• holygenes commented on the blog post The GOP Base Loves Ted Cruz

    2013-09-29 12:32:33View | Delete

    Nostradamus thus was about effectively
    the prospect of engaging in a reverse
    witchhunt by using the unification of
    math, moral choices and event streams
    (history,) charted mathematically,
    so as to mathematically find the
    immoral ones in nature.

    Pascal was obviously persuaded Nostradamus
    demonstrated the high likelihood the
    existence of souls, including specific ones,
    could be mathematically isolated.

    Nostradamus famously identified Hitler and
    what he called (I’d say he did this
    informationally–he was a Jewish
    kaballah master physician, very much
    taking after his father, but who, despite
    much disclosed disdain ow religious
    leaders, plainly thought much if not most
    Western prophesy (including Catholic) was
    valid. So, in other words, he would’ve become
    a priest partly to conform and have access
    to the best books; but, clearly, he
    found an intellectually satisfying home

    It’s nothing more than a personal guess
    Nostradamus was personally colored in his
    thoughts as to Napoleon, plainly identified
    (again, I’d call it “informationally”) as
    the first “anti-Christ.” The latter’s actions
    were of course consistent with the complex
    named for himself, which one could equate
    with those compensators and self-defenders,
    to the exclusion of wider social interest,
    so prominently on display in our own time.
    They’re appearing equally de facto fascist.
    (Napoleon’s parents are regarded generally
    to have been model ones. Josephine, descended
    from a Tascher, and thus possibly if not likely
    Jewish, famously regarded him as a clown.)
    However, Napoleon famously harbored resentment
    toward his would-be peers, but in fact rejectors
    of himself, at France’s top military academies.
    He was much more the beneficial dictator (and
    devoted Frenchman in the end, of course,
    though his native language
    was Italian and his name essentially meant
    one of Naples) than are America’s
    corporatists, though they’re simply competing
    for protection of their monopolies.

    He got named emporer, though likely was seen
    as a commoner by the bloodlines,

    The only reason to give Nostradamus
    any thought is his “gives:”
    Pasteur and de Gaulle (particularly
    President 3 times (he actually was,))
    though duality is a profoundly common
    theme, and the Duel Quatrain is the

    Sorry if it’s a little rich in the esoterics,
    FDL. Next time I’ll just start with Romney or Koch
    and end with Coulter.

  • holygenes commented on the blog post The GOP Base Loves Ted Cruz

    2013-09-29 11:14:09View | Delete

    Romney/Bain/Monsanto, considering the
    Tea Party movement and its to me seeming close affinity
    with gay bashing leaders of the religious right, themselves
    almost always turning up being gay or having
    kids come out, seem/s imaginably profiting from, though
    in all rightful admission, not perhaps having
    instituted, the fraud where (generally–reflects opinion)
    demagogues replace free enterprise and democracy
    with monopoly and privatization, and a political ally,
    or even simply a judgmental spouse, especially one
    who enjoys making people afraid of being demonized
    (some people enjoy the control, harbor resentments, etc.)
    demonizes, so as to make afraid of being demonized,
    any disapprover.

    I can only imagine, not knowing anything of the
    actual nature of any of these people or of their
    relations, of course, that the Koch’es, Ann Coulter,
    and the like, may have something to do with that.

    I don’t mean that to sound “anti-”religious.”
    Contrarily, I happen to think my comment is moral.

    Also, it happens being my theory that though
    L. Frank Baum was famously racist, his mother-in-
    law, Joslyn Matilda Gage, a close confidant of the
    famous seekers of equality for women from her era,
    was the actual person who essentially coined
    “witchhunt,” which was incorporated in what was
    likely her invention: Oz (as in ounces of gold,


    Gage happened to have been devotionally moralistic.

    She also lived during a time when many people thought
    these issues were the subject of ..

    Could she have created the Wizard and the witch

    I mean quantum mechanics-wise?

