Saturday, October 11, 2008

Wall Street, Larry Kudlow, and CNBC, Communists: The "Fing'er" Points at YOU

ACPRM, and the Democrats how support it, made a strong push for the "Finger" this week. See today's entry, and the earlier entry this week about radical ACORN member Tony Romo, who let himself be cloned to vote for Obama in Nevada.  But, ultimately, the spinning Flying, Fickle Finger of Fate came to rest this week pointing at more serious culprits.
 
As "old" readers know by now, the "Finger" is my unauthorized reincarnation of the old "Laugh In" award for outstanding stupidity and/or evil that came to light in the previous week.  It is represented by a statuette of an INDEX finger.
 
There was never much doubt this week.  The "Finger" came to rest on those Communists (ok, not quite, but close) on Wall Street and CNBC, as well as upon Larry Kudlow as a worthy representative of the worst of them.  These people should all just shut up and go away . You should definitely pay no attention to any of them, except to wish ill for everyone on Wall Street (if only that did not mean wishing ill for a good number of us!!!).  You sshould, of course, pay no attention t any of these people, ever again.
 
Did CNBC do anything to prevent this financial crisis?   Nope.  Did they really warn of it in advance, or even of the housing "bubble".  Nope.  How about Larry Kudlow?  You have got to be kidding.  What have they done?  They have spread panic and fear--all while claiming that we need "confidence".  See entries for the past week, and indeed for the past 3 weeks.
 
They (CNBC, Kudlow and Wall Street) keep claiming to believe in "free marekts".  They don't.  What they believe in, and it became clearer every day this week, is in Wall Street--specifically in the Federal Government, and the governments of the entire world, bailing out Wall Street by whatever means Wall Street demands.  You don't get any more hypocritical and intellectually dishonest than this--to the extent that I have correctly called all of these people (Kudlow, CNBC, and all of "Wall Street") corrupt. By this, I don not mean that they are corrupt in the sense of fraud for personal gain, although many of those on Wall Street are, but that they are so intellectually dishonest in pursuing their self-interest that no other word is adequate. 
 
My point is illustrated by some woman who was head of some "Association of Community Banks", or some similar name, who appeared on Kudlow's "special report" on CNBC on Friday.  She nailed Kudlow, although he did not seem to realize it.  She said that the Fed and Wall Street seemed only interested in bailing out the "big banks", and big Wall Street firms--not  in helping banks in communities who are still giving out loans and taking deposits (no "credit freeze" there).  This woman noted that 4 financial institutions in this country now control 50% of the deposits.  While I have no personal knowledge of whether she is right in that figure, she seemed to know what she is talking about.  It is those big institutions--the institutions that CNBC, Wall Street, and Larry Kudlow kept wanting to get bigger and bigger--which pose "systemic risk".  What the woman said was that it is these big institutions favored by Wall Street that the Federal Government keeps talking about helping, and which are the only ones Wall Street wants the Federal Government to help.  They are uninterested in the banks still making loans to "main street". 
 
She was right, and could have gone further (did go further, by implication),  It is fhose huge Wall Street "favorites" who directly got us into this mess--not any of the ordinary banks, credit unions, or savings and loans out there.  It is Bear Stearns.  It is AIG.  It is Lehman Brothers.  It is Goldman Sachs.  It is the big hedge funds.  It is the "professional traders" featured on CNBC.  It is Morgan Stanley  It is even Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan/Chase, and Citigroup.  To the extent there is a "credit freeze" in our financial system, those four are creating it--along with Wall Street favorites like Goldman Sachs and Genreal Electric (big credit unit).
 
Leftist Democrats in Congress, and in organizations like ACORN, started this "subprime" mess in housing, and the Federal Government--Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were basically Democrat fiefdoms--pushed the ridiculous central planning notion that everyone could have a house.  But Wall Street created its particular part of the problem. 
 
Yes, it was Wall Street who came up with credit instruments (like "credit default swaps") that it did not know how to use--created derivatives andother instruments with which it levered out of all reason, as institutions like AIG insured the whole unholy mess.  How did Wall Street institutions get so big that they could not fail?  They merged, for one thing.  One of the things I have passed over is how this financial crisis has proven (yet again) this blog to be right. Big mergers of healthy companies should not be allowed (there is no choice when companies are failing, although the irony here is that we are creating companies still more obviously "too big to fail").  Wall Street created these corporate Wall Street empires.  Then when the emperors (like Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, although he left Goldman Sachs after putting it in position to fail, and then bailed out his own firm as Treasury Secretary)  turned out to have no clothes, Wall Street suddenly all became COMMUNISTS (I use that as hyperbole for Big Government Guys). 
 
