Wall Street & George Bush

[the gentleman]

While polls show the country still evenly split over the reelection of George Bush, there has been no indecision on Wall Street. Even before John Kerry became the presumptive democratic nominee, Wall Street was contributing lavishly to the Bush campaign. Bush’s unprecedented campaign wealth of $145 million dwarfs John Kerry’s paltry $33 million and reflects a major shift in political contributions from New York’s financial giants. According to the Washington Post’s Ben White:

“The Bush administration had given the bankers almost everything they ever dreamed of: a reduction in dividend and capital-gains taxes, a phase-out of the estate tax, and an overall reduction in income taxes…Unlike in 2000, when the industry hedged its bets between Bush and Al Gore, Wall Street thus far has put the bulk of its muscle behind the Republican incumbent.”

White goes on to quote Mr. Mallory Factor, “a merchant banker,” who tells us, "Wall Street runs on a good economy and the president has given us that." Is Mr. Factor talking about the same economy we see everyday? Has Mr. Factor heard of the 2.3 million jobs lost in the U.S. during the Bush presidency, the poorest job record on any president’s watch since Herbert Hoover? Has Mr. Factor been to Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and seen the economic wreckage of George Bush’s “good economy”? Oh yes, there were the tax cuts that Bush said would “put money back into the hands of working Americans.” But the benefits went not to the average worker, but rather to Bush’s rich cronies--to be exact, 40% of all tax benefits went to the richest 1% of Americans. Just as mainline economists predicted, Bush’s tax cuts have done nothing to stimulate the weak economy--but they have made the wealthy wealthier and the filthy rich even filthier. Of course Wall Street wants four more years of George Bush!

But is there more to the story than simple greed? Recall the financial scandals that rocked the country in 2002: Enron, Arthur Andersen, WorldCom, Global Crossing. Sometimes forgotten in this list of evildoers are some of Wall Street’s biggest names, such as Merrill Lynch. In 2001, New York state attorney general, Eliot Spitzer, began an investigation of Merrill Lynch and quickly came across internal emails that showed Merrill had downgraded the stock of an internet company, GoTo.com, because it hadn't given Merrill its investment-banking business. Spitzer was able to show that as a general practice Merrill had doctored their stock analyses to win business for their banks' investment arms or to downgrade companies that didn't play ball.

In April 2002, Spitzer held a press conference and released what became the classic and devastating Merrill Lynch e-mail. A Merrill research report from Dec. 21, 2000 called an Internet company, LifeMinders, "an attractive investment." But earlier that month, an internal e-mail had said, "I can't believe what a piece of shit that stock is."

At this point Merrill agreed to settle, but without admitting wrongdoing. They agreed to pay a fine of $100 million, apologize, and reform their ways. Some felt Spitzer was too lenient with Merrill. For a company with an average profit over the past three years of $2.35 billion, the $100 million fine was chump change. Moreover, no one went to jail. And just last week, the company announced that the pay of its chairman and chief executive, E. Stanley O'Neal, nearly doubled last year to $28.14 million, up from $14.39 million the previous year. If O’Neal gave back his generous raise he would pay off almost 15% of the fine by himself.

So, is anyone surprised to learn that of all the big guns on Wall Street, none is as committed to George Bush’s reelection as Merrill Lynch. Here are a few statistics. According to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), “The financial sector is far and away the biggest source of campaign contributions to federal candidates, with insurance companies, securities and investment firms, real estate interests and commercial banks providing the bulk of the money.” The largest contributor in this category in the 2004 election cycle is Goldman Sachs which has so far given $2.3 million to both parties--but they’ve given 50% to each party and only a modest $280,000 to the Bush campaign, or about 12% of their total. In contrast, Merrill Lynch comes in at $925,000 overall, with 80% going to the Republican Party; and more strikingly, their specific contribution to the Bush campaign is a disproportionate $458,000---more than half of their total donation and the single largest campaign donation to George Bush.

So Merrill Lynch really wants George Bush for four more years. And it’s clear they don’t want to mess around with small-timers like House representatives or United States senators. They want the prez himself on their side, and they know he’s for sale--always has been. Given Bush’s shady stock dealings while on the board of Harkin Energy, the crooks at Merrill are sure that our good president “can feel their pain.” After all, how is a millionaire to make a few ‘mil’ these days with regulators and prosecutors running wild and damping the entrepreneurial spirit?

But the question we as citizens and voters sometimes forget to ask is, whose money is this anyway? Who are the entrepreneurs? The answer is, it’s our money; it’s our hard-earned investment savings they’re playing with. The 2004 election is our chance to tell the “money changers” and their Republican supporters that the gig is up.

written by:

Gerald S. Rellick, Ph.D., worked as scientist in the aerospace industry for 22 years. He now teaches chemistry part-time in the California Community College system.

[Membrane]

OK, so..? and SO WHAT'S GOING ON IN YOUR COUNTRY?

For every article you can come up about GWB and the U.S.--given time and the inclination--I could find another, equally as bad about your government.

In case you haven't a clue Gent, it means maybe it's time you used your skills and talents on fighting Al-Quaeda and the terrorists, rather than constantly trying to gnaw away at the U.S.

Regardless of how you feel about G-P and the little back-and-forth games you are playing with him, the United States is your best friend in preserving YOUR way of life, protecting YOUR country--or would you rather have Osama as your best friend?

Gent, all of your posts seem to be directed at demoralizing Americans, shaming them, ridiculing them and the current administration. Just what do you think you're doing, MATE? What the ###### is your AGENDA? You obviously have one! Why not just come clean and share it with all of us? And don't hide behind the facade of "I love America but can't stand George Bush" shit!

[the gentleman]

This post is about the way big business runs your governments as with Halliburton, its all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$, NOTHING ELSE!

[Boon Mee]

Mr. gent - Hot off the press:

NY Times 3/16/04

The candidacy of Ralph Nader looms as a potentially lethal threat to Democratic hopes of regaining the White House: With Mr. Nader in the race, Mr. Bush leads Mr. Kerry by 46 percent to 38 percent, with Mr. Nader drawing 7 percent of the votes. In a sign of the polarized electorate Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry are facing, three-quarters of supporters of each candidate asserted they would not change their mind before the election.

[et33.com]

i see

most people are still stupid

and don't get it

or choose not to get it

in any CAPITALIST COUNTRY

it's the corrupt and the businesses

who are behind the gov'n

and it's the same

all over the world

tell me which top politician

in any capitalist country

didn't have a finger in business connection...

which one / where and who...

[Membrane]

i see

most people are still stupid

and don't get it

...[snip]

So tell us, oh wise one:

WHAT IS BETTER? WHAT FORM OF GOVERNMENT IS BEST, in your humble opinion?

[Boon Mee]

i see

most people are still stupid

and don't get it

or choose not to get it

in any CAPITALIST COUNTRY

Perhaps one of the characters in an Aldous Huxley novel (Brave New World)?

[Guest chingy]

Thailand Gov. is the best (TRT)