    After all,
    Gilgamesh, humanity’s very first literature:
    immortalize from deeds

    quantum mechanics: existence from degrees of
    awareness, with that acting in wavelike fashion

    Between those:
    paranoia (all knowing;)
    logos (living word)
    Nostradamus (unified math, morality and history in his quatrains (I think))
    Blaise Pascal: goes from atheist to intensely religious
    upon Nostradamus’ publications, with Pascal adding
    coefficients to Yang Hui’s decision tree that
    very much resemble Nostradamus’ possible (I obviously think likely)
    code (the product, of course, being Pascal’s Triangle.)
    Pascal immediately thereafter publishes his fluid dynamic theorem,
    perhaps a forerunner of Guth (MIT–) I wouldn’t know, I’m
    hardly the physicist
    Pascal publishes the birth of probablism and fairness in risk,
    as in commerce

    Hate and fear are obviously the long well known
    tools of demagoguery.

    Can one actually be born from it?

    Aside from reachy esoterics and pleasing
    thoughts, one has to consider, after all,
    the striking similarity between “Dorothy”
    and Dorothy Height.

  • holygenes commented on the blog post Obama Wants Cuts To Social Security

    2013-04-07 09:28:56View | Delete

    legitimate whistleblower:


    (The reason some “conswervatives”/”liberals” are quoting

    each other with ease and increasing frequency is fiefdoms

    are not legitimate to either.)

    Legitimate President:


    Jimmy Carter actually challenged the water monopoly

    in the West, but I think he’s not sufficiently

    balanced as to these:



    Those to me are demonizing for monopolists

    (the rich demagogue subbing monopoly for capitalism

    and the mouthpiece demonizing the objector–

    women were the target when midwives threatened

    medievel doctors)

    (I turn witchhunt on itself for a proving of

    traditional morality–but I don’t spam and never

    link myself–at least not here. I welcome

    FDL’s rigid watchout for that, knowing

    the trustworthy dedication here.)

    So it’s fiefdoms, all right. But it’s also

    the protection racket, modeled literally after

    history’s real fiefdoms. That’s why people disappear

    when they challenge large concerns, though it wasn’t

    that long ago Karen Silkwood was murdered.

    It’s that mouthpiece thing above that explains,

    for me, how sociopathy substitutes for real morality.

    It sounds profoundly please go away trite, but it

    really is the Oz analogy, with OZ being ounces of

    gold, of course.

    Borglum (Rushmore) was anti-monopoly leaders.

    Baum was anti-”witch-”hunt, literally/figuratively/

    theatrically. But he and Borglum were dire

    racists. But Baum’s mother-in-law, Joslyn

    Matilda Gage, appears to have

    been a close Susan B. Anthony follower, and she’s

    either the inspiration (and bankroller) for Baum’s

    theatre and play; or, she’s literally the author.

    That being the case, I’m in good company turning

    witchhunt on itself so as to favor morality.

    Freaky, Dorothy Height’s one who just happened along,

    a perfect re-make of Dorothy.

    B.O. cried at her funeral, but for real?




    I think it’s demonizing and overreaction.


    http://goo.gl/35Z2H (is Wikipedia)

    Judging and transference (transfering distubence onto

    others; confusing the person resembling the obnoxious
    prior with the obnoxious prior) exist at the expense of love.

  • holygenes commented on the diary post Republican Governors Opt-In to Medicaid Expansion by ThirdandState.

    2013-01-29 16:39:42View | Delete

    They simply discovered it’s a fiefdom.

    They like fiefdoms and caste systems.


  • holygenes commented on the blog post New Armed Guard Leaves Gun In Student Bathroom

    2013-01-21 10:13:33View | Delete

    There being too much to our present
    experience to ignore as regards
    personal theory reflected below, I’ve
    decided to retain the reference; but,
    there is absolutely no spam.

    On the one hand if I were a pro police
    state control freaky sort of person,
    which is to say a paranoid (all knowingly
    sort of judgemental person) or someone
    desparately needing to mollify myself over
    something or desparately needing to deflect
    blame from my own nefarious activity, I’d
    welcome shoot-ups in grammar schools
    cause even Hitler didn’t militarize
    grammar schools.

