"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote:
We'll never return to late 2008 Ed.
What is becoming increasingly obvious at large, and what I've
always believed, is that nothing was actually "saved".
The collapse had occurred. What didn't happen, and what I'd
expected, was a
reckoning with that reality.
I'd thought that the purpose of this delaying tactic was to
allow a restructuring of the mechanisms to deal with that
collapse in an orderly manner. Clearly, on the evidence, I was
mistaken.
The tactical retreat made isn't being followed up with either a
regrouping or counter attack.
Not yet. But I believe in the power of lobbies, so it's maybe
never. They seem to have frightened Congress into inaction. And
they've worked the anti-socialism angle exceedingly well. They've
got the Tea Party coming and going: they want to put a lid on bank
bailouts, but not if it means more government involvement in
business.
sigh....
A perfectly good crisis wasted but take heart Ed.
What's just around the corner is going to be a lulu and won't be.
I could be mistaken, of course, but I called this year's Super
Bowl. I watched it with my brother and a group of very smart and
clever people. They went to their stats and if you only look at the
possible outcome through that prism, the Colts were the hands down
odds on favorite.
I told them that Indiana had recently won, the Saints never had and
Drew Brees would want to show up the Chargers, who basically fired
him. You can't
really quantify those things but that was my reasoning.
It's the same reasoning I'm using to predict a real melt down.
We are just due.
--
John R. Carroll
Ha. A sports picker who bets on players' emotions. I'll bet you were
sweating before the Saints pulled off that onside kick, however.
Well, I couldn't believe the dumb ****s took Bush out of the game
every time
they got to the red zone.
The fourth down shtick was also pretty stupid but when the third
quarter began with an onside that was recovered, I was pretty sure
N.O. had regained
the momentum necessary.
That's always a real crapshoot. g
Well, I hope your meltdown prediction goes the way of Gunner's Great
Cull. The good thing about your wager, though, is that you stand no
chance of winding up on death row. Gunner may not be so lucky. d8-)
There is little downside to pessimism Ed.
I have the satisfaction of being correct 80 percent of the time and
pleasantly surprised the other twenty.
LOL
Keep in mind that I called Obama months before he entered the race.
Actually, what I said was that if he ran he'd beat Hillary and go on
to be our next President regardless his opponent.
I've also pretty consitently gotten the last couple of years doings
in the financial services and banking sector right, even down to the
timing. At least roughly. There wasn't, however, any real genius in
that. All you had to do was accept that greed and avarice, freed
from regulation, would produce the result it always has. That's just
common sense.
I did misfire on the NJ Governors contest, however.
You would have had to be here to feel the momentum. It's probably a
lot like the feeling in California, though. There's a real sense of
desperation here about taxes, and our new clod...er, governor got
away with promising to fix it without saying how. There is no "how."
We're just going to have to ride it out. The thing is, it feels to me
like we'll be riding it out on the back of a jackass.
Speaking of Jackassery.
LMFAO
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stefan..._b_452458.html
It was funny. What was especially funny is that all she had on her hand was
a few words about three core subject areas (apparently for the Q&A period;
she spoke from prepared notes). If she needs a prompt to remember them, then
wha??
Oh, well. This is a nutty thing going on with the Tea Party and Sarah Palin.
I'm trying to back away from it emotionally and just look at the phenomenon
itself. Populist anger is good; Jefferson was right about that. One hopes
that the phenomenon follows the rest of his prescription: that they figure
out what it is they want, and how to accomplish it. That's where the Tea
Party is going to run into trouble. They're going to find out about the law
of unintended consequences.
--
Ed Huntress