The Miseducation On Newt Gingrich

If you want to know why I believe there's a enough solid chance Newt will win enough primaries to seriously panic the GOP establishment into doing something amazingly stupid that may blow up the entire party, I direct you to Pajamas Media's Bryan Preston, who has this analysis of the Newt.

Newt Gingrich is such a mixed bag it’s hard to know where to start in assessing his true record. He helped scuttle HillaryCare. He balanced the budget for the first time in forever. He authored, and forced President Clinton to sign, welfare reform. These are all historic achievements for which Newt Gingrich deserves credit.

But he resigned in disgrace after being the only Speaker of the House in US history to be punished and fined by his own majority for ethics violations. He fell for global warming. He lobbied — despite what he says, that’s what he did — for Freddie Mac. He raked in tens of millions promoting big government health care including the individual mandate, all the way up to 2009. He called Paul Ryan’s budget reforms “right wing social engineering.” In an anti-establishment national moment, he’s the embodiment of much that’s wrong with the establishment. He is, ironically, more of an establishment figure than the incumbent president. That “crossroads where government meets enterprise”? Gingrich has occupied it for 30 years. And then there are the private life problems, which stretch all the way to the beginning of his political career. You can’t even argue that he has always been faithful to his next wife. He’s an opposition researcher’s dream opponent. His nomination would take several major issues off the table.

But at least he can debate well and swat the media. There’s no chance that either can wear thin and end up turning voters off, right?

What an amazing mix of fact and fiction there to create Gingrich's larger than life persona...or more importantly, the facts are the part where Preston is attacking him.  The fiction is where anyone other than a die-hard Republican voter over the age of 40 has any positive connotations of Newt at all, and even with the silly nonsense about Newt "balancing the budget" and "reforming welfare", not even a winger hack like Preston can make up enough winger nonsense to rehabilitate Newt Gingrich.  There's just too much baggage there.

On the other hand, the fact that the GOP establishment despises Newt Gingrich only hands the Tea Party nutjobs all the motivation they need to vote for him.  And should Newt actually start winning and the polls stay where they are into the January primaries, I wouldn't put it past the GOP powers that be to put Newt down like a rabid animal.  And if they don't, and they accept him, he augers into the ground at Mach 4 in the general.  Who would be pick as his VP in order to help him win?  Palin again?  Bachmann?  Cain?  Please.

Either way then things will get really, really fun.

Haves And Have Nots

Ladies and gentlemen, meet the epitome of America's wealth inequality:  the heirs to Sam Walton's massive Wal-Mart fortune.

The triennial Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) is one of the best sources for data on wealth in the U.S. And, of course the Forbes 400 estimates the worth of the wealthiest amongst us—all 400 wouldn’t be captured in the SCF. If we look at both the SCF and the Forbes 400 we can glean some interesting insights.

In 2007 (the most recent SCF) the cumulative wealth of the Forbes 400 was $1.54 trillion or roughly the same amount of wealth held by the entire bottom fifty percent of American families. This is a stunning statistic to be sure.

Upon closer inspection, the Forbes list reveals that six Waltons—all children (one daughter-in-law) of Sam or James “Bud” Walton the founders of Wal-Mart—were on the list. The combined worth of the Walton six was $69.7 billion in 2007—which equated to the total wealth of the entire bottom thirty percent!

Six people in America have the same total combined wealth as about 90 million Americans, roughly.  I'm not sure what's more depressing, that 400 people control enough wealth equal to half the country, or the six Walton heirs controlling enough wealth for the bottom 30%.

No country should have an economy out of whack.  Nobody should be worth millions of people like that.

It's crazy.

Bag of Hope

Bag of Bones will be coming to A&E. This is one of Stephen King's best novels. However, like all of his best work I worry that it will fall flat when it hits the screen. The entire book is told from the main character's point of view, and it's him that we learn to love. It's his thoughts that add that extra dimension of pain and terror. Showing us may not be enough.  One article says it falls way short of the book's promise.  I hope they are wrong.

