and is refusing to allow them to be buried in the main Muslim cemetery of Mumbai, the 7.5-acre Bada Kabrastan graveyard, run by the Muslim Jama Masjid Trust.

“People who committed this heinous crime cannot be called Muslim,” Hanif Nalkhande, a spokesman for the trust, told The Times of London.

Eventually, one assumes, they will have to be buried, but the Mumbai Muslims remain defiant.

“Indian Muslims are proud of being both Indian and Muslim, and the Mumbai terrorism was a war against both India and Islam,” explained M.J. Akbar, the Indian-Muslim editor of Covert, an Indian investigative journal. “Terrorism has no place in Islamic doctrine. The Koranic term for the killing of innocents is ‘fasad.’ Terrorists are fasadis, not jihadis. In a beautiful verse, the Koran says that the killing of an innocent is akin to slaying the whole community. Since the … terrorists were neither Indian nor true Muslims, they had no right to an Islamic burial in an Indian Muslim cemetery.”

[May be now that Pakistan has accepted responsibility for the Mumbai attacks and acknowledged that the terrorists came from Pakistan's soil, those bodies should be shipped to Pakistan.]

Friedman goes on to say:

The only effective way to stop this [Extolling or excusing suicide militants as “martyrs”] trend is for “the village” — the Muslim community itself — to say “no more.” When a culture and a faith community delegitimizes this kind of behavior, openly, loudly and consistently, it is more important than metal detectors or extra police. Religion and culture are the most important sources of restraint in a society.

That’s why India’s Muslims, who are the second-largest Muslim community in the world after Indonesia’s, and the one with the deepest democratic tradition, do a great service to Islam by delegitimizing suicide-murderers by refusing to bury their bodies. It won’t stop this trend overnight, but it can help over time.

While one Muslim community reacts responsibly calling these terrorists for what they are, murderers, there are troubling developments in other Islamic countries. It appears that Taliban and their pals Al Queda have now been given territory, a safe haven if you will by Pakistan in the Swat valley and they are already establishing Sharia law there.

I am no foreign policy expert but I did make this observation on my last post on this topic:

What did we accomplish from the 2001-2002 incursion into Afghanistan? It appears to me that the Taliban and Al Qaeda just got relocated with all expenses paid by the Pakistan Army and its Intelligence unit.

Bush’s incoherent Pakistan policy and taking his eyes off the ball from Afghanistan to invade Iraq come at a huge price, not the least of which is the dire political conditions in Pakistan. This is what one Times of India (TOI) article is reporting on the US reaction to Pakistan’s deal with Taliban:

The Obama administration’s yet to be formulated policy on Pakistan and Afghanistan is already being tested after Islamabad’s defiant move to make another peace deal with the Taliban amid mounting US concern and frustration.

Both US and NATO officials have expressed disquiet about the latest ”peace” deal in Swat, the kind which they say has in the past given Taliban and Al Qaeda elements space and time to regroup in Waziristan and other parts of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan.

US response to the rebellious Pakistani move has been muted given the upcoming review of Washington’s Af-Pak policy, but on a four-country Asia visit to China, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made no secret of American unease.

Washington is studying the agreement and trying to understand the Pakistani government’s ”intention and the actual agreed-upon language,” Clinton told reporters on Tuesday in Tokyo, the first stop.

However, she added that ”activity by the extremist elements in Pakistan poses a direct threat to the government of Pakistan as well as to the security of the United States, Afghanistan and a number of other nations not only in the immediate region.”

But where Pakistan is concerned one has to wonder if it is not capitalizing on the lull and change of guard in the US trying to shock everybody into compliance by their latest move to call truce with Taliban militants and giving up Swat region to them. It remains to be seen what their real agenda is. The article in TOI goes on to give us a clue to Pakistan’s behavior:

Pakistan’s move comes amid a massive trust deficit between Washington and Islamabad, and just days ahead of a visit here by the country’s army chief Pervez Kiyani, who was once seen as a hand-picked U.S ally, but is now regarded as a two-faced patron of terror, much the way his predecessor Pervez Musharraf is now being characterised.

Both Musharraf and Kiyani, and indeed the Pakistani military, have been exposed as duplicitous in a recent book called ”The Inheritance” by New York Times reporter David Sanger in which he cites U.S intelligence phone taps that show Pakistani military’s double-dealing.