    On the other hand, guns have to be
    something clung to desparately by masculine
    insecure obnoxious paranoid clowns.

    They have to be the world’s most obvious
    phallic symbol.

    I’ve so far failed finding a way to not use the
    witch-hunt word or thesis.
    But I mean no ill-will, having come from atheist to
    pretty much being convinced information enjoys multiple
    stages of life, for one thing, and even that there just might
    be some real validity to this theory as regards there being
    a conveyed lesson wherein it is intended for us to understand
    the conceptualizations of freedom/equality/love as living
    beings are meant to be taken seriously and in terms of their
    being able to show themselves in different manners.

    In a nutshell, simply to quickly explain the seeming contradiction,
    I theorize that after a date East/West are morally identical per plan,
    with the West admonished not to judge but having embarked on that

    WItch-hunt enables judging to control and enslave, and originally for
    ancient despots to rumble with their neighbors and have other men’s

    Imagine a rich person switching out monopoly for capitalism and his
    cohorts shouting demon-like labels at anyone not concurring.


    That formula led to the process-self-creation of a ruling class so
    steeped in witch-hunt but also by that process genetically so
    infused with gay genetics, with them being the hypocritical
    gays now finally believably foreseen, with gays otherwise utterly,
    utterly normal, even optimally occurring, that said class has
    grown drunk on deception and profit from fraud.

    Fear having been their own would-be legacy for their own
    families, but transferred, literally into a system of
    ‘Government by Transference,” they further bring a
    resentment to their deception and profit from fraud.

    The process of the community that springs forth witch-hunt
    is about everything having nothing to do with

    Just as was described to have been the case during
    earlier moments of history similar to our present experience,
    this ruling class is a class of inadequates–both psychologically
    from emotional deprivations and physically, most likely.

    The witch-hunter is definitionally homicidally paranoid,
    paranoia being Greek for all knowing. The fat witch-hunter,
    self-limited by such things as voluntary obesity lest
    he, to his self limiting thinking, be wrongly demonized,
    will thus be: fat; impotent; inadequate; ruled by a God
    complex; likely a product of a father lacking in his own
    recognition, likely a product of a mother more interested
    in making people afraid of being demonized than affording
    affection to her children.


    That would be the logical candidate for the blowhard with the
    suitcase full of Viagra telling women what they can’t do.

    That would be the cops denying birthright and freedom/equality/love
    with gratuitous severe punishment, and they would be deliberately
    understood as such by that ruling class.

  • It’s saddest, I think, though, seeing
    police state elementary schools.

    Besides depriving the kids of their
    rainbows and lollipops, it will tend to
    make them shy, some ultimately likely
    more like the paranoid judgemental control
    freaks imposing it, just as the latter likely
    became that way from their own parents.

    Though, it’s more pathetic thinking that the
    gun tot’ers on Texas campuses would be pre-selected
    paranoids by virtue of the last decade of the likes
    of rich demagogues substituting monopoly for
    capitalism and politicos using long historic witch-hunts
    to make afraid of being demonized anyone
    tending to not agree with that, with that thus
    also conflating (good) morality with sociopathy.

    Ancient despots used witch-hunt to enable rumbling
    with neighbors and to have other men’s women.
    (Women only recently gained a semblance of equality
    though they were burned at the stake when midwives
    threatened medieval doctors.)

    Judging is to control to enslave.
    Witch-hunt enables judging.

    Adults don’t simply remain childish from that,
    not only in terms of arrested growth
    (boys hurt animals, but men don’t but they
    do if they need asserting gender.)
    Children imitate their parents’ witch-hunting,
    judging and controlling. They otherwise plainly
    have the capacity to be far more adult far earlier
    than their childish parents realize.

    Judging to control to enslave, and transference
    (of fear or pain (THINK: Spock’s half-brother:
    tell me your pain so I can relieve you of it,))
    and concomitant ego defense (self-assurance, self-
    adulation,) with all these forms of paranoia typically
    quite insulting, though the actor is the loser in
    advance, exists in perfect inverse relation to the
    capacity to socialize beyond one’s own nose.

