The 2005 Bankruptcy amendments were a consumer disaster. A few months ago, when I checked the NY Times to see how the candidates had voted, the Times reported 99 votes and one absence - Hillary Clinton. In the House, even Barney Frank voted against them. I think that I heard Hillary say she opposed the Amendments. Am I wrong? Did she duck the vote?

Is that true? Is she alone among all the Senators, the one who did not vote on the bankruptcy law that catered to the credit card companies in an attempt to make credit card debt non-dischargeable. Does anyone have an explanation for this? Is her convenient absence one reason why she has such superior fund raising ability? From long experience: a lobbyist WILL tell a legislator, if you can’t be with me, go to the bathroom when the vote comes-up. I know, it happens.

If Obama wants a real issue, and the infighting persists, I suggest he check with the folks in Fayetteville Arkansas where the Clinton regime built a toxic waste incinerator. One of the edges Bill Clinton had in 1992 was his early fundraising from Wall Street. He delivered, they paid. The key to the incinerator binge was the money the Wall Street bond lawyers and underwriters made in the sale of bonds. As I wrote for City Sierran in 1992: “If it’s bondable, it’s buildable. Whether it’s workable is irrelevant.” See http://www.johnklotz.com/burn.htm

Incidentally, the Sierra Club and its allies defeated the mass burn incinerators, which were an initiative by Governor Mario Cuomo and Mayor David Dinkins, both of whom were defeated for reelection in heavily Democratic New York by Republicans. I am not a Giuliani fan, but it was Republican Governor Pataki and Republican Mayor Giuliani that put a nail in the coffin of both the mass-burn plan and the hospital waste in incinerator in the South Bronx. Was that important. See http://www.johnklotz.com/andy.htm

New York City's air quality is now among the best of major cities.

If the Clintons don't get a grip, the only winner in the Democratic debate will be McCain. Hillary’s shrill performance may cut Obama down to size, but it may set up ”nice guy” John McCain for a win, as I expect the polls will be showing. Although McCain has enormous liabilities issue wise, I don’t think they will be able to tag team him the way they are tag teaming Obama. We may notice that the “straight talker” speaks with a forked tongue but it will be a tough sell.

I am for Edwards but as that possibility fades, the only Democratic ticket that will make sense is Hillary-Obama. Hillary’s courting of the Latino power structure may make the need for a dramatic gesture to the most consistent overwhelming Democratic vote - the African-American vote. It’s not that they will they vote for McCain, it’s will they vote in sufficient numbers for a candidate who is destroying their best spokesperson since MLK and Jessie Jackson’s heyday.

Nice guy John McCain may dampen their ardor to vote for Hillary. Somewhere out there, I can also hear Michael Bloomberg licking his chops.

Those people, like Bush, who tsk-tsk "ignorant" home buyers for buying over their heads ignore the basic fact that selling mortgages and enticing home buyers is an ultra-sophisticated game in which the vulnerable are targeted and seduced in the expectation they would fail because THAT'S WHERE THE MONEY IS.

Every one made a buck on the homeowners who fell victim to the hard sell: the mortgage brokers. the Wall Street packagers of the Mortgage Backed Securities, the hedge fund jockeys who bet on defaults and especially the mortgage servicers who specialize in default mortgage servicing.

Against this array of sophisticated con men, to expect that the average home buyer would have a prayer is to underestimate the power of modern marketing and consumer targeting.

I am sick and tired of seven figure heroes on Wall Street and in the media bemoaning the irresponsibility of fleeced consumers. The Bush proposal is a placebo to create the appearance of a solution. The only answer to this problem of mass marketing failure may be the sound of cell doors clanging shut.

As to the investors, anyone who invest in a Cayman Island hedge fund gets what he deserves - to be plucked like a chicken.

The victims of this scam are the people who brought the snake oil, not the ones who sold it.

The Clintons would do well to heed Satchel Page's words of advice but the person gaining on Hillary in S.C. is John Edwards. Barring a truly stupendous upset, Obama will carry S.C. But right now it looks as if Edwards is gaining on Hillary and he may be closer to her, than she is to Obama.

If Hillary runs third again, then Edwards may very well be around for the duration. That would be good for everybody including the Democratic Party and would force Obama and Clinton to get back to real issues. It's a delightful prospect. But I'm not ready to bet the ranch yet.