In one telling excerpt, Sanger describes a telephone-tap transcript passed to Mike McConnell, the Director of National Intelligence in May 2008, in which Kiyani is heard referring to the warlord terrorist Jalaluddin Haqqani as ”a strategic asset.” Washington later intercepted calls from Pakistani military units to Haqqani, warning him of an impending military operation designed to prove to the US that Islamabad was tackling the militant threat.

”They must have dialled 1-800-HAQQANI” a source tells Sanger. “]It was something like, ‘Hey, we’re going to hit your place in a few days, so if anyone important is there, you might want to tell them to scram’’’ The intercept was apparently the clue that led the CIA to uncover evidence of collusion between ISI and Haqqani in the bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul — an act that would put Kiyani in the dock.

When it comes to war on terror, Pakistan is having its cake and eating it too. I hope US can implement smart policies calling Pakistan’s game to its face. This is what Richard Holbrooke said in one interview:

“We are troubled and confused in the sense about what happened in Swat, because it is not an encouraging trend,” Richard Holbrooke, the Special US Representative for Pakistan and Afghanistan told the PBS news channel in an interview.

Having just returned from South Asia wherein he met leaders of Pakistan, Afghanistan and India, Holbrooke said the Pakistanis are shocked at the fall of the picturesque Swat, which is after all a resort they all went to for vacations.

“So we have a situation in the area which is very serious. This is what we inherited,” he said.

This is for the first time that an administration official has spoken clearly against the peace deal between the Taliban and the Pakistan government.

A South Asia expert sums up US reaction thus far as lacking.

Observing the Obama administration has reacted cautiously to this news, Curtis said this sends a signal of weakness in the region precisely at the time the US needs to demonstrate resolve against the forces of extremism and terrorism.

“Washington’s prevarication on the take-over of the Swat Valley by pro-Taliban forces undermines US policy in the region and raises the critical question of why the US would send troops to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan, while standing by as Islamist extremists gain ground in neighboring Pakistan,” Curtis said.

When it comes to terrorists, like Friedman says the key to peace is in the hands of much of the international Muslim community itself. But when it comes to deceptive State actors like Pakistan, what should the US and other countries do?

Barack did not start the war in Afghanistan, he did not mismanage the policy for the last seven years, but it is now his baby and will probably be his version of Jimmy Carter’s failure to rescue the U.S. hostages in Iran, only worse. For starters I encourage you to watch the following from Charlie Rose. Very informative and worth your time.

(Discussion about Afghanistan with Craig Mullaney, Dexter Filkins, Martha Raddatz and Milt Bearden in Current Affairs on Monday, February 16, 2009)

Here is why Barack is caught.

We do not have enough military forces and economic resources to commit to Afghanistan to make a significant difference on the ground. Those resources–both military and economic–have been consumed by the Iraq war and last years economic meltdown.

With out enough troops on the ground we do not have the ability to protect villagers who may want to cooperate with us. Our lack of force presence led us to rely heavily on air strikes. Big problem–air plane bombs are not precision weapons and we have killed enough civilians that we have given the Taliban and other opponents to the U.S. presence a great issue for rallying local support. We have become the bad guys. We are losing the Information Operations war.

Here is where it gets tricky. The Commander of the international forces in Afghanistan, General David McKiernan, says we need a troop level of at least 60,000 troops for at least three years.

Here’s Barack’s very first Carter moment–he is not giving the military Commander what the commander says he needs. But even if Barack could provide a full up 30,000 troops there is still a big problem–we do not have the logistics supply lines and bases in place to sustain such a force.

We have a big problem, worsening by the day, with our supply lines from Pakistan and Krygystan are being attacked and/or shut down. If we had more forces it becomes more critical, not less, to keep those opening and functioning.

Then we have the absence of a coherent, integrated strategy. A buddy of mine who has served with the CIA in Afghanistan told me recently that the CIA is not even conducting coordinated ops in country. There is not a coordinated plan. CIA operatives in Kandahar are doing one thing while those in Kabul are doing something completely different.

The military picture is worse. U.S. conventional forces are operating on a different sheet of music from that pursued by U.S. special operations forces and by NATO forces. In essence we have at least four independent, uncoordinated military efforts underway.

There are now two separate policy reviews underway in Washington. That in an of itself tells you that we still have no one in control. General Petraeus is conducting a review and President Obama has commissioned a review, which reportedly is being lead by Bruce Reidel, a former CIA analyst.

This is not about blaming Obama. But whether he likes it or not he is going to wear Afghanistan as his war. Milt Bearden is right about that. It is tough enough to wage a war when the economy is swell and the tax coffers are full. But with the economy in the toilette there are no easy, good options. This is like a bad TV series–Welcome Back Carter!