    The products of the witch-hunting community
    would not be employable in my eyes.

    Today, it’s gay fascists (not the optimally
    occurring–numerical genetic advantage
    of the group-) transferring the fear
    of being wrongly ferreted out.

    That’s how monopoly can substitute for capitalism
    with some mouthpiece(s)demonizing anyone not going

    All that constituting judging to control to enslave,
    with killing and stealing tossed in, the above thereby
    entirely confirms traditional morality and highlights
    the very realization of prophesy that today’s would-be
    witch-hunters have sought to see realized.

    (It makes sense if it’s conveyed and part of an
    experiment for our benefit, with the East identical
    after a date but for the judging.)

  • holygenes commented on the diary post Why Do So Many Low-Income People Turn Against Their Own Kind? by John Wright.

    2012-10-22 09:12:43View | Delete

    Dear FDL:

    It was genuinely an accident my URL’s showing.

    I added a paragraph to a C-P job.

    Please: rather than bounce me, simply delete
    my own URL under request/approval of myself
    under my own USER ID and PW.


  • holygenes commented on the diary post Why Do So Many Low-Income People Turn Against Their Own Kind? by John Wright.

    2012-10-22 09:11:08View | Delete

    That’s from the conflation of good morality with sociopathy, or, more precisely, self-serving demagoguery at the expense of populations suffering holocausts. Start with http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_james_py_060422_warped_interpretatio.htm Then: That’s about billionaire demagogues floating false ideologies in tandem with the demonization of a group so that their mouthpieces, in league, or benefiting from the control gained, an make whomever [...]

  • Bye.

  • I hope you realize this is on point because
    whether supporting monopolistic companies
    in one sector or banking, it’s six of one
    half dozen the other.

    One Cong. from NY proposes privatizing immigration
    for banks selling government-protected monopoly in
    overvalued collateral to foreigners; NY’s mayor proposes
    requiring recreating 19th Century housing standards to
    make that collateral look better (I think;) a Fed Chairman
    privatizes the currency when his bank buddies need
    free reserves.

    Then they call you renegades by every name.

    What causes the arrogance:

    The child of a parent given to
    limitation or limiting, and judging, instead
    of reasoning empathetically, will be
    vulnerable to feeling deprived of recognition
    and love. They will be vulnerable to
    mollifying themselves, or to arrogance
    (ego defense.)

    I think that’s a consequence of, among
    other causes being available, of course,
    political power based on demonizing so
    rich demonizers can hire mouthpieces to
    define the demons to taste and identify who
    might be thus (wrongly, as if demonizing
    is O.K. to begin with) ferreted out as a demon.

    Of course, if you know me, I’m into the idea
    of a proving (math/history/morality) wherein the
    self-produced demons, compared with morally
    identical people elsewhere otherwise, provide
    one heck of an experimental gradient and control.

    But I personally think the
    world’s problems are80% scapegoating
    and mollification, 20% arrogance.

    You know the routine if you know me.


    Absence of reply thus does not reflect
    indifference/Just hitting and running
    really would be f’n obnoxious though, so
    I’m here briefly to answer early replies.

    FDL: Noone more than me appreciates not
    putting people off. I simply have a personal
    flavor on these issues but work at not spamming.

    Otherwise, please enjoy the rest of your holiday.

  • holygenes commented on the blog post Ron Wyden’s Dilemma in Disavowing Ryan/Wyden

    2012-08-15 13:15:16View | Delete

    I anticipated a couple obvious Q’s.

    Safety nets are good, of course.
    Adam Smith actually was a profoundly
    compassionate man who advocated them, along
    with not abusing labor, though the mouthpieces
    supporting the super-rich cite the opposite,

    I would agree with Smith corp’s are great
    at applying resources for next greatest return.

    But he never advocated monopolies.

    The U.S. is supposed to be about freedom and
    after T. Roosevelt anti-monopoly.

