Traders call for a Tea Party

[Aranince]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1039849853

Bring it!

[mkrishnan]

This was on Chicagoist's twitter feed...

http://chicagoist.com/2009/02/19/cnbcs_rick_santelli_calls_for_chica.php

It's pretty great (you have to watch the video).

[Thomas Veil]

First Michael Steele and now this.

Exactly how many full moons are out tonight??

[Schtumple]

That was amazing, I laughed when that guy piped up :p

[mkrishnan]

That was amazing, I laughed when that guy piped up :p

That trader / random guy / whoever that was standing kind of in front of him was hilarious. :D

[MacNut]

The best thing I have seen, and he is right too.

[mkrishnan]

The best thing I have seen, and he is right too.

The Japanese recession does suggest this too (for some of the things he said)... and basic economics suggests that going to extreme lengths to keep people in homes in which they do not belong will not work. If a person who had a large earning potential had some kind of life blip and you kept them in the home that was consistent with their earning level, they could ultimately return back to their earning level and re-establish a balance. But here people are in homes no one should sensible have allowed them to move into.

Keeping people in homes that are threatened by joblessness in locations where industry can be quickly revitalized is a good idea. Keeping people in homes they have only because of subprime irresponsibility is another matter.....

Ironic these things were being said on a trading floor... hardly a bastion of people who were uninvolved in this whole mess.

[MacNut]

I was wondering, rather than giving the autos bailout money, why not give that money to consumers to put towards a new car. At least that way the money is passing through the tax payer.

[Dmac77]

I also saw that this (yesterday now) morning. I have to say that I agree with them 100%! Obama's "stimulus" plans aren't going to do any good. All that they will manage to do is increase our national debt, and give the Chinese more leverage over us. If you don't believe me, go ask Alan Greenspan.

Don

[és:]

I also saw that this (yesterday now) morning. I have to say that I agree with them 100%! Obama's "stimulus" plans aren't going to do any good. All that they will manage to do is increase our national debt, and give the Chinese more leverage over us. If you don't believe me, go ask Alan Greenspan.

Don

Who do you ask if you don't believe Alan Greenspan? :D

[calculus]

I was wondering, rather than giving the autos bailout money, why not give that money to consumers to put towards a new car.

Instead of giving money to the owners of dead industries it should be used to help people people thrown out of work by these changes. Let the car industry go. Its time is over...

[mkrishnan]

Instead of giving money to the owners of dead industries it should be used to help people people thrown out of work by these changes. Let the car industry go. Its time is over...

The big problem with this attitude, and how this situation is in my mind not analogous to the housing situation, is the replacement plan.

If these houses are foreclosed and these individuals are forced to move downstream into more affordable housing, the expensive housing will be sold on the market at reduced prices and people now in lower quality housing will move into most of the good units. Although this will create some hardship in the form of individuals having to "lower" themselves back to the standard of living they can maintain, the net result is that, the faster this is done, the more likely that in the long term, most of the better new housing remains on the market and in use, and if any housing becomes redundant, it will be at the bottom of the economy, and the quality of housing occupied by Americans will improve in a net sense.

With the automotive industry, when these companies fail, there has been no good plan in the United States to move workers into jobs that maintain overall quality of living in the US. The service sector jobs that replace the manufacturing jobs are far inferior in pay and benefits. There are manufacturing jobs, true, such as the ones the transplant auto industry brings, that, while they pay less, don't pay catastrophically less, but this would require a fairly massive migration of laborers for which we have no real plan, since these jobs aren't going where the US auto manufacturing strength lies.

If, in the long term, you can really draw the conclusion that the US automakers cannot recover and become competitive, then fine -- it's better to rip the band-aid off, let them perish, and start getting on with the work of fixing things -- sink the money into non-automotive growth in Michigan and Indiana and Ohio instead. Pick anchor projects that have the potential to grow job sources over several decades in that part of the country, if there's evidence this might work.

But, is it really fair to conclude they can't become competitive? Ford isn't the best example, as it isn't asking for a bailout anyway, but they had blockbuster profits only eight or nine years ago. It's been only about 15 years since they had the dominant midsize car on the American market. If they can be made competitive again, given that they proffer a higher standard of living than readily available alternatives... I'm not that big a fan of letting the Midwest of our country just fall into a giant black hole. It's easyto suggest from the outside, but these are our people....