I won't throw any spoilers (major ones anyway) but I have heard a few things that give me pause. First, they kill Jo in an entirely different way, one that doesn't match the underground story that is developing quietly the whole time. She had to die the way she did for everything to add up. Also, I have heard that the grief of losing his wife is shown in a clumsy way. It's no secret that Mike's wife dies. What is important is how it made him the scattered and desperate man that he becomes. It's also the most brilliant part of King's writing. Authors are often told to skip grief because it makes the reader sad or uncomfortable. Not King. He didn't flinch from the pain and he let you feel it right along with Mike. Anyone who has lost someone that meaningful knows how grief lays little traps. You think you're all cried out, you think you have move on, then like a sucker punch you catch a whiff of perfume or see their favorite book and you're right back to where you were the day you learned they were gone.

The terror of Bag of Bones is the same way. What happens is semi-scary by itself, in the context of Mike's universe they are enough to stop your heart. It's going to be hard to capture that without lame segues or "talking to myself" scenes.  The secret language of marriage is going to be hard to portray, and the love stories going on might be too distracting.  We had the advantage of hearing Mike's thoughts on everything, without that the movie may rely too much on 1) assuming the viewer hasn't read the book and 2) that they need to explain too much so they cut crucial parts of the story.

Still, I will be tuned in and hoping for success. Give me back my dust catcher, please.

That's Some Fine Police Work There, Lou (Again)

An off-duty Miami-Dade police officer was arrested after he was discovered passed out and drunk in his patrol car in the middle of a West Kendall intersection, the department said Thursday.

But Fernando Villa was not cuffed and booked into jail. Instead, Villa, 32, was allowed to go home after signing a form promising he would appear in court.

Now, the internal affairs bureau is investigating Villa, as well as why supervisors on the scene allowed him to avoid jail, despite orders from Miami-Dade Police Director Jim Loftus to treat him “like everyone else.”

Surprise, they can't figure out who did it. Looks like another cop may get away with a crime. I have no problems with professional courtesies, but this is too much. Anyone else would have been treated like dog crap on their lawn, and this guy gets to go home.

Greek Fire, Part 48

Well, if Felix Salmon's analysis of the "Save the euro!" summit is correct, then the Greek Fire is about to pretty much claim the entire continent.

Remember how Wolfgang Münchau said that the Euro zone had to get it right at this summit or it would collapse? Well, the Euro zone has most emphatically not got it right. Take any of the list of prescriptions of the minimum necessary right now — from Münchau, from Larry Summers, from Mohamed El-Erian — and the one thing that jumps out at you, especially in light of the most recent news, is that if you look at anybody’s list, there’s an enormous number of items which has zero chance of actually happening.

Here’s how the FT put it on Wednesday:

It borders on hysterical to say there are but hours to save the euro, but there is a risk that if the crisis is not now tamed the price of a rescue might start to spiral out of politicians’ grasp. The stakes are therefore very high at Friday’s summit. The world cannot afford another half-baked solution.

And yet, inevitably, another half-baked solution is exactly what we got. Which means, I fear, that it is now, officially, too late to save the Eurozone: the collapse of the entire edifice is now not a matter of if but rather of when.

Oh it gets worse from there, but the central tenet of the issue is that the summit yesterday was a complete failure, and not just because the UK said they wanted nothing to do with saving the euro.  There's simply not enough money to bail out any more countries, period.  It's all been blown on the PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece, and Spain.)  And Italy has 2 trillion euros in outstanding debts, when these guys are balking at a quarter of that for the entire permanent stability bailout fund.

But Felix is right.  The euro is done for at this point.  The question is only how much damage will it do to the world economy, and given that the world economy is on life support as it is, this is likely to be horrifically bad when the dominoes finally stop falling.

Sadly, it's going to be the average European who is going to suffer...followed very, very closely by the average American.  And if you think the Fed will be allowed to step in to save Europe, remember that the Republicans made sure we couldn't even save ourselves.

Time to start thinking about what could happen when the euro does collapse, never mind the "if" part.