    That is obviously entirely incongruent for
    the person who’s a control freak, an ego-
    challenged person, or the person who obnoxiously
    believes in one dollar one vote (Eleanor R. had it
    right: one person one vote) or plutocracy
    generally (I think if you toss the control
    freak part everyone is educated and has
    no need for annoying plutocrats.)

    Now it really is a bientot.

  • holygenes commented on the blog post Ron Wyden’s Dilemma in Disavowing Ryan/Wyden

    2012-08-15 13:03:59View | Delete

    Bye for now.

  • holygenes commented on the blog post Ron Wyden’s Dilemma in Disavowing Ryan/Wyden

    2012-08-15 12:50:40View | Delete

    I think:

    When you run a monopoly what’s
    even better than charging different
    prices for different people like a
    pricing control freak is having
    the government help pay a higher
    than otherwise price along with,
    where appropriate to the monopolist,
    taking the lion’s share of the risk.

    These people will be the ones with
    the obnoxious self-important faces.

    But they’ll typically actually be
    clueless, only the very few, including
    I’m guessing the ones play acting in the
    woods (in women’s clothes?) but nonetheless
    enjoying the transfering of fear so as to
    control and conflate bad morality with
    the opposite of control, which is what
    FDR explained: the only thing
    we have to fear is fear itself.

    Obama replaced an obvious shell game
    with the above with the cartel having
    a free hand with those who’re rich and
    free from risk factors. But it’s still
    a cartel’s delight.

    Which has to be why it was voted in by
    senators who prior thereto had just
    been exposed as really be joined at
    the hip with the insurers.

    The name of the game is deception.

    I’ve had my own fascinations in the area
    of deception in our lives today.

    It seems to be a product of people
    who love to scapegoat as well as those
    who just love themselves.

    They had ill-prepared or ill-suited
    parents, having nothing to do, of course,
    with sexual orientation.

    Job/family–lack of response to a reply
    does not mean disinterest on my part.
    However, I do stand by a while, of course,
    as doing less really would be obnoxious.

  • holygenes commented on the diary post The Levy Commission Report and the Eradication of Palestine by EdwardTeller.

    2012-07-12 07:52:43View | Delete

    If I were an ancient despot desirous of rumbling with my neighbors, I’d first need to create a group to blame for all my failings. Of the thousands of Biblical admonitions, the only one that the religious right around the world harps on is the extermination of–a veritable holocaust against–gays. Yet the ones most vocal [...]

  • holygenes commented on the blog post FDIC: Banks Enjoy Highest Quarterly Profits Since 2007

    2012-05-24 23:48:37View | Delete

    It’s Marginal Expected Shortfall that gets blown out by,
    well, what looks a heck of a lot like self-deluded bank
    managers who think it’s smart to reward their people for
    accepting larger risk for a smaller price than will their

    What Bernanke, Greenspan et al. ignored:

    With right decision makers shafted, with war for
    car cultures based only on oil taking priority
    over even the fracking that’s spoiling our water,
    the very “ultimate economic recovery” from that
    is actually a losing proposition.

    If you’re going to frack, at least roll out
    cars that can use it, I would think.

    But it’s Just Wars Just Oil and Just Near Free Reserves
    for Big Banks – R – Us.

    When the banks get essentially free reserves and lend it
    back to Treasury, and when you get otherwise a half point
    on the proceeds from your house, for a negative real return,
    while the bank charges several times that, though the nominal
    rate doesn’t look like much, on that capital that’s otherwise
    available to lend, that’s gangbusters net interest margin
    indeed. In fact, I think from memory that’s even made
    Cramer bullish on the TBTF banks on a recent show (pre-Facebook,

    We’ve never seen $US trillions in free reserves before any more
    than we have credit guarantees multiple 10′s X bank net assets.

    So after how many $100 billions in interest income has been
    surrendered to these bank favors (for anyone to be surprised by
    these bank results, I’m sorry, you’d have to be a sorry individual.)

    and $US trillions have been extended in near free reserves (raising
    reserve requirements is simply a way of saying shaft employment now,
    we had to feed the banks but we can’t let that ignite “velocity,”)
    I think we’re all part of their crap shoot, though I think Nassim
    Taleb would put it differently (self-serving reckless possibilities?
    Yaha! economics?)

    A little background you might find interesting:

    Before Blaise Pascal added coefficients to Yang Hui’s “Triangle,”
    (one choice leads to two, leads to 4, etc., in a triangle-like fashion,)
    he and a correspondent mathematician pretended they wanted to unwind
    a card game of chance such that each players relative strength and
    biddings would be fairly settled.

    It’s my guess his coefficients were inspired by a coding within
    Nostradamus’ quatrains, running first vertically, then horizontally,
    but with Nostradamus’ work, I’m further guessing, having conveyed to
    Pascal that choices over time mathematically reflect (as in the web
    bot, iChing, digital forensics, the like, this being funky now and salient, so I’m sparing persons’ names) moral decisions, which of
    course is in and of itself obvious and almost meaningless. But
    then again, it’s not. It says morality is math.
    (Economists look at “tails,” historians “periodization.”)

    (There’s potentially more. Parallel events but for slight
    alterations in moral choices (as in, say, identical East – West,
    but for one item here or there) seem to then offer actual
    meta-experiment value, which would be handy if someone
    cared to convey something through history.)

    It sure looks like there’s a morality of life vs. one that’s not.
    We’re obviously headed toward imitating the mistakes of the
    inhabitants of Easter Island. It looks conversely like
    freedom, equality and love are the path to life, though I
    personally try seeing those now as generalized states, rather
    than think of them in terms of the confines of my particular
    language (which I think you’ve guessed is English.)

    That triangle actually becomes spherical, though I’m
    capable of taking this to a funkier level and suggest the
    pyramids are confirmational. So if something imparted
    character rather than blink out, it would have become morality,
    math and history all by itself.

    This decision pattern is very similar looking to those experienced
    with fractals (ultra simple concept: repeated iterations of one thing
    to many of the same until it forms a forest, with life the building
    block.) I wonder if the two can be connected, as I also wonder if
    probabilities and relativity can be connected in parallel. If they
    can, can it be seamlessly? We actually have that already, somewhat,
    in economics, such as in Taleb’s work. In fact, that’s now glaringly
    obvious. I happen to think (factual characterizations subject to my
    mis-characterizing them) what with the game of footsie with the employment
    participation rate, the playing with the real estate statistics
    by virtue of loss sharing and toxic mortgage sales subsidized by the
    taxpayer, and thus a bubble bought by you and now distorting in myriad
    ways, we’re in a much worse place with much worse probabilities. Heck,
    it’s not just the M.E. that’s had it with the dollar, the Asian states
    are struggling to break free too. All for avoiding bank holding cos.’
    holders being the losers. (The interesting question would be do
    probabilities and relativity provide a theoretical fixed point.)

    And, if it should be Nostradamus saw the future in “real time,”
    then surprise! Morality teaches us how to travel through
    space (that time is distance thing.)

  • The buying of the bubble from the bubble creators looks correct, to me.
    Except the taxpayer is paying for much of the loss sharing.

    This isn’t to be taken as legal advice, as it’s simply sensible doubting
    that any market participant should understandably have. But I wouldn’t trust the title of a foreclosure part and parcel to an MBS absent an independent look at the title chain, particularly looking for whomever would be an unspoken for lienholder, especially at the moment of a
    would be settlement, that apart from tracing the current conveyor every step back to the original. I don’t know that I could happily rely on the title insurer. And, where a settlement occurs but with other lienholders present but not participating (again not legal advice–get your own,) I really doubt the title insurer has seen anything like it before, and, I
    honestly don’t know what quitclaim value a settlement’s supposed to have.

    After all, if someone’s foreclosed, and his first was sold, there was
    still nothing stopping him (absent a clause) from earlier adding a second.
    What about that lender? It could simply be a home equity line from
    a broker (and not one owned by the foreclosing bank.)

    I agree with all the doubts expressed.

    There are two additional areas I would have questions in.

    Aside from $US trillions in virtually free reserves extended to the
    TBTF banks by Bernanke at the expense of the earning power of everyone
    else’s savings, including those of all who did the EXACT OPPOSITE of those
    banks, that is, they sold the bubble (they made the RIGHT decision,)
    the Fed has purchased $100′s billions in those banks’ MBS’s.

    That’s a form of indirect lending power that just as well could have
    been devoted to, say, free tuition. And that would represent an
    investment indeed.

    On the other hand, when the Fed sells the MBS’s, and when interest rates rise from the level of the Liquidity Trap, it, of course, will require less equity for the equivalent return. So the free interest reserves and the MBS purchases seem to be, if I’m not mistaken, a sure-fire give not just in interest to those banks but in an interest rate hit on the MBS’s as well, I would guess (I’m always legally defensive–I don’t know that interest rates will/won’t reflect near free reserves for bad banks forever or that Bernanke will/won’t be changing reserve accounts forever while
    then necessarily letting employment suffer forever lest inflation break out, even if it means a generation lost to a mortgage derivatives Ponzi scheme,) indirectly against the taxpayers’ interest.

    When the MBS’s are sold at a loss, I don’t see anything stopping the banks
    from buying them back. That’s not fencing? That’s not laundering?



    Buying toxic mortgages also could be less stupid looking if the’
    buyers are bank proxies aiming to quickly use the taxpayer-supported
    loss sharing, and then to simple resell them (that’s different from
    the Federal Reserve selling MBS’s at a loss and the banks buying them

    The reserve ratios on the MBS insurance was said to have left the
    large banks with 3% liquidity ratios. After the losses are laundered,
    the taxpayer will have bought the bubble, those who sold their homes at
    the top of the market will have bought the bubble back, they will have
    paid for the banks’ loss sharing programs, and the banks will be back
    at it, though, with what, 5% liquidity ratios? I don’t think that would
    be a happy economy, cause the bubble will have been bought instead of
    corrected, those who would have taken the banks’ collateral at the banks’
    loss will have been shaken down, saving for retirement will have been
    strangled, and the bubble will still be there with only a weaker
    support system.

    (Still the legal paranoid, this is only a guess too:) I think the
    shadow inventory is hugely under-appreciated and only getting worse
    faster than you’re buying the loss-sharing and thus subsidizing the
    toxic mortgage sales.

    Everything middle class will have been hacked. Teachers. Nurses.
    Medicare. Social Security.

    The Europeans will have been told they pay too much taxes.
    (Remember? Europe: a tax and spend mistake?)

    The Europeans will have been told they pay too little taxes.
    (Remember? It’s more recent: Greeks: you pay too little taxes.
    Actually, they pay, I think, about 23% VAT.)

    I don’t mean to harp, but hypocrisy, running a mortgage
    security Ponzi scheme cause you feel you’re good for it while
    sneering at those who complain about it, even as they’re
    forced to buy it with student sharecropper-hood and the like,
    is like “transference.”
    That’s taking a fear/pain experienced and pushing it onto others.

    It doesn’t have to be subliminal, though for the bankers
    it obviously is.

    It can be understood, mastered and

    That the bank holding cos. won’t simply suck up their own losses
    and get recapped is simply what I call the “Government of Transference”
    of the bank holding company owners.

    It’s all so obvious and transparent it would be funny if it weren’t
    for Capt. Lewis getting strung up and this
    I’m guessing now being illegal
    (note Kovic getting wrongly demonized “communist,” Nixon cynically
    using anti-divisive rhetoric when he actually depended on division.)

    As to the happy talk, a 3% bump after 2 mos down, with record low
    mortgage rates, and an ocean of delinquent properties, with people often unable to move between states if they have pre-existing health issues,
    with states laying off people cause of the bubble-induced recession, and
    with an accumulating pent up need to sell, and with existing home sales
    still a small fraction of the pre-collapse level, I really have to wonder how much is laundering, using the loss sharing, and how much is people
    finally throwing in the towel on negative returns on Bernanke’s benchmarking returns to below inflation. Why even do these guys commute
    to work in Washington? You can easily force people to buy a bubble,
    subsidize loss sharing, or accept negative returns from your netbook.