On the other hand, I'd be open to a much more aggressive plan, like picking one target US automaker that can survive and putting all the resources into making their supply chain become globally competitive while letting the other two die. I'm not particularly impressed by what GM and Chrysler have put on the table as "plans" to dig their ways out of this mess....

[Juventuz]

Ironic these things were being said on a trading floor... hardly a bastion of people who were uninvolved in this whole mess.

He was on the Chicago Board of Trade floor in that clip, they deal in commodities and futures.

[fivepoint]

If these houses are foreclosed and these individuals are forced to move downstream into more affordable housing, the expensive housing will be sold on the market at reduced prices and people now in lower quality housing will move into most of the good units. Although this will create some hardship in the form of individuals having to "lower" themselves back to the standard of living they can maintain, the net result is that, the faster this is done, the more likely that in the long term, most of the better new housing remains on the market and in use, and if any housing becomes redundant, it will be at the bottom of the economy, and the quality of housing occupied by Americans will improve in a net sense.

YESSSS!!!! Exactly. While it sounds good to 'save these poor people' we're really doing them a disservice in the end. We're really just patching the bubble so it can grow larger and do more damage in the near future. Taking money from one group of people, giving it to another group of irresponsible people so they can keep their big house is unsustainable at best, social re engineering at worst.

The housing market needs to auto-correct, but unfortunately the administration and Democratic leadership continue to push the broken idea of government interventionism and manipulation of the market... which is the biggest reason we got into this mess in the first place. (fannie, freddie, fed interest rate manip, housing bills, etc.)

What's their solution to this problem? Giving more money to fannie and freddie. Allowing the Fed to continue and leave interest rates at rock bottom. Continue to put money into the banking system, telling the banks to "LOAN MONEY" apparently to people they don't want to loan to... It has to be the most backwards thinking I've ever seen.



Synopsis: Sign me up for the tea party.

[iJohnHenry]

He was on the Chicago Board of Trade floor in that clip, they deal in commodities and futures.

Ah yes, the very people that drive the price of goods and services up, without contributing anything in return.

Poor babies.

[Aranince]

The Don't Go Movement is getting involved. #teaparty is a trending topic on Twitter now.

http://tweetgrid.com/search?q=teaparty
http://www.officialchicagoteaparty.com/

[joepunk]

Who the hell is Rick Santelli, anyway? Is he like the Italian version of Rick Santorum? He seems about as big a douchebag.

[itcheroni]

Ah yes, the very people that drive the price of goods and services up, without contributing anything in return.

Poor babies.

Why aren't they driving the prices up now?

[.Andy]

The Don't Go Movement is getting involved. #teaparty is a trending topic on Twitter now.

#teaparty: bought new trousers!
#teaparty: is having a few beers after work.
#teaparty: is rallying against the stimulus package.
#teaparty: wishes their washing would dry more quickly.

[Thomas Veil]

If these houses are foreclosed and these individuals are forced to move downstream into more affordable housing...Your entire post was the most sensible thing I've read all week.

The only thing I have qualms about is letting automakers die. I understand the rationale behind what you said, and who knows, it may come to that. But in my lifetime I've seen so much competition killed off -- mostly by mergers and acquisitions -- that I'd hate to see our choices reduced further still.

I think everyone will acknowledge that American, European and Asian cars each have their own "flavor" or style, and as someone who prefers the way American-designed cars look, I'd hate to have my choices whittled down to...one.

Again, I'm not arguing with the logic of your stance...just that it would be a pity.

As far as Obama's mortgage plan...my understanding is that it will help those who have conventional mortgages, have normally paid, and have only fallen a bit behind (through recent job losses, for example); and those who have subprime loans for which the terms can be reasonably adjusted to keep them in their homes. It does not apply to those who have mortgages greatly in excess of the actual value of their homes, and these folks would be the ones who are forced to move "downstream", as you put it.

Ah yes, the very people that drive the price of goods and services up, without contributing anything in return.

Poor babies.You said it. Those guys make used car salesmen in loud plaid suits look trustworthy by comparison.

Sign me up for the tea party.That'll happen about the same time Hillary implements her secret plan to win the 2008 Democratic nomination.

Oh, wait......

[mactastic]

Synopsis: Sign me up for the tea party.
But you certainly wouldn't resort to any violence against person or property in this tea party, now would you?

[iJohnHenry]

Why aren't they driving the prices up now?