Hint: worst case scenario here is "years of global depression and 20% listed unemployment" which would be about 40%-50% in real terms.  In other words, game over.  And at this point, we're not even players in the game to stop it.

Papers, Please In Alabama, Part 3

Looks like Alabama's "Papers, Please!" immigration law is already causing serious economic damage to the state's farms, but now it's starting to cost the state foreign manufacturing plant jobs as companies look for other states to build their plants in.

And earlier this week, the business alliance in Birmingham, Alabama’s largest city, called for revisions to the law because the group worried the law was tainting Alabama’s image around the world. James T. McManus, chairman of the Alliance and CEO of the Energen Corp., said revisions “are needed to ensure that momentum remains strong in our competitive economic development efforts.”

Sheldon Day, the mayor of Thomasville, Alabama, has already seen the reality of McManus’ concerns. After Day recruited a Canadian steel company to Thomasville in July 2010, he said 25 companies have visited the town about building plants there. But he told the Wall Street Journal that since the law went into effect, at least one company turned down a visit because of the immigration law. And Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, a Chinese company that in March pledged to build a $100 million factory in Thomasville, is reconsidering its decision to build a plant in Alabama after the law went into effect.

The mounting concerns among business leaders show a turning point for the immigration law. Already, legislators have weighed in about wanting to change HB 56, and state Attorney General Luther Strange admitted that parts of the harmful law need to be scrapped. For a law that could cost the Alabama economy at least $40 million each year, it should be clear how vital it is for lawmakers in Alabama to do something about the crisis HB 56 created. 

$40 million plus a year and potentially hundreds of jobs, if not thousands if foreign manufacturing companies and auto makers pull out because of the embarrassing PR backlash.  It should have been dead obvious to Alabama lawmakers that the multinational backlash to this policy in a global economy was going to far outweigh the political "benefits" from the anti-Latino crowd in the state's midst.  Then again, they're Republicans...apparently not too smart to begin with.

While it would be devastating to the state's economy, I wonder how many international companies will leave Alabama before this law gets tossed?  If I'm an Alabama GOP lawmaker, I'm hoping the Supreme Court files this piece of work in the wastebasket pretty damn soon.

StupidiNews, Weekend Edition!

• The EPA is now saying that chemicals from extracting natural gas from the process of "fracking" has polluted groundwater in Wyoming.
• Charlotte-based home improvement chain Lowes is now backpedaling after conservative groups pressured the company to pull advertising from TLC's All-American Muslim reality show.
• A new Gallup poll finds 76% of voters say most members of Congress do not deserve re-election in November, a new record high.
• Japan is extending tax breaks for buying green cars in an effort to boost the country's lagging auto sector.
• NASA scientists say the Mars Opportunity rover's recent discovery of gypsum deposits on the red planet means there must have been flowing water at some point in the planet's past.

Last Call

A lot of numbers have been thrown around in the accounting of just hom much money the banks got from the Fed, but if this analysis is to believed, it's utterly insane: some $29 trillion total.  Randall Wray at EconoMonitor:

There are a number of issues that must be understood. First, the Fed quibbles about the differences among lending, guarantees, and spending. For the purposes of this blog I will accept these differences and call the sum across the three “commitments”. In spite of what Bernanke claims, these do commit “Uncle Sam” since Fed losses will be absorbed by the Treasury. (The Fed pays profits to Treasury, so if its profits are hurt by losses, payments to Treasury are reduced. If the Fed should go insolvent, the Treasury will almost certainly be forced to recapitalize it.) I do, however, agree with the Chairman that a tally should not include facilities that were created but not utilized (there were several of them, and the tally I present below does not include any facilities that were not used).

