Guest yobob1 Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 What a week, eh? Bobbing Head Bear posted on Oct 1 @ 6:52 PM MT (By the way Welcome, Bobbing Head Bear) Me think this is the event we have all been waiting for..... Ranger Rick and Rog have pointed out there has been MASSIVE selling in the Treasuries in the last few days. What other clues should we be looking for? IF you were Al, what would you do? Anyone here have a position on her yet? Think she is terminal like WCON and Enron? Will they drag her around like Bernie until the stench becomes unbearabul? What is the over/under time frame for the 9001 hedgehogs to lose all its money so we can continue this BEAR? Blaming the matrix is really sad... (for most of us) trying to out gamble each other and thinking you can or should win is moronic. The game will be here until we all lose all our money. This is a bull mkt is metals and a bear in paper... Just position and hold. I think there's a lot of truth here regarding the hedgehogs and what I still sense is short heavy market. Shorts can be their own worst enema at times. That's not to say markets can't or won't be manipulated, but IMO they need some help and little luck to do so Secondly position and hold - amen to that bro. Currently my holdings are up 49% after about 3 years - no trading costs post initial purchase - no taxes paid as for now the gains are unrealized. All in what I consider a safer investment than US govt. toilet paper or CDs. But then I don't, or try to, make a living trading the markets. Not my cup of tea. My business provides plenty of thrills as it is. And a thrilling year it has been - ytd sales are up 157%. Cash now represents 60+% of "book value". Still have one quarter to go though and the election noise may slow sales - frequently happens in our business. And thanks to Shrub's loopholes set to expire this year I will be able to expense away the profit and if the plan stays on track, pay no taxes. Lest you think I'm buying Ferraris and writing them off, most of the expenses are going into capital improvements and additional or improved equipment. Geeze, I feel just like Microsoft without the stock options flim flam! Getting back to Bobbing Head's first paragraph, this little "noise" on Fannie will be quietly simmering in the background until someone remembers that they forgot to release the pressure valve on the cooker. If you read Eavis's comments regarding the possible true amount Fannie may have to come up with to cover her ass to meet the increased reserve requirements, things begin to get real interesting. In summary he thinks due to derivatives trading losses that the true amount required may be 20 billion instead of 8 billion. I expect some big fat heads to roll at Fannie real soon. Of course the spin will be that the "ethic" cleansing was necessary to get things back on track and every attempt will be put forth to give infestors the warm fuzzies. In reality I expect whoever gets the reins from Raines is going to discover that their steed is ready for the glue factory - ala Enscam and Worldcon. It wouldn't surprise me to read that Raines' replacement retires due to health reasons within a year of taking charge. He ought to be plenty sick by then. Will Fannie go under? Maybe, but I wouldn't bet the farm on that one. The implied govt. backing is just that - implied. Is she too big too fail? Perhaps. However given the current fiscal situation maybe, just maybe the US govt. will say hey read the fine print - you assumed what you wanted to without really delving into what the limits of our "backing" was. And to that notion I would say - bully! Caveat Emptor. Me thinks the mortgage business is about to hit a major pothole. The spreads will tell the tale. Of course this isn't the only reason RE is going to be in big trouble, but it sure as hell isn't going to improve it. Congrats Machinehead on your fine analysis of the Fukdaq. Sadly the NYSE isn't much better. The pure concept of a stock market is investing (i.e. you expect a higher real return than holding cash equivalents) in companies that you think will propsper over time and pay you dividends commensurate with the risk. Appreciation of the underlying security will occur organically if the company executes well and is able to increase dividends. At least that's my interpretation of the way things should work. Obviously that's not what we have. We have nothing more than a giant ponzi gamlbing casino in about 99.9% of the listed securities. It is all based strictly on the concept of asset appreciation with almost total disregard for the actual performance of the company. Nothing more than the greater fool theory at work. The apparent improvement in profits has been due to two things. First a very accomodating corporate bond maket has allowed C- companies to borrow at A rates as opposed to begging at the banker's desk. And AAA companies are selling bonds at virtually no premium to govt paper. I don't expect that to continue for much longer. I expect that increased demands by govt borrowing will be spread over a sheet of liquidity that is not thick enought to accomodate both. Again the spreads will tell the tale. Secondly, and more importantly, has been the slash and burn mentality of cost cutting. Is there much left to cut? Management bloat, R & D and advertising are about the only things left on the table. The thing with slash and burn in a forest scenario is you can normally only raise one crop on the newly cleared land before the soil runs out of sufficient nutrients. That crop has already been harvested for corporate America. If you want to keep farming you have to add a lot of fertilizer. Unfortunately coporate America couldn't see the forest for the trees. Their rush to move production and outsource services overseas was effectively the shipment of the fertilizer to a new forest. The second crop will be considerably smaller, if it grows at all. The attempts by the pro-Shrub gang to put a positive spin on the debate are pathetic. IMO they merely serve to illustrate just how lame that duck is. Have a great weekend boys and girls. May the Stool be with you. PS: John (aka JRMFL) has had a rough go of it lately. Between his daughter's illness and the havoc of 2 hurricanes that have decimated his home, life hasn't been easy. Send him your positive thoughts. Peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machinehead Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 My business provides plenty of thrills as it is. And a thrilling year it has been - ytd sales are up 157%. Those key rings, bicycle license plates and scented candles really add up, don't they? Geeze, I feel just like Microsoft without the stock options flim flam! "You know, these gratuitous slaps from yobob really grate on me." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregFokker Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 Apparently the CIA is not taking the roll of "fall guy" for the lies and miscalculations of the Cheney cabal lying down: C.I.A.-White House Tensions Are Being Made Public to Rare Degree By DOUGLAS JEHL Published: October 2, 2004 WASHINGTON, Oct. 1 - James L. Pavitt spent 31 years at the Central Intelligence Agency, the last five as head of the clandestine service, before retiring in August. But never, Mr. Pavitt said Friday, does he recall anything like "the viciousness and vindictiveness" now playing out in a battle between the White House and the C.I.A. The tensions have simmered for years, mostly over intelligence about Iraq, including whether Iraq posed a threat. But in the last few weeks, they have surged into the open in a remarkable way, in a struggle in which both sides believe they have much at stake. Already, the contents of classified intelligence estimates about Iraq have been leaked by people sympathetic to the C.I.A., to the considerable embarrassment of the White House. Of course, the most urgent threat to the agency lies in the effort now under way in Congress to restructure American intelligence agencies under the command of a new national intelligence director. In defense, the agency's allies have clearly been trying, as they see it, to set the record straight, by calling attention to what they regard as the more prescient judgments by the C.I.A. that the Bush administration dismissed. As described by the government officials, the postwar challenges identified in the documents included a surge in anti-Americanism in the Muslim world and the possibility of an anti-American insurgency in Iraq. The intelligence warnings appeared to have been much sharper than was acknowledged in the more upbeat forecasts provided before the war by Mr. Bush and top deputies including Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary. An op-ed article published on Friday in the Washington Times by John B. Roberts II, a conservative commentator on national security affairs, reiterated that message. "When the president cannot trust his own C.IA.," it warned, "the nation faces dire consequences." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/02/politics...ner=rssuserland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 Here comes the CIA, laying the ground work on the "moral side" for the pending attack of Iran: Iran Barbarity Aired By Court BY JAMIE DETTMER - Special to the Sun October 1, 2004 WASHINGTON - As reports mount of a harsh crackdown in Iran on dissidents, journalists, and minorities, an international panel of nine eminent jurists, diplomats, and human-rights activists is urging the International Red Cross and the United Nations to demand access to the country's prisons and judicial proceedings. The call made by the International Moral Court came after it held three days of hearings in Paris last week and heard hours of bleak testimony about systematic human-rights abuses in Iran and the use of torture in the country's jails. The panel was set up by a committee of prominent Iranian exiles eager to highlight the excesses of their homeland's clerical regime. Experts and victims of torture told the panel that barbaric punishments are being meted out, not only to dissidents or suspected political opponents of the regime, but to anyone who offends the austere moral and social codes imposed by the regime, and are being enforced with renewed vigor. http://www.nysun.com/article/2528 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 The Medium Lobster is in agreement. George Bush should come out - in favor of torture. To this end, the Medium Lobster has written George W. Bush the following letter: President Bush: Next week Congress will vote on the 9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act of 2004, Sections 3032 and 3033 of which will legalize sending "suspected terrorists" to other countries which practice torture. The Medium Lobster commends the foresight of House Speaker Dennis Hastert and the Republican House leadership, who have inserted these measures into the bill and have fought to prevent Democrats from removing or changing these sections, for torture is necessary to protect the American people from terrorists, and how can protecting the American people from terrorists be wrong? However, these provisions must not be passed in the dark. If we are to embrace torture, we must do so openly and without hesitation, and as both the commander-in-chief and as the leader of the party which has taken this bold step, only you can embrace it. George Bush, in the defense of the United States you have donned the mantle of a War President and of a Peace President. It is time for you to become the Torture President. Since shipping suspects off to second-tier Axes of Evil to be beaten and electrocuted is the just thing - no, the noble thing - no, the necessary thing, for why else would it be in so critical a piece of legislature as the bill intended to protect America from the next 9/11? - this policy must be endorsed, publicly, by the President himself. Call a press conference, announce it on every television network, hold a Rose Garden ceremony with yourself, Speaker Hastert and the half-dozen drugged and bleeding Muslims of your choice. Let the world know that America stands for freedom, and freedom stands for torture. If you did any less, how could you live with yourself? Most sincerely, The Medium Lobster http://fafblog.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 WTFDIK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 Americans should be proud that the state is willing to electrocute our genitals and pull out our nails in order to protect us. But it looks like our lawmakers aren't very proud of this rich new American tradition, approving it in the closet while pushing the labor force out to cheap foreign torturers in Pakistan! If we want to legalize torture, Giblets demands we go all the way and give torture some public, homegrown respect! Giblets wants to see the brave men and women of the 101st US Torture Brigades, Dick Cheney beating prisoners with rods on CSPAN, George Bush standing in front of a pile of naked and bleeding Iraqis under a "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner! Giblets knows that there are some out there who will say, "Oh, but countries like Saudi Arabia and Syria can do torture cheaper and better than we can, why should we try to compete?" Well, Giblets is holding a little something in the thumbscrews of his heart called patriotism, and Giblets thinks American workers can compete with anyone else in the world! Sure, these other countries have been at it longer than we have, but with gumption and stick-to-it-iveness Americans can rise to the top of anything! http://fafblog.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 This guy is funny! Entirely dependent on American military and financial support as he is, Allawi should feel free to dance on his strings with reckless abandon, to revel in his marionettedom. But more importantly, the Bush administration - or the Bush campaign, rather - should not hesitate to employ any foreign leader at their disposal to counter the foreign endorsements his opponent has received - namely, the terrorists. Indeed, as Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and others have noted, terrorists "are going to throw everything they can between now and the election to try and elect Kerry." This was made obvious when the 527 group, "Terrorists For Kerry," began campaigning for the Massachusetts senator throughout various swing states. Just yesterday at a Kerry rally in Nashua, New Hampshire, Ayman al-Zawahiri spoke to cheering throngs of Democrats, laying out a scathing attack on George Bush and firing up the base with appeals to standard Democratic issues such as universal health care, better funding for education, and the purging of crusaders and zionists with a tide of blood. http://fafblog.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butterfield 8 Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 Plunger - re the shutdowns of last week - call Spitzer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 Marine declares war on Bush Iraq war veteran Steve Brozak is running hard for Congress. And he's turning his campaign into a referendum on Bush's military folly. Sept. 30, 2004 | Steve Brozak is running for Congress in New Jersey against George W. Bush. Sure, his opponent on the ticket is Republican incumbent Mike Ferguson. But as Brozak sees it, Ferguson is just a synecdoche for the Bush team, whose failings drove Brozak out of the Marines and the Republican Party and into the first political campaign of his life. "The bottom line is I'm going to take him down," Brozak says of Ferguson. "I'm just going to keep hitting at him. This is a national race because I'm going to start hitting not just him but his boss. They lied to us, they misled us about what was at stake in the war with Iraq, and they're misleading us about what is going to happen going forward." http://salon.com/news/feature/2004/09/30/b...k/index_np.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 "The only thing where we got it wrong and where our presentation did not hold up was the actual stockpiles," Powell said. "We've seen nothing to suggest that he had actual stockpiles. That was not right." He added, "As we've gone back and looked through the intelligence, there are indications that we had bad sourcing that we should have caught. For that I am disappointed and regret that that information was not correct." A Senate Intelligence Committee's report on prewar intelligence about Iraq found that much of the information provided or cleared by the CIA for inclusion in Powell's speech to the United Nations "was overstated, misleading or incorrect." Nevertheless, Powell noted that the war has led to the ouster of Saddam, and for that,he said, the world will be safer. http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/10/01/regrets/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 U.S. cybersecurity chief abruptly resigns - - - - - - - - - - - - By Ted Bridis Oct. 1, 2004 | Washington -- The government's cybersecurity chief has abruptly resigned after one year with the Department of Homeland Security, confiding to industry colleagues his frustration over what he considers a lack of attention paid to computer security issues within the agency. Amit Yoran, a former software executive from Symantec Corp., informed the White House about his plans to quit as director of the National Cyber Security Division and made his resignation effective at the end of Thursday, effectively giving a single's day notice of his intentions to leave. http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/10/01/...uter/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 Congress worried about spending on Iraq - - - - - - - - - - - - Pauline Jelinek Oct. 1, 2004 | WASHINGTON (AP) -- A decision to shift money from Iraqi electricity and water projects to boost security spending has many in Congress and the Bush administration worried that the move could make a growing insurgency worse. "It grieves us deeply,'' Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage said, even as he argued for the trade-off at a recent Capitol Hill hearing. "I admit I am concerned,'' agreed Rep. Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz. ``But I see no alternative.'' A key reason Iraqis haven't helped the coalition more against insurgents has been the resentment over slow progress on solving soaring unemployment and improving living conditions, U.S. officials say. http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/10/01/...ress/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2004 Report Share Posted October 2, 2004 Plunger - re the shutdowns of last week - call Spitzer. Call Spitzer and tell him what? That the US Treasury Department - under the direction of Alan Greenspan - is doing an excellent job at preventing a stock market crash? Who could possibly be opposed to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.