The point is they make money in any event, by adding their cost to whatever is being traded. They don't have to "bid-up" the product, like someone holding a stock.

[itcheroni]

The point is they make money in any event, by adding their cost to whatever is being traded. They don't have to "bid-up" the product, like someone holding a stock.

But if someone bought an oil contract when it was at $100 per barrel, how can they charge more than that now? So I don't think they make money no matter what and they don't have a significant impact on prices. They make money speculating and they lose money that way too. There are some people who make money on spreads and I think that's what you're talking about. I'm not sure how it works but I think they make the money between the supplier and the guys on the floor in that video.

[iJohnHenry]

BI'm not sure how it works but I think they make the money between the supplier and the guys on the floor in that video.

*sigh*

In attempting to make money for their clients, they add their overhead to the cost of the commodity being bought/sold.

It is all a greed issue.

Of course a lot of their clients are institutional investors, which affect you and I in our benefits/pensions/etc.

[it5five]

How hilarious. A bunch of trader *******s whine about government promoting "bad behavior" by "subsidizing the losers mortgages", yet they have absolutely no problems with the government promoting their bad behavior by subsidizing the losers banks! Where is there outrage at that?

Some people need critical thinking skills.

[fivepoint]

But you certainly wouldn't resort to any violence against person or property in this tea party, now would you?

That's right, I wouldn't resort to any violence against any person or private property. Although I wouldn't literally throw the tea into the water, I would support the philosophy behind the revolt.



How hilarious. A bunch of trader *******s whine about government promoting "bad behavior" by "subsidizing the losers mortgages", yet they have absolutely no problems with the government promoting their bad behavior by subsidizing the losers banks! Where is there outrage at that?

Some people need critical thinking skills.


Maybe you could share your inside knowledge that indicates that these guys supported the bank bailout? Is it your assumption that all "trader *******s" support corporate bailouts but not homeowner ones?

I know that I supported neither, and from polling data I know that the vast majority of Republicans supported neither, and virtually all 'fiscal conservatives' supported neither... so I'm wondering where you get YOUR info.

[.Andy]

That's right, I wouldn't resort to any violence against any person or private property. Although I wouldn't literally throw the tea into the water, I would support the philosophy behind the revolt.
You're becoming more and more liberal every day fivepoint ;).

[iJohnHenry]

You're becoming more and more liberal every day fivepoint ;).

:eek:

LOLduelling

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/duel-cats-1.jpg

[it5five]

Maybe you could share your inside knowledge that indicates that these guys supported the bank bailout? Is it your assumption that all "trader *******s" support corporate bailouts but not homeowner ones?

I know that I supported neither, and from polling data I know that the vast majority of Republicans supported neither, and virtually all 'fiscal conservatives' supported neither... so I'm wondering where you get YOUR info.

I don't need "inside knowledge" to notice the absence of outrage by corporate bankers at the corporate bank bailout in this video. I've seen no videos of corporate bankers doing what they're doing here regarding their own bailout. They said nothing about the bank bailout in the video (which is much larger than the planned mortgage assistance). Again, where is their outrage at that situation? My statement wasn't meant to be applied toward fiscal conservatives as a whole group, and you know it. I specifically talked about the video posted in this thread.

[fivepoint]

You're becoming more and more liberal every day fivepoint ;).

If you're saying that purely as a joke, then I laugh with you. :D

However, I fail to understand how you are relating respect for private property with 'liberalsim'. Classical liberalsim (or libertarianism) perhaps, but at any rate... in this case names just serve to confuse. It's about the issues.

[fivepoint]

I don't need "inside knowledge" to notice the absence of outrage by corporate bankers at the corporate bank bailout in this video. I've seen no videos of corporate bankers doing what they're doing here regarding their own bailout. They said nothing about the bank bailout in the video (which is much larger than the planned mortgage assistance). Again, where is their outrage at that situation? My statement wasn't meant to be applied toward fiscal conservatives as a whole group, and you know it. I specifically talked about the video posted in this thread.

I'm glad you weren't implying anything about people not in this video. My bad. However, are you saying that all of the people at the Chicago Merchantile Exchange, and those in this video, are corporate bankers? :confused:

[it5five]

I'm glad you weren't implying anything about people not in this video. My bad. However, are you saying that all of the people at the Chicago Merchantile Exchange, and those in this video, are corporate bankers? :confused:

I was commenting on the absurdity of Rick Santelli's statement, and the people behind him who cheered. Stop reading too much into what I wrote. Until I see Rick Santelli on TV whining about the government bailing out loser banks, and receiving cheers on a trading floor for saying it, he's a hypocrite who shouldn't be taken seriously.

