Leave Andrew alone, he's just sticking with the dominant meme of the chattering class. The man has a family to feed and can't afford to stray too far afield. The narrative is that credit is freezing up and the stock market is whipsawing in anticipation of a bailout that will save us all.

For some reason, I keep thinking of my favorite superhero: The Tick. He's crouching, every muscle straining, with sweaty brow and gasping out "Must ... Maintain ... Narrative".

After all, you don't get fired for repeating the chatter. You can get in trouble for if you don't. The nail that sticks up gets hammered down.

So, how to interpret the market swings. Lets see... Wall St. has to either make loan payments for its own borrowing or default. Based on Paulson's payout plan, I think it takes about 50 billion a month to keep those loans afloat.

The banks raise cash by selling what has actual value, such as stocks. The bank's massive selling makes stock prices fall. General nervousness causes a lot of sympathetic selling. Program trading and similar techniques also kick in. At the end of the day, people look around and see bargains. Next day, the market goes back up.

Basically, it's a massive move of capital from the faltering banks to the holders of capital. Some of the rich get richer. They won't buy toxic derivatives, but are happy to buy stock at a reasonable or bargain price.

I expect the "crisis" to abate until the next round of loan payments. Around the end of October, another 50 billion in assets will have to be dumped. Unless the government steps in that is.

Regardless, that's my theory. It makes no assumption about market confidence being driven by congressional bickering. As such, it deviates from the dominant narrative, but my job doesn't depend on it.

I also love the argument that the government can't just go in and take over specific mortgages because no one knows who owns them. My guess would be that its the the folks that foreclose if you stop paying. They at least think they own the mortgage.

Amusingly, I've already seen a case where a guy used this reasoning to not only escaped foreclosure but also his mortgage. He simply told the court that only the real mortgage owner has a right to sue. No one could prove they owned the mortgage. The judge, disgusted, dismissed the case and declared that there was no valid contract between the homeowner and any of the plaintiffs.

Forbid that the Republican ticket lack homogeneity of opinion.

Every one knows that Gore religiously internalized Clinton's opinions and that, even as we speak, Biden is being reeducated to do nothing except ape obama.

This is what they needed to do in the first place. It'll be fine as long as they act as a backstop instead of a subsidy by keeping the fed rate a little higher than a non-panicked bank rate. That's what they appear to be doing.

So, business has access to credit. The wheels of the economy are greased.

The weirdness is that only "top rated" companies and banks qualify thereby depending on ratings companies like Moody's, which are notoriously corrupt. Sadly, there doesn't appear to be anything better.

It looks like the bailout bill wasn't needed after all. They stepped in on their own authority AFTER panicking congress into passing the bailout bill. Maybe that was the game. A big handout to the elites followed by actions that actually address the problem.

The last letter discusses the "repressive ideology" of certain feminists.

I laughed and sighed at the same time while reading it because that's my impression of most liberals. Very dogmatic within their ideological straight jacket.

Camille shows up every now and then with her own brand of liberalism and the freepers dog pile her. Way to show how open minded and evolved y'all are.

Keep it up Camile! Some of us love an independent voice challenging our beliefs.

We've removed that sense of privacy by blanketing kids with video cameras. We put 'em in schools, stores, parks, parking lots, etc. Many parents even put them in their kid's bed rooms and even bathrooms. Gotta keep an eye on the little tykes lest they act like children.

Now we're supposed to be alarmed when those same children snap n' send naughty pics.

I've told many kids that if I we're young I'd be sending naughty pics to various adults. Teacher gives you a "C"? Send her a nudie pic. Then tell the school and cops that she has it. Child porn is a strict liability offense. If the teacher has it, she's guilty. That's how the laws are written. Also, if the the school administration (or other teachers) are alerted to the fact, they have to act on it.

Hell, kids could even try going into a bank and threatening to flash the cameras unless they get cash.

Every under aged pudendum is a weapon of mass destruction.

Claiming that obama would have voted for the AUMF if given the chance is a canard at best. It ignores the most relevant fact - he didn't do it. It is unjust to throw him in with the guilty.

It's like saying "The defendant is guilty because he would have stolen the money if he had been there to take it."

As for the FISA vote, yes, that's where he showed his true colors. red-white-and-bush. It would have been a deal breaker but for his competition's AUMF votes. No one was ever killed or crippled by having their panties peeked at. Furthermore, I would not at all be heart broken if obama used the presidency's new found powers to spy on his political enemies. It just puts those politicians into the same boat as the rest of us - the USS Surveillance.