The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets- Category [Politics]

Dear Kerry;

I appreciated your one-liner email to me containing a link to Trottwatch, a hitpiece web site dedicated to the man who beat you in the primary.  There wasn't really anything there that I didn't already know about Mr. Trott, who if you remember I had some harsh words for in the wake of your defeat.

Nonetheless since you persist in sending me targeted emails I think a fair response is in order, and rather than do so privately I'll reply in public.

There is this oft-repeated lie in the media about various acts taken by people and their impact.  We saw this in the wake of 2008 in the fawning presented by the media in regards to Hank Paulson and Ben Benrnake, with the oft-repeated claim that they had "saved the world" -- or at least the US economy.

The problem with such a claim is that it rests on nothing more than conjecture, being bereft of evidence.  Indeed, the sort of interventionism that both engaged in has parallels that are not so kind in the hindsight of history, including the years of The Depression when our government likewise engaged in financial repression, an orgy of deficit spending and outright currency devaluation.  While the means and methods were different this time the intended acts and goals were not.  Nor are the results; the common man's purchasing power, on average, has taken a huge hit -- just as it did in the 1930s, and for the same reasons.

It also flies in the face of actual evidence, specifically 1920/21, where the US Federal Government and Federal Reserve, despite the bleating of one Hoover, yes, that Hoover, refused to intervene in what at the time was the greatest deflationary depression in the history of the United States before or since in terms of rate of change over time.  The reason we don't recognize it as a depression in our history books is that it was over almost before it began; by refusing to intervene the bad debt and bad economic decisions forcibly cleared themselves via bankruptcy and fire sale within a year.  Within 18 months the economy had posted the fastest rate of expansion in production along with the most-rapid return to full employment in the nation's history, before or since.

So why do I bring this up, as it appears to be entirely-disjoint to your missive, and indeed your failed term as a US Representative -- a term that is about to draw to a close?

Simple: An appeal to the counterfactual is the only defense for your actions, and yet it's the worst possible defense one can raise, given that you accomplished exactly nothing by performing political fellatio upon John Boehner and his cohorts in the US House.

You had laid before your feet two points of attack on the economic issues facing this country by myself and others: The legalized counterfeiting that exists in deficit spending and the monopolist protections in the health industry that have expanded cost by a factor at least 5 and likely as much as 10 over what a free-market system would leave us with.  The former has destroyed the purchasing power of all but the top 1% of Americans and the latter has been exploited to shove sham "insurance" and Obamacare, neither of which should be necessary at all for anyone, down our throats.

Taking on either, had you succeeded, would have had a profound impact on the future of this nation. I and others were willing to spend whatever time was necessary to make sure you had the facts, figures and presentations necessary to take that case to the people and to Congress - but we were flatly ignored from the minute you set foot in Washington DC.

Of course there was no guarantee you would have succeeded, even if you managed to recruit others.  And neither I or anyone else was going to blow smoke up your ass on the number of people who would be interested in that fight -- I bet Justin Amash could have been recruited, and perhaps a few others, but it would have been a long shot.  That's the counterfactual again; there's no way to know, because it never happened.

But here's the rub -- what you wound up with, because you didn't go down that road and instead stood with Boehner, McMorris-Rodgers and Ryan, who have no interest in doing anything about either of those issues, was, in retrospect, nothing.

Zip.

Zero.

Nada.

Zero initiatives, zero accomplishment.

You didn't even get a second term.

So measured against that, Kerry, what was the right choice?  After all, what would a second term alone have gotten you? That's all, right?  The personal aggrandizement of "Congressman" next to your name along with the salary and benefits.  

Let's face it: You didn't get your name on any important legislation, you didn't accomplish anything, your record is blank.

Well, except for the political fellatio you performed for your "master" Mr. Boehner -- but I don't know that I'd call that something to be proud of.

So here you are, about to leave Congress in a few short months and come home, tail between your legs.  Your district is about to go to either a man who has evicted an untold number of people from their homes after they were sold bogus mortgage products, with many foreclosed upon with robosigned documents that should have been laughed out of court or, much less-likely, to a faceless Democrat.  Neither will advance anything that could be credited as an agenda that will help the common man and woman in your district or anywhere else.  Indeed if Trott wins he might actually manage to get more protections put in place to advance further the legalized robbery of the common man via unbacked credit creation and then bogus foreclosures in the housing industry.

But here's the bottom line Kerry: Arguing that one should vote for the lesser of evils is still asking someone to vote for the Devil.  Your entreaty in that regard fell on deaf ears, as it should.  Even if you had taken on those issues and lost 100% of the battle you could have taken the position with the voters that a vote for you was a vote for advancement of issues that are important to the common person in your district instead of arguing that one should vote against Trott.

You obviously don't see it that way because if you did you wouldn't have sent me your one-liner link -- your email would have contained an apology instead.

Be gone from my association like a fart in the wind, Sir.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)
 

It's not that hard.

Rand Paul, along with a large number of Democrat reps and senators, have come out for putting a stop to the militarization.

Ok, let's see if you mean it.  Because if you do, then the following will take care of the problem.

  • First, get rid of "internal investigations."  Pass a law that every act by a police officer that, if proved, would be a felony if committed by an ordinary citizen is to be presented to a Grand Jury, and that prevention or diversion of same is defined as felony obstruction of justice.  Further mandate that the Grand Jury must be held in and comprised of the public in the area where the act occurred, and any trial coming from a handed-up indictment must likewise be held in the same area, with the jury pool drawn from that population.  The testosterone level in Ferguson would drop precipitously among the county cops if the guy on top of that truck with the machine gun were facing a Grand Jury on dozens of felony Assault with a Deadly Weapon charges for pointing that gun at the citizens, and if an indictment was handed up he would have to face a jury there, both comprised of 60% black people from the local community! 

  • Second, demand that all of the equipment "given", "granted" or otherwise allocated to local and state forces is to be immediately returned and that possession of any such item that cannot be owned without permit or license by the general public is deemed a felony offense as it would be for those very same civilians.  That will get rid of the tanks, machine guns and similar things.  It would end the "flash-bang" proliferation, LRAD and CS gas grenade use as well.

We'll see who's serious and who's not by whether these two provisions get proposed and passed into law and whether the people both demand these changes and enforce that demand.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)
 

Boy, you really do have some balls, don't you Stone?

Forty years ago public outrage about the actions of President Richard Milhous Nixon, lead by his long time liberal critics, forced him to be the first U.S. chief executive to resign the presidency. Critics screamed about Nixon’s extra-legal and extra-constitutional conduct as protestors ringed the White House chanting “Jail to the Chief.”

....

Because of Obama’s iconic status on the left, liberals are silent as Obama shreds the Constitution in ways Richard Nixon would have marveled at. Democrats scoff at the notion of the impeachment of Obama for crimes far more serious and reaching than of those committed by Richard Nixon.

That's an amusing charge considering that Stone is a self-admitted "hitman" for the GOP AND was involved in Nixon's shenanigans before he got elected -- and afterward too.

He has been associated with a number of other GOP candidates (well, damn near all of them for President) since, including the infamous Brooks Brothers "riot" during the 2000 recounts.

More-recently he took credit for sending 30 hookers into Ron Paul's speech at the GOP Convention in the last election cycle -- while allegedly advocating for Gary Johnson's Libertarian campaign at the same time Johnson was trying to court Ron Paul voters!

Oh, and let's not forget that he's hawking a book these days too.....

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)
 

To the dishonorable Mr. Bentivolio:

You deserved to lose, even if your loss was to a bigger ******* than you.

Next time you decide to run for political office you might consider that turning into Benedict Arnold within minutes of winning your seat isn't exactly conducive to the people who helped put you there deciding they'd like to remain in your tent.

As you also discovered Boehner and friends didn't give a friendly **** (say much less a hostile one) about you despite your doing a 180 on issues you ran on and garnered support predicated upon, so pitching in with them and abandoning those issues (and the people who backed you) didn't work out so well either.

I'd rather vote for Beeelzebub and it appears your district's voters saw it the same way.

I regret every single penny of in-kind advertising I ran during your campaign and have since days after the election.

In short:  Get out of The People's House you lying snake.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)
 

Main Navigation
Full-Text Search & Archives
Archive Access
Get Adobe Flash player
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be reproduced or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media or for commercial use.

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.