[fivepoint]

I was commenting on the absurdity of Rick Santelli's statement, and the people behind him who cheered. Stop reading too much into what I wrote. Until I see Rick Santelli on TV whining about the government bailing out loser banks, and receiving cheers on a trading floor for saying it, he's a hypocrite who shouldn't be taken seriously.

it5five, I hate to keep doing this to you... but again, even if you're talking JUST about Rick Santelli... he has a long history of being skeptical of any governmental intrusion in the market place. Here is what he said ON CNBC regarding the potential Bank Bailout:

"viewers, be careful out there of snake oil salesmen on every side trying to present this plan... we don't know enough details. The one thing we do know... the history of the government making money for us isn't a good one."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-1g0OZJIdk&eurl=http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message733594/pg1&feature=player_embedded



So... where's the hypocrisy?

[Sun Baked]

Does this mean we get to throw a bunch of stock brokers into boiling water and try to make a tea out of them? :confused:

[Berlepsch]

Does this mean we get to throw a bunch of stock brokers into boiling water and try to make a tea out of them? :confused:

Broker Orange Pekoe? I'll have milk with mine, please.

[SactoGuy18]

Does this mean we get to throw a bunch of stock brokers into boiling water and try to make a tea out of them? :confused:

That might not be such a bad idea given the over-zealous upward speculation on crude oil and downward speculation on financial companies last year, no thanks to overly-liberal minimum margin requirements for commodities and stock futures trading. :mad:

[mactastic]

That's right, I wouldn't resort to any violence against any person or private property. Although I wouldn't literally throw the tea into the water, I would support the philosophy behind the revolt.
LOL! So IOW, you'd do NOTHING! All hat, and no cattle, so to speak.

It's a good thing you weren't listened to during the American Revolution. You'd be a footnote in history as those people who philosophically supported throwing the tea into the harbor, but let it reach it's destination unharmed and taxed.

[fivepoint]

LOL! So IOW, you'd do NOTHING! All hat, and no cattle, so to speak.

It's a good thing you weren't listened to during the American Revolution. You'd be a footnote in history as those people who philosophically supported throwing the tea into the harbor, but let it reach it's destination unharmed and taxed.

There's a difference between 'government' and private property. If you think that throwing tea into the water is the only reason that the American Revolution happened... well, then. I just... we'll have to leave the conversation at that. :)

[Juventuz]

I was commenting on the absurdity of Rick Santelli's statement, and the people behind him who cheered. Stop reading too much into what I wrote. Until I see Rick Santelli on TV whining about the government bailing out loser banks, and receiving cheers on a trading floor for saying it, he's a hypocrite who shouldn't be taken seriously.

Nobody's reading too much into what you wrote, you called them bankers, they're not bankers. Did you even watch the video? Do you even know what the hell they're talking about? Corporate banks? Where did you pull this stuff from?

It's clear that you obviously have no familiarity with who Santelli is or what he stands for. Try do some research before you call someone a hypocrite.

[mactastic]

There's a difference between 'government' and private property. If you think that throwing tea into the water is the only reason that the American Revolution happened... well, then. I just... we'll have to leave the conversation at that. :)
So it's ok to deface or harm government property, just not private property?

[mactastic]

There's a difference between 'government' and private property. If you think that throwing tea into the water is the only reason that the American Revolution happened... well, then. I just... we'll have to leave the conversation at that. :)
So it's ok to deface or harm government property, just not private property?

[itcheroni]

*sigh*

In attempting to make money for their clients, they add their overhead to the cost of the commodity being bought/sold.

It is all a greed issue.

Of course a lot of their clients are institutional investors, which affect you and I in our benefits/pensions/etc.

Don't all businesses add overhead? I don't see a difference between them adding their fees to any other business adding fees. Is it because we don't see them?

[Thomas Veil]

Does this mean we get to throw a bunch of stock brokers into boiling water and try to make a tea out of them? :confused:Too "Middle Ages". I'd go for hanging or the guillotine.

[Juventuz]

How is it a traders fault that Wall Street crashed? They don't have any influence on what happens.