With rare and scattered exceptions, Chris “Tweety” Matthews was not kind to Hillary (or Bill) Clinton. His rude remarks were childish and reeked with suppressed envy. Meanwhile, Matthews gushed over Barack Obama like a love-sick teenager. On February 12, 2008, he made this astounding admission:

“I have to tell you, you know, it’s part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama’s speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don’t have that too often.”

Yeah, neither do I. At least not since I was potty trained.

So needless to say it was a surprise to see who won his fifth “Hardball Award” this week. None other than Hillary Rodham Clinton! He gleefully portrayed her as knowing the art and science of human behavior by being savvy, street smart, grace under fire, knowing what to do, and doing it. Yep, he did! No tingle, but you gotta give the guy some credit.

On February 12, 2009, in Buffalo, NY, 44-year-old Muzzamil Hassan, a prominent Muslim businessman, was arrested for having allegedly beheaded his wife, thirty-seven year-old Aasiya Z. Hassan.

What was Aasiya’s crime? Apparently, days before Aasiya had served Muzzamil with divorce papers.

Join “Sins of Omission” on Monday, February 23rd at 9 pm EST as we talk with Marcia Pappas, President of NOW (New York State) about the role of culture and religion in violence against women.

As always, Paula Abeles will be beautifully prepared for this important interview, and YOUR questions and comments will be encouraged during the show!

FOR MORE on this hideous story, check out LisaB’s post last night, “Brewing scandal, Replacing the “n-word,” Buffalo beheading, and an Obama apology?.”

And, if you missed last Monday’s remarkable and truly historic radio program hosted by the always-incredibly-prepared Paula (aka Paulie) Abeles, do listen. You will NOT regret it.

HERE is the link to that great program: “We ARE ON THE AIR! Join Paula Abeles & Historic Women’s Activist Lilly Ledbetter In 25 Minutes on No Quarter Radio!.” (That post includes some great photographs and background on Lily Ledbetter.)

ALSO: If you look in the right margin of our blog, in the gold box titled “Blog Talk Radio” and “No Quarter Radio” (our channel at BlogTalkRadio.com) you will see links to both the BlogTalkRadio.com and to the iTunes/iPod versions of all of our archived shows. We also provide instructions for how you can subscribe to all of our programs via iTunes!

Howard Dean reacts to being told he has no shot at being the new head of HHS

Barack Obama would not be where he is today without Howard Dean. The former Vermont Governor and DNC Chairman created the blueprints that David Axelrod would expand upon to garner the 2008 Democratic Party presidential nomination for the junior Senator from Illinois. In 2004 Dean built a presidential nomination campaign based on grassroots support and small internet donations. He energized the net roots and helped the far left blogosphere find a voice and influence.

Dean did not succeed, but Obama’s team had four years to study what he did right and where he went wrong. They found ways to exploit regulations involving internet donations, control the flow of information on blogs and add some old fashioned Chicago wrangling to the caucus game.

After losing out in 2004, Dean’s consolation prize was to chair the DNC. He took a party stung by the loss of John Kerry and the despair that followed and helped energize it. His 50 state strategy helped pave the way for Obama’s red state organizing and was key to providing President Obama with the congressional majorities he now enjoys. Dean also helped stack the deck in Obama’s favor. The Florida and Michigan mess played out Obama’s way thanks to a heavy DNC hand, the DNC stayed remarkably silent over documented instances of caucus fraud and even this most progressive party chair had nothing to say over the mistreatment of Senator Hillary Clinton and the outright misogyny displayed throughout the campaign.

This of course makes Dean the perfect passenger for a ride under the Obama bus.

Howard Dean probably never expected to stay on as DNC Chairman following the Obama victory. Tradition has the President selecting his “own man” to head the party. Even so, it would be hard for Governor Tim Kaine to deliver for Obama the way Dean did. Dean was apparently not even welcome to the press conference where Obama tapped Kaine to be the next chair. I am sure they made sure the door didn’t hit Howie in the ass on the way out. One could imagine Obama saying “thanks for the help there Ho (an endearing term used by the rappers the President enjoys), but we won’t be needing you around here anymore.”

Today, there just happens to be a help wanted sign on the office of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. There is probably no Democrat as qualified for this position as Howard Dean. He is a doctor and former governor with a record of expanding health care opportunities for the residents of Vermont, particularly children. He is a favorite with the progressive base that will called upon to generate support for some form of nationalized health care and has proven he can organize and win political battles.