Second, there are (at least) three different ways to measure the Fed’s bail-out. One way would be to find the day on which the maximum outstanding Fed commitments was reached. According to the Fed, that appears to have been about $1.5 trillion sometime in December 2008. I’m willing to take Bernanke at his word. Another way would be to take the total of commitments made over a short period of time—say, a week or a month. That would be a measure of systemic distress and would help to identify the worst periods of the GFC (global financial crisis). Obviously, this will be a bigger number and will depend on the rate of turn-over of Fed loans. For example, many of the loans were very short-term but were renewed. Bernanke argues that it is misleading to add up across revolving loans. Let us say that a bank borrows $1 million over night each day for a week. The total would be $7 million for the week. In a period of particular distress, the peak weekly or monthly lending would spike as many institutions would be forced to continually borrow from the Fed. Bernanke argues we should look only at the lending at a peak instant of time.

Think about it this way. A half dozen drunken sailors are at the bar, and the bartender refills their shot glasses with whiskey each time a drink is taken. At any instant, the bar-keep has committed only six ounces of booze. That is a useful measure of whiskey outstanding. But it is not useful for telling us how much the drunks drank. Bernanke would like us to believe that if the Fed newly lent a trillion bucks every day for 3 years to all our drunken bankers that we should total that as only a trillion greenbacks committed. Yes, that provides some useful information but it does not really measure the necessary intervention by the Fed into financial markets to save Wall Street.

And that leads to the final way to measure the Fed’s commitments to propping up our drunks on Wall Street: add up every single damned loan, guarantee and asset purchase the Fed made to benefit banks, banksters, real Housewives on Wall Street, fraudsters, and their cousins, aunts and uncles. This gives us the cumulative Fed commitments.

And if you go ahead and do that, as two UMKC graduate students have done, you come up with a mind-busting figure:

When all individual transactions are summed across all facilities created to deal with the crisis, the Fed committed a total of $29,616.4 billion dollars. This includes direct lending plus asset purchases. Table 1 depicts the cumulative amounts for all facilities; any amount outstanding as of November 10, 2011 is in parentheses below the total in Table 1.  Three facilities—CBLS, PDCF, and TAF—overshadow all other facilities, and make up 71.1 percent ($22,826.8 billion) of all assistance.

Table 1: Cumulative facility totals, in billions

Source: Federal Reserve

Facility	Total	Percent of total
Term Auction Facility	$3,818.41	12.89%
Central Bank Liquidity Swaps	10,057.4(1.96)	33.96
Single Tranche Open Market Operation	855	2.89
Terms Securities Lending Facility and Term Options Program	2,005.7	6.77
Bear Stearns Bridge Loan	12.9	0.04
Maiden Lane I	28.82(12.98)	0.10
Primary Dealer Credit Facility	8,950.99	30.22
Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility	217.45	0.73
Commercial Paper Funding Facility	737.07	2.49
Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility	71.09(.794)	0.24
Agency Mortgage-Backed Security Purchase Program	1,850.14(849.26)	6.25
AIG Revolving Credit Facility	140.316	0.47
AIG Securities Borrowing Facility	802.316	2.71
Maiden Lane II	19.5(9.33)	0.07
Maiden Lane III	24.3(18.15)	0.08
AIA/ ALICO	25	0.08
Totals	$29,616.4	100.0%

Yeah. That figure is in billions, as in $29,600 plus billions, commonly known as $29.6 trillion.  Some ten trillion just in liquidity swaps, and another nine trillion in the Fed's primary dealer credit window, plus another ten trillion in change in other various and sundry programs.  Twice our entire national debt, just to get the banks out of the hole they were in.  Helicopter Ben was dropping cash out of helicopters made of cash.

Oh, and the banks are right back to playing the same games they were before, because they know if they screw up again, the Fed will bail them out...again.

It is any wonder that the Village Elite are looking to scrap as many social programs as possible in order to make the average American pick up the tab for what's coming next?

Well That's A Crying Shame

Sadly, Republican presidential candidates aren't quite as stupid as we thought...well, not every single one of them, it seems.

Late on Thursday, Michele Bachmann confirmed that she would not participate in Donald Trump’s proposed GOP debate. This followed fast on the footsteps of Rick Perry, who earlier in the day “respectfully” declined the offer.

That means Trump’s “debate” is down to two participants — Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum — with the noted businessman and celebrity birther activist Trump as moderator.