[Blue Velvet]

All of you who were naive enough to think this was the greatest thing ever and a spontaneous event have been completely played. I hope you put your money where your mouth was and turned up with these losers (http://washingtonindependent.com/31868/scenes-from-the-new-american-tea-party) with their ever-so carefully prepared signs.

This is how corporate interests and the wealthy 2% control your thinking:


What we discovered is that Santelli’s “rant” was not at all spontaneous as his alleged fans claim, but rather it was a carefully-planned trigger for the anti-Obama campaign. In PR terms, his February 19th call for a “Chicago Tea Party” was the launch event of a carefully organized and sophisticated PR campaign, one in which Santelli served as a frontman, using the CNBC airwaves for publicity, for the some of the craziest and sleaziest rightwing oligarch clans this country has ever produced. Namely, the Koch family, the multibilllionaire owners of the largest private corporation in America, and funders of scores of rightwing thinktanks and advocacy groups, from the Cato Institute and Reason Magazine to FreedomWorks. The scion of the Koch family, Fred Koch, was a co-founder of the notorious extremist-rightwing John Birch Society.

Within hours of Santelli's rant, a website called ChicagoTeaParty.com sprang to life. Essentially inactive until that day, it now featured a YouTube video of Santelli’s “tea party” rant and billed itself as the official home of the Chicago Tea Party. The domain was registered in August, 2008 by Zack Christenson, a dweeby Twitter Republican and producer for a popular Chicago rightwing radio host Milt Rosenberg—a familiar name to Obama campaign people. Last August, Rosenberg, who looks like Martin Short's Irving Cohen character, caused an outcry when he interviewed Stanley Kurtz, the conservative writer who first "exposed" a personal link between Obama and former Weather Undergound leader Bill Ayers. As a result of Rosenberg’s radio interview, the Ayers story was given a major push through the Republican media echo chamber, culminating in Sarah Palin’s accusation that Obama was “palling around with terrorists.” That Rosenberg’s producer owns the “chicagoteaparty.com” site is already weird—but what’s even stranger is that he first bought the domain last August, right around the time of Rosenburg’s launch of the “Obama is a terrorist” campaign. It’s as if they held this “Chicago tea party” campaign in reserve, like a sleeper-site. Which is exactly what it was.

ChicagoTeaParty.com was just one part of a larger network of Republican sleeper-cell-blogs set up over the course of the past few months, all of them tied to a shady rightwing advocacy group coincidentally named the “Sam Adams Alliance,” whose backers have until now been kept hidden from public. Cached google records that we discovered show that the Sam Adams Alliance took pains to scrub its deep links to the Koch family money as well as the fake-grassroots “tea party” protests going on today. All of these roads ultimately lead back to a more notorious rightwing advocacy group, FreedomWorks, a powerful PR organization headed by former Republican House Majority leader Dick Armey and funded by Koch money.

On the same day as Santelli's rant, February 19, another site called Officialchicagoteaparty.com went live. This site was registered to Eric Odom, who turned out to be a veteran Republican new media operative specializing in imitation-grassroots PR campaigns. Last summer, Odom organized a twitter-led campaign centered around DontGo.com to pressure Congress and Nancy Pelosi to pass the offshore oil drilling bill, something that would greatly benefit Koch Industries, a major player in oil and gas. Now, six months later, Odom's DontGo movement was resurrected to play a central role in promoting the "tea party" movement.

Up until last month, Odom was officially listed as the “new media coordinator” for the Sam Adams Alliance, a well-funded libertarian activist organization based in Chicago that was set up only recently. Samuel Adams the historical figure was famous for inspiring and leading the Boston Tea Party—so when the PR people from the Chicago-based Sam Adams Alliance abruptly leave in order to run Santelli’s “Chicago Tea Party,” you know it wasn’t spontaneous. Odom certainly doesn’t want people to know about the link: his name was scrubbed from the Sam Adams Alliance website recently, strongly suggesting that they wanted to cover their tracks. Thanks to google caching, you can see the SAA’s before-after scrubbing.

Even the Sam Adams’ January 31 announcement that Odom’s fake-grassroots group was “no longer sponsored by the Alliance” was shortly afterwards scrubbed.

But it’s the Alliance’s scrubbing of their link to Koch that is most telling. A cached page, erased on February 16, just three days before Santelli’s rant, shows that the Alliance also wanted to cover up its ties to the Koch family. The missing link was an announcement that students interested in applying for internships to the Sam Adams Alliance could also apply through the “Charles G. Koch Summer Fellow Program” through the Institute for Humane Studies, a Koch-funded rightwing institute designed to scout and nurture future leaders of corporate libertarian ideology. The top two board directors at the Sam Adams Alliance include two figures with deep ties to Koch-funded programs: Eric O’Keefe, who previously served in Koch’s Institute for Humane Studies and the Club For Growth; and Joseph Lehman, a former communications VP at Koch’s Cato Institute.


So, rather than being a spontanous outpouring of populist anger, it was a stunt cooked up months in advance by monied interests to sway weak minds.

More here. (http://www.playboy.com/blog/2009/02/backstabber.html) Enjoy, while you pause and think about where your opinions come from and how they are shaped.

[Thomas Veil]

(Santelli exposé)Beautiful. Just beautiful. :D

[yg17]

Their little tea party in St. Louis was epic fail. They claimed there was some huge protest downtown at the Arch to dump tea into the Mississippi River. I was out and about in Downtown St. Louis right around the time their stupid little protest was supposed to take place, to grab lunch at a place 2 blocks away from the Arch and didn't see any activity whatsoever. I didn't even know this thing took place until I read about it afterwards.

[iJohnHenry]

Don't all businesses add overhead? I don't see a difference between them adding their fees to any other business adding fees. Is it because we don't see them?

Sorry I missed this question earlier.

It's because, unlike other businesses, we are unable to shop elsewhere if we don't like the pricing of their goods/services.

With the futures market, all commodities are affected, and we have no say in the matter.

[itcheroni]

Sorry I missed this question earlier.

It's because, unlike other businesses, we are unable to shop elsewhere if we don't like the pricing of their goods/services.

With the futures market, all commodities are affected, and we have no say in the matter.

Do you buy futures contracts or are you arguing that it's wrong on principle?

[zap2]

"viewers, be careful out there of snake oil salesmen on every side trying to present this plan... we don't know enough details. The one thing we do know... the history of the government making money for us isn't a good one."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-1g0OZJIdk&eurl=http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message733594/pg1&feature=player_embedded



So... where's the hypocrisy?

Well he isn't calling for a tea party, that is for sure....
He even goes so far to say "I'm not making a judgement call"(either for the bailout or against it)


Thats full of hypocrisy

[iJohnHenry]

Do you buy futures contracts or are you arguing that it's wrong on principle?

No I certainly do not, so on principle is is. ;)

I realise the argument is the stabilisation of prices, but the cost of doing so just adds to the burden for you and me, at the greed of futures traders.

I see no problem with prices fluctuating with supply. Let's cut out this type of trading altogether.

[mactastic]

Santelli can now go join Joe the Plumber in the GOP pantheon. Is there room for a Palin / Wurtzelbacher / Santelli 2012 ticket?

[Schtumple]

santelli bits

Have you thought about working as a detective? :rolleyes:

"And I would've gotten away with it, if it wasn't for that medlin' Blue Velvet!"

[itcheroni]

No I certainly do not, so on principle is is. ;)

I realise the argument is the stabilisation of prices, but the cost of doing so just adds to the burden for you and me, at the greed of futures traders.

I see no problem with prices fluctuating with supply. Let's cut out this type of trading altogether.

I think if you ask the farmers and producers what they want, they would certainly prefer selling futures so they can set their costs and prices. If a farmer just held their inventory until it's time to sell, they will have no idea what it will sell for, how much they should produce, or if it is even worth producing. That peace of mind is worth it for them. From that point, the trader/broker takes all the risk. The value added is for the producer and not the consumer.

[iJohnHenry]

The value added is for the producer and not the consumer.

Yes, you got that right, but I don't think you meant to. :D

[Thomas Veil]

Santelli can now go join Joe the Plumber in the GOP pantheon. Is there room for a Palin / Wurtzelbacher / Santelli 2012 ticket?Now there's an idea. Kind of like a modern-day
http://www.tvcrazy.net/tvclassics/articles/stooges/images/three-stooges.jpg

[kavika411]

More here. (http://www.playboy.com/blog/2009/02/backstabber.html) Enjoy, while you pause and think about where your opinions come from and how they are shaped.

Thanks for the playboy.com link.

[Gelfin]

Thanks for the playboy.com link.

I can say in all honesty I only went there for the article.

[joepunk]

Who knew, that republicans were so into tea bagging. :D


Oh, and appropriate accessories, eh?