Wall Street created their own problems.  No, they are not the "innocent victims" of events beyond their control.  They were certainly not the "victims" of lax government regulation.  They were the willing accomplices in the housing boom/bubble/madness. 
 
Having created their own problems, Wall Street now demands that the taxpayer bail them all out, on penalty of the whole system crashing (because of those too big corporate empires built on sand).  For that act of extortion alone (exactly like a 20 year old killing his own parents and then throwing himself on the mercy of the court as a poor orphan), Wall Street deserves the "Finger".  Wall Street is demanding that the taxpayers bail Wall Street out of the mess Wall Street created (its part of it).  Even more rage inducing: Wall Street wants the taxpayer to do anything necessary to restore the easy credit, and rescue the faulty financial instruments, which got Wall Street in trouble in the first place!
 
Yes, Learry Kudlow, and those other Communists on Wall Street, are now saying that the Wall Street bailout bill is not enough to loosen credit--because of the lost confidence caused by Wall Street and CNBC extortion in fear mongering to get passage of the Wall Street bailout in the first place.  Therefore, Kudlow "and company" want the taxpayer to guarantee every interbank loan.  I could not make this stuff up.  And because Wall Street and the "establishment" seem to be one these days--even the leftist establishment--the government seems to be considering this insanity. 
 
You may well ask what an "interbank" loan is.  Kudlow keeps referring to it as "parking money overnight"--intellectually dishonest as he is.  You could argue a thousand years and not explain how "parking money overnight" will loosen up the credit markets.  What "Wall Street" really wants is a blank check for Wall Street.  They want the Federal Government (taxpayers) to spend whatever it takes, in the way Wall Street wants in a manner to the maximum benefit of Wall Street, and not to benefit those "community banks" or "communities".
 
Note again that these people wanting a blank check--including Bernanke and Paulson--are the same people that got us into this mess with their mistakes.  That includes CNBC, and Kudlow.  The original people have not been shot, so that we are dealing with "innocent" successors.  These are the same people who misled us (lied to us) to get us into this mess.  Shooting is too good for them for that nerve alone.  The "Finger" is too good for them.   "Guarantee all interbank loans my ass!!!", and they want central planning worldwide to do that.  Such a measure, of course, would not give one loan to a small business on "main street", while help for local banks might (see that woman mentioned above again, and the "community banks" might indeed be pretty much "innocent" here--especially on a relative basis).
 
No.  Kudlow, you are a lousy human being, because you are intellectually dishonest.  So is most of CNBC.
 
Sidebar:  Every time Kudlow, or someone else on CNBC, mentions "LIBOR" (the interbank lending rate which, for the life of me, is not that important and not that easy to bring down directly by government action that makes any sense) should feel EL KABONG.  Yes, they should immediately be bonked over the head with a guitar. A small "finger" is awarded to every person on CNBC who mentions LIBOR with a solemn face (meaning to convey the message:  "I am smart.  I know the significance of LIBOR.  You idiots don't.  So you should listen to me.").
 
If you people are on Wall Street are so smart, why do you need the hick taxpayers to bail you out.  None of these people, despite their losses, seem to be missing their meals.  They are still confident the taxpayers will save their "fat cat" hides.  I would not, and would not have.  I still wiould not.  Whether you agree with me or not, you have to agree with one thing:  All of these people deserve to have to start over with no money.
 
You still doubt me on Kudlow and CNBC (you fool you!)?  Consider that Kudlow, and virtually everyone (besides Cramer) on CNBC opposes restrictions on short selling as an "intrusion" on the market.  Translation:  It interferes with what they want to do--with their own self-interest.  These people are despicable.  They are intellectually dishonest.  They prevented restrictions on short selling, even after short selling obviously drove Bear Starns down and threatened Lehman (and multiple other financial insitutions).  Maybe banning short selling (temporarily) would have saved the government from turning to socialism, at the demand of Wall Street, and maybe it wuoldn't.  But anyone who says that restrictions on short selling are more on an interference with the free market than the socialism that has happened is a dishonest idiot.  Kudlow that means you.
 
Why go on?  You know in your heart that these people all deserve it. 
 
Award ceremony--as usual taking place entirely in the imagination, with no graphics.  I ask you to use, as a visual aid, the image of Dick Martin presenting the "Finger" statuette on "Laugh In":
 
Imagine Dick Martin thrusting the "Finger" at the camera, and saying:  "Wall Street, Larry Kudlow, and CNBC, this for you.  You deserve it.  I hope you don't believe anyone on Earth still respects you anymore, or believes a single word you say."
 
Return next week, wherever this blog is, and see where the spinning Flying, Fickle Finger of Fate comes to rest next time. 

No comments: