December 2021
« Nov    
Posted by: J. P. Hogan @ 10:03 pm

In the Potterville of President Obama’s Sequestration how might we consider many different jurisdiction issues? 

In the bailiwick of banking and our housing crisis how can we now be better bankers ourselves.  This administration sided with the Big Banks and not those more of the Savings and Loan of Bailey’s.  There were better stewards of our public trusts available to step out otherwise and to help home owners and main streets more if we hadn’t been so stuck upon TOO BIG TO FAIL full embrace by the then new administration of President Obama.

As Rand Paul and others his peers stand up to educate and involve many about threats real to their freedoms we have that our Sequester is more of a Jimmie Stewart of IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE than as Mr. Smith in MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON.  I did read all of Ayn Rand’s books by the mid 1980s, and, I do not know if or by how much Rand Paul may be older than I am old/young.

So about Obama and his “Potterville” administering of TOO BIG TO FAIL and alarmism about a politically convenient new Great Depression:  There were other ways to fix our economy, and, there were other ways also to have attempted to address “solutions” for any pressing climate change or global warming.

How now to be better teachers and educators with an involving of our too huddled in recessionary times masses?

This is for a BAILEY WICKING about bailiwicks of our sequestration, while of the time and duties of the institution of this seeming real new day of a “Mr. Smith.”  

How now should we consider that President Obama could otherwise have from his official first days have been to governing more like Mr. Bailey of IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE?

Was/is President Obama trapped by his own party from having been anything but Big Potters of Bedford Falls?  Was the alternative of being more of Mr. Bailey out because they would have had to incriminate themselves as causally responsible for the housing collapse near wholly as a party?  Was/is TOO BIG TO FAIL the only defense the Democrat Party had other than stirring up too much curiosity by a public pleading of the Fifth, like?

Was/is it simply better to have written checks to most Americans as cost of living stipends directly to them while of trouble paying their mortgages due to the new higher energy politics of the Democrat Party GREEN ENERGY policies?

All the Republican candidates for President in the 2012 Republican primaries stood up to the person and declared that our Government caused the housing crisis, and without incriminating themselves more than they were incriminating Democrats.

It would still have been a capitalism for our Government to have issued many handouts to those with tight finances and troubled mortgages, oddly - yet truly.  It would not have been “socialism” specifically or necessary hypothetically or theoretically since it would have been of stipends for cost of living increases due specifically to the Democrat Party leadership meddling with energy “scarcity” and “demand” and as well with weather politics.  Had such been done as Mr. Bailey might have as soon as President Obama had otherwise taken to being more just a Big Potter of Bedford Falls we might have had our Government have to spend less than it did by bailing out all the banks.

It would have been self incriminating though for the Democrats rivaling President Obama and he himself to have argued that we should copy China’s economics and just write some checks to the people — President Obama couldn’t be as free as the Chinese to be capitalistic for he would have had to incriminate himself and his party in order to properly justify that it would have cost less and have been more efficient to have issued cost of living stipends to the people directly.

It was all supposed to be sold as of a polarizing partisan political #rap against at least President Bush - with the message and dictates all to TOO BIG TO FAIL let us be Potters of Bedford Falls based on the impossible of “IT IS ALL BUSH’S FAULT.”

Though the housing crisis started during the administration of President Bush it was of new faulty foundations of the plotting of Democrat President Clinton.  The housing crisis did get triggered under President Bush mostly by the campaigning to an energy revolution by Democrats of Al Gore, Senator Clinton & Speaker Nancy Pelosi.  The housing crisis was triggered by the higher gas prices triggered by the new and too subjective supply and demand possibilities about the Democrat Party’s energy idealism and revolutionary methods.

If the Democrats could have just martyred themselves and instead have written checks to Americans caught on fixed incomes and then overextended in credits not only might the bank bailout have not been necessary but our economy might have been able to bounce back within a couple years like it likely would have if McCain/Palin had been elected.