He also has no shot of landing the job (although his odds are slightly better than Tom Daschle’s.) White House insiders say there are worried that Dean is too divisive and partisan to bring Republicans into the fold. Some GOP support will be needed to get any kind of meaningful health care reform through the Senate. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is also no fan of Dr. Dean. The two apparently had some real knock down, drag out battles over how DNC funds would be used in congressional races back when Emanuel was the head of the Congressional Campaign Committee.

Dean no longer has any real value to the Obama administration, he has given them all he can. If they really wanted him at HHS, they could have him. They could leave the GOP wooing to someone else and let him just work on the policy. However, Dean is used up as far as the Obama team is concerned and just not worth any potential headaches.

The net roots are trying help Dean’s case with petitions and postings and old liners like Tom Harkin are pushing his candidacy, but it is all for naught. The word on the street is that Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius will be the pick (once her tax returns have been vetted by a team of 50 different accountants.) She is a one time state insurance commissioner and has spent the last eight years as a Governor overseeing a state medicaid program. Coming from red state Kansas, she is skilled at working across party lines. It will be a surprise if she is not the pick.

As for Howard Dean, well hopefully Sebelius will craft a plan that covers injuries sustained while being run over by the Obama bus.

These are clearly the times that try our souls. In an attempt to bring a measure of perspective to the markets and economy, let us review some month-to-date stats for February and add economic commentary:

DJIA: -9%
S&P 500: -5.7%
Nasdaq: -2.3%
Bonds: flat to -10% depending on sector
$/Yen: 94.14 versus 89.81
$/Euro: 1.262 vs 1.280
Oil: 38.78 vs 41.60
Gold: 975 vs 929

There really has been no place to hide. Why? Very simply because in a “massive margin call” (selling assets purchased with borrowed money) when debt cannot be refinanced, all assets are “on sale” in order to pay down debts!!

We have achieved the objective we were looking for in the DJIA and are about 5% away from the objective on the S&P. If there are people who were outright short the market “nobody ever went broke taking a profit.” The question is where do we go from here? In order to address that question, we need to break it down into its component parts.

Will we see more forced selling and by whom?
Yes . . . hedge funds, private equity, insurance companies and others all will be sellers. Wall Street banks will NOT allocate balance sheet to take on assets. As painful as this is, I personally do not think we have seen a capitulation. While there will be some pools of private capital to provide liquidity as need be, they will be patient. As bad as the market feels, it does not strike me as oversold or overly cheap based upon expected earnings and the degree of uncertainty/risk.

Interest Rates
While we saw healthy activity in various sectors of the bond market in the first 6 weeks of the year, many sectors have given back a lot of ground this week. Credit risks, default risks, and foreclosure risks are keeping investors away. With a whiff of inflation today in the Producer Price Index and the Federal Reserve minutes focusing on inflation more than deflation, I do think we can see a serious move higher in government rates.

Global Markets
Europe is worse off than the United States. Asian markets had initially bounced but have since given back those gains. These export based economies have come to a screeching halt. Germany indicated it may take a stand, if need be, to support the Euro. Eastern European losses pose major concerns for Western European banks. I also read a startling stat today that Western European banks hold 75% of emerging market debt, while the U.S. and Asian banks hold less than 10% each. Sovereign credit risks are very high. Could a government default or devalue its currency to manage its debt? Most definitely!!

Economy
It is all focused on global government intervention. While the Obama Administration has only been in office for a month, the markets are not giving him, Secretary Geithner, and team a resounding welcome. The Administration has created measures of uncertainty while Congress was nothing short of pathetic in the process and execution of the stimulus plan. The housing plan and bank plans also present a wide array of “unintended consequences” which unsettle the market.

When can I get constructive?
I will go back to my piece entitled “Reason for Optimism” which I wrote on the heels of the Administration propping the “bad bank” (remember, I liked Bank Transition). For those who forget, the DJIA moved up toward 8600-8700 at that point and is down approximatley 13% since then. I do think the market is going to price certain banks to the point where the government will have little choice but to temporarily nationalize them. Where is Sheila Bair? We used to hear from her regularly. Has Secretary Geithner stifled her? The sooner the government makes this move, the sooner the markets may start to stabilize while not necessarily improve. Can you make investment decisions based on what wonks and policy mavens in Washington may do? We’ll keep our ear to the ground but don’t hold your breath because they have not given us a lot of confidence to this point.

I’ll keep writing. Please keep your cards and letters coming!!

LD