    And when the banks are taxpayer subsidized for placing their overvalued
    collateral up for rent, there’s a laugher. The best places to rent, if you sold your home at the top of the bubble, is where, as you’re getting
    close to nothing on the proceeds, where you might otherwise have expected to be getting $10,000 annually interest, are, then, where the rent level
    will let you survive yet another year or two or three of Bernanke’s
    free reserves, and then, if it’s from a large manager experienced in
    clumping developments so as to allow it attention to detail and responsiveness to tenant requests, and to allow it to extend really nice amenities across that scale, you can make out pretty well.

    If you rent a TBTF bank’s overvalued collateral, I assume the prop at this
    point’s starting to look slummy. It could very well have origly been
    spec in a nice place and have common amenities. However, where/when there’s a problem with something that’s customarily the landlord’s
    responsibility, I wouldn’t want to have to call that bank.

    FDL: If this results in a double-posting, what happened was
    I edited $10,000 to $10,000′s; then, upon submission, the paragraph
    formatting vanished. So I deleted at my account activity. And I’m
    thus resubmitting here and now.

  • This pertains the original basis of demonization for the sake of associating foes with the demonized and use of division for
    the sake of ulterior motives.

    It’s indistinguishable, where g are a capital status crime, from the calls to exterminate J’s.


    That those who engage in the demonization have been likeliest carriers of the gy gene is proof,
    on top of this, of the genetic, apart from the developmental, incidence.


    Hitler was famously feminine, JFK’s killers substantially gay fascists, many / most religious right
    gay bashers ultimately proved gay themselves, or, their kid(s) come out. The ultimate gradient and
    proof: virtually all murderers of gays and persons wrongly presumed gay have proven being gay.
    What’s this guy?

    So a history, a genetic science, and a morality prove each other simultaneously, and it is mathematical across event streams and meta-experimental where the East is identical but for the
    transference. And all manner of indicia identify this “Government by Transference” as the operative proof.

    It’s been a source of not simply the transference defining monopoly protected by fear and pacification (including those standing in as the American basij in the Tea Party,) but of the arrogance.

    How sad.

    It’s division that has bought student sharecropper-hood and monopolies and war.

    It’s division that murdered Ghandi.

    It’s transference-tainted families (the ones with the hypocritical gays attacking gays and making a world afraid of being demonized,) not married gays, that are a world’s evil. One can easily imagine the hypocrites being the ones thought by many foreseen. I’m guessing they really want understanding, forgiveness and love now instead.

    But if transference, fear mastered and transferred, and if it’s then the person in the street fearing the person resembling the obnoxious prior (which defines transference for him / her at that point,) is proposed ended by one who would today otherwise make this


    (Is Ronnie Kovic being demonized as a “communist” and Nixon co-opting “divide and conquer.”)

    illegal (!,) is the purpose then to end transference, or is it to see its triumph?

    (same story, same reply as last from me; but, this time, w/o
    the stuff as to how the process of demonization understood because it was receive, how it was transferred to everyone else, how it process self-produced, how it was the basis of division for the sake of judging to control to scapegoat to offer a target for blame instead of the that being the self-serving demagogue puppet-master go started (though folks know how to find my thoughts on that))

  • holygenes commented on the diary post The Making of an Evolution: Obama “Comes Out” for Marriage Equality by Gregg Levine.

    2012-05-10 07:59:00View | Delete

    This pertains the original basis of demonization for the sake of associating foes with the demonized and use of division for the sake of ulterior motives. It’s indistinguishable, where g are a capital status crime, from the calls to exterminate J’s. http://pages.citebite.com/g2a2d0expuk That those who engage in the demonization have been likeliest carriers of the [...]

  • Load More