To have justified otherwise proceeding to stop the economic slide to a convenient era for NEW DEAL politics and a NEW DEAL AUSTERITY we either had to get the price of gas lower than it was before HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT commenced or before Al Gore started with his AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH crusading.  We either had to get the price of gas as low as it was then as then possible because the Bush administration had actually gotten to stabilizing global markets for oil or we had to send checks out as capitalistic cost of living stipends to cover the additional costs of and from the GREEN ENERGY REVOLUTION politics of the Democrats — We had to do one or the other to have stopped the housing crisis in time and to have avoided needing to bail out all the banks.

It seems Senator Rand Paul as Mr. Smith is still going - Stand with Rand - your freedoms are being threatened domestically.

Like we have it a historical consideration that President Bush could maybe have only argued his case for OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM more clearly and with more honesty and transparency if he had been otherwise from lying for such to the harder and most political truer route of needing to argue for such necessarily with a parallel discourse about the Clintons’ Administration of a GROSS NEGLIGENCE.

The Democrats would have had to martyr themselves for their energy idealism for us to have avoided bailiwicks for so many about bailing out so many that would have been better served by a President Obama as a Mr. Bailey of Bedford Falls than a Mr. Potter.

That said:  It would have been “capitalistic” to have cut checks to the American People as cost of living stipends to supplement their finances so like of fixed incomes already maxed out and it likely would have saved most banks better and faster than the TARP and TOO BIG TO FAIL politics did.  The Republican candidates during their primary did all stand up and speak to how it was the Government not the people that caused the housing crisis.  The same Republicans though might have had a hard time seeing a way to writing checks even though the Chinese Government was then being that capitalistic and prudent even if actually just “cost of living stipends.”

We had many stories of these early trouble days of convenient crisi for new NEW DEALERS of how in Spain a similar energy idealism had cost at least two existing jobs (regular jobs) for every one new green job that their politics managed to create.

The Democrats have a history with me of my having been party to old concerns that we needed as a nation to get our energy prices higher to change the nation to a better frame of mind about efficiencies and environmental concerns.  When they once asked me “Could it work?” they only wanted to hear the start of my answer that started like:  It could work — But it likely won’t work or wouldn’t work!  I remember them being dismissive (naively) and with “we just want to know if it could work!”

Again, the Democrats would have had to martyr themselves politically to have prevented the housing crisis and stopped the very global economic slide to such now their much (it seems) unexpected not easily reversed convenient “recession” like a “depression” down time from their mathy suppression.  I was of a shared mind that we needed to find a way to educate and involve the American people to real concerns that a higher price of gas could be a variable about — I didn’t think “could work” would work because of the economies and politics of the time and that Democrats mostly were seeming to be being counterproductive by trying to do too much too quickly.

We have seen since this all really got rolling that other things were already quite happening to have fixed the problem without needing higher gas prices and general energy costs.  We have that our natural gas finds and other innovative developments may have been doing more for climate change concerns these past few years and yet while hardly if at all of the Democrat Party plotting as too much all more Mr. Potters of Bedford Falls.

To be brief as this is all now of real bailiwicks of so many new and former members of our Congress:  A Mr. Bailey solution would have been better and especially capitalistic though oddly for too many if so of our Federal Government otherwise to have written checks out (like the Chinese economics) as “COST OF LIVING STIPENDS.”  President Obama has taken to being much more a Mr. Potter and hardly a fan of Mr. Smiths;  he would have had to martyr himself contrary to his own Fifth Amendment rights though to have been so more “capitalistic” and yet as well like the Chinese.

Note:  Had McCain/Palin been elected we likely would have seen the economy recover in just a couple years.  There is that he was set to let a renaissance in state’s rights happen fluidly and naturally and not have been of like a New Nationalist heavy hand too like a Mr. Potter.  And, they would have needed to stand up a bailiwick PRIORITY for regulators to necessary and speedy bank reformation.  By my own considerations it was as far back as 2006 that I had become concerned that the Big Banks had become too corrupt on their collections side and to try out of necessity and desperation to try to cover the corrupted lending side so much a bastard banking child of Clintonomics.

It is all our bailiwicks that Democrats should have admitted that they wanted or thought they needed higher energy prices, and that we would have been better off if they had told us and sold us and decided to educate and involve more like a Mr. Bailey.

Comments are closed.