While Bachmann, Romney and Perry all had polite words to say as they ran from the TV star’s project, Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman went out of their way to reject Trump himself as a debate moderator who would demean the political process.

And Rick Santorum, one of the few candidates yet to have experienced a “boomlet,” leaped to Trump’s defense.

“Many of my opponents jockeyed to be the first to fly up to New York and use Donald Trump for a photo op and no doubt try and secure an endorsement,” Santorum said in a statement. “But when Donald wants to moderate a debate - they refuse to attend. That’s what’s so wrong with politics today - hypocrisy.”

That leaves just two, Gingrich and Santorum, for the Trump Debate on the 27th.  Sadly, I'm betting the debate gets axed.  If not, an hour of Gingrich on the hotseat trying to out-wingnut Rick Santorum the week before the Iowa Caucuses on January 3rd I'm thinking will only make the Iowa goofballs love him more...and alienate the rest of the voting populace.  Trump indeed is considering pulling the plug.

It's entirely possible that Newt could have this thing wrapped up by February 1 if he takes Florida on January 31 and has won Iowa and South Carolina before that.  Unless Mitt has won New Hampshire by a huge margin, I'm pretty sure it'll be over.  GOP may not have anything to play for on Super Tuesday on March 6.

Obama vs Gingrich?  The universe cannot be that stacked in the President's favor.

Of course, there's a debate tomorrow and another one Thursday, so the GOP Clown Car Show will roll on regardless, so we'll see if Newt can last.

Why Yes, Cenk Is Indeed "Mad, Bro"

I actually am glad Cenk Uygur has his own show on Current TV these days, right before Countdown with Keith Olbermann.  It's good to have as many liberal cable news voices as we can, because those voices are critically outnumbered.

Having said that, it's terribly, abundantly clear that Uygur isn't going to let go of Rev. Al Sharpton's PoliticsNation getting his old slot at MSNBC anytime this century.

Responding to a reader poll on Thursday night, Current TV’s “The Young Turks” host Cenk Uygur suggested that Al Sharpton, whose MSNBC program “PoliticsNation” airs at the same time as Uygur’s, is a cheerleader for President Barack Obama.

The Current reader poll Uygur was responding to showed that 84 percent of his viewers believed he was not being too tough on President Obama. Making good on his promise for “real interaction” with viewers, Uyger defended himself and pointed to Sharpton as the alternative.

“If [Obama's] wrong about something, I’ve got to tell you,” Uyger insisted. “I can’t be like, ‘Give me an O! Give me a B! Obama’s great!’ If you want that kind of show, go to Al Sharpton.”

“Did I say that?” he quipped immediately thereafter, drawing groans and laughter from the rest of his crew.

Hey, I've been pretty tough on President Obama this week myself:  I completely disagree with his Plan B drug reversal despite the FDA saying that it's safe enough for over-the-counter use, and the US climate change delegation in Durban this week has been basically worthless on the biggest issue facing the globe, choosing to punt until 2020.  Those are real problems, and real disagreements I have with this President's policies.

Having said that, is that enough to make me run screaming to vote for Republicans in November?  Hell no.  Thinking these issues will be revisited in a second Obama term may make me a sucker for believing there's a chance they'll be fixed, but thinking the Republicans will magically turn into the party of environmentalism and women's rights after they win in 2012 is an even worse bet.

I don't think Cenk remembers that always.

Privacy Law Takes Turn For The Stupid

Leon Walker, 34, is charged with a five-year felony after accessing now-ex-wife Clara Walker's Gmail account to see whether she was having an affair. Michigan's law prohibits accessing a computer system without consent.

Walker and his attorneys, Leon Weiss and Matthew Klakulak, said the law was never intended for domestic matters, but was designed to prevent identity theft and the theft of trade secrets.

But judge Pat Donofrio said Walker's actions appear to fall squarely under the law the way it was written.

"Your client is being charged with securing intellectual property -- her e-mail, accessing her intellectual property," he said.

Klakulak also argued legislators never intended the law to be used for snooping spouses and that if it's used as such, it could criminalize activities such as parents monitoring their children's online activities.

I'm going to stop there and call bullshit. First of all, it's illegal to access someone's postal mail without permission. This is an extension of that expectation of privacy. Second, an adult being punished for accessing private correspondence without permission in no way covers a parent's obligation and responsibility to check correspondence for a minor child. The man accused is described as a "computer technician" and had an advantage over his wife.

Cheating on your spouse is wrong, but it's not our business. Private correspondence and the right to expect privacy is a bigger deal and affects all Americans. Dismissing this as silly is wrong. I agree with the judge, this falls under the description of the law and appears to also follow the intent of the law, which was to protect our electronic privacy.

What do you guys think? Would you find this man guilty or not, based on the law and based on your own moral compass?

John Shore Puts A Fine Point On Christianity VS Gays

Before I post this, I want to say a few things.  I have never believed that religion is a reason to discriminate against others.  We are free to choose our religions, therefore it makes sense we can choose a religion that matches our own moral standing, and each one is as valid as the next.  In a country that proudly offers its citizens choice, and after reading religious doctrine that validates the gift of free will, what other conclusion could there be?  Some religious people aren't happy to control their own lives, they feel the need to extend their beliefs on those who do not live the way they feel is proper.  Whether that is in regards to tithing, prayer habits or our sexual lifestyle, it's wrong.  Period.

I have challenged homophobes to describe the logic as to why they feel the need and that they have the right to dictate to others how they should live.  "I don't like it" isn't a fair reason, but that is what it comes back to.  "It's offensive to God" is the only other reply.  Well, God's a big guy and He can take care of Himself.  I highly doubt a bunch of hypocrites are doing any favors to the cause.

The truth is, there isn't a logical reason to discriminate.  There is no right that is right enough to force changes on consenting adults who can make their own choices.  There is no reason law should dictate personal behavior if it isn't a crime or a threat to others.  Now enter John Shore, who wrote a beautiful article about a boy who got his attention on YouTube and is in anguish over how he is treated for feeling a certain way.  And that's all it is, folks.  How one feels towards others.  Shore calls out the religious might that says their beliefs is enough reason to treat this boy like a second-class citizen.  Tea Baggers like Michele Bachmann would also see their rights as citizens downgraded so they don't have protection or recognition under law.  But when you ask why, you get the same stuttering bullshit that has been spewed from the beginning of time.

This is a direct challenge to look this boy in the eye and tell him he's sick, broken or a criminal.  He could be anyone's son, brother, cousin or best friend.  He's just a normal kid who happens to be gay.  The pain on his face is real, and so is the stupidity he has endured for his entire life.  Look at him in the eye and explain why you think he's less of a person.  I dare you.

Evangelical, fundamentalist Christians -- by which I mean, specifically, Christians who believe that being gay is a moral abomination, an appalling affront to God -- talk to me, please, about this kid.

Tell me that your belief system didn't help put the hot tears on this kid's cheeks. Tell me that the bullies who torment this kid aren't in any way encouraged or empowered by your tacit approval of their actions. Tell me that the shame this kid feels about himself has nothing to do with the shame that you believe all gay people should feel for themselves.

Tell me that you can't comprehend the connection between your conviction that God finds homosexuals repulsive and the fact that this kid finds himself so repulsive that he habitually cuts his own flesh.

Tell me, please, how you love this kid. Tell me how you understand his pain. Tell me how when he cries, you cry.

Tell me how you want to do everything in your power to make sure that no one, ever again, feels free to in any way victimize a young, gay person.

A Christian myself, I am pleading with you to be honest with me about this.

Tell me, please, how none of this kid's anguish has anything to do with you.

I'm listening. I really am.

We all are.

Shutdown Countdown: Here We Go Again, Part 7

Ahh, but there's a much larger issue this weekend for Congress besides the payroll tax fight or nomination issues for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau:  a government shutdown is right around the corner again.

Top lawmakers are aiming to forge a deal to keep the government operating beyond next week, even as Republican measures to restrict funding for abortions and the Obama administration's health care act threaten to derail it.

If Congress fails to iron out differences before December 16, lawmakers will be forced to pass another temporary spending measure or risk a government shutdown and the wrath of voters increasingly disenchanted with Washington.

"We cannot allow the government to remain on autopilot for another fiscal year," said Democratic Senator Daniel Inouye, who helps oversee spending as the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Inouye was speaking on Thursday to a committee of lawmakers in charge of hashing out the deal.

Congress managed to pass bills to fund housing, agriculture, transportation and justice departments for the fiscal year ending October 1, 2012. But it still needs to figure out how to fund other crucial government functions such as homeland security, labor, foreign affairs and health.

And make no mistake, health is the big one.  Republicans have eliminated almost all funding for implementing health care reform measures, and have zeroed out funding for Planned Parenthood.  Tea Party Republicans say they'll block any attempts to restore funding.  It's a mess, and without a deal by a week from today, there will be a partial shutdown of health services, possibly including VA hospitals, Medicare and Medicaid.

The clock is back on, and there appears to be no real change right now.  Will there be a punt until after the new year?  Who knows.  One thing's for sure:  Republicans cause a shutdown and they block the payroll tax extension again, the voters are not going to be happy with them.

And the Republicans know it.

Turn On The Lights, Watch The Roaches Scatter Part 82

The banks are now in full panic mode over the combination of Massachusetts leading the charge to sue the mortgage banks and Occupy Wall Street destroying the bank's public relations efforts.

A national effort to reclaim vacant properties has one of the country’s largest lenders scrambling.

The financial website Zero Hedge has allegedly obtained a memo from Bank of America’s field services operation warning, “We need to make sure we are all prepared.”

Vocal New York organizer Sean Barry told Raw Story Tuesday that an action known as “Occupy Our Homes” would place foreclosed and homeless families in otherwise-vacant homes. That effort began Tuesday with over 40 events in more than 20 cities.

“On Tuesday December 6th there is a potential nationwide protest planned that could impact our industry,” BofA employee Leonard Pavlov reportedly wrote to BAC Field Services. “We believe the protests will likely take place tomorrow at auction sites, homes that are being foreclosed, homes in the eviction stage and vacant homes.”

Indeed, the Occupy Our Homes movement is hitting the banks right where they hurt, by squatting in foreclosed homes in order to take them back from the banks.

Nick Espinosa, one of the organizers of Occupy Minneapolis, which officially launched Oct. 7, said Minnesota's cold makes it difficult for people to spend the winter outdoors, where the temperature is forecasted to reach a low of two degrees on Thursday just as Hennepin County authorities removed unattended tarps and chairs at the plaza outside the Minneapolis government center, the Associated Press reported.

The numbers at the plaza fluctuate, but they are "dwindling," Espinosa said.

"It makes sense to be indoors but really this is a larger issue," he said. "It's an opportunity for a way to bring what is happening on Wall Street to back to Main Street and to communities most affected by this crisis." 

The Occupy folks get out of the cold, and into where the real battle is taking place:  America's residential real estate market.  It's a maneuver than makes it much harder to evict Occupy volunteers for a number of reasons, and it provides shelter for folks this winter.  It's a smart move...and one that has the banks sweating bullets.

StupidiNews!

• A campus police officer is among the pair of people shot dead Thursday at Virginia Tech University, nearly five years after a mass shooting took place there that left 33 dead.
• After blocking a payroll tax cut extension in the Senate, Republicans are pushing a plan in the House that includes authorization for the controversial Keystone XL pipeline.
• The President and Mrs. Obama will visit Fort Bragg to greet troops returning home from Iraq as the eight year war winds down.
• Former hedge fund chairman Jon Corzine testified before Congress yesterday that he doesn't know what happened to some $1.2 billion in missing client funds.
• Scientists have discovered rats in trouble will be assisted by and even fed by other rats, suggesting they have empathy.