In Wednesday's New York Times, Berkshire Hathaway founder Warren Buffett offers a Op Ed thank-you to the U.S. government for averting a financial collapse. "In this extraordinary emergency, you came through," writes the Oracle of Omaha. "And the world would look far different now if you had not." Buffett praises Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, current and former Treasury Secretaries Henry Paulson and Tim Geithner, and FDIC Chairwoman Sheila Bair for acting with "courage and dispatch."
The Berkshire Hathaway founders piece takes another high-profile step toward bolstering the emerging consensus among experts that the bailout, despite its extreme unpopularity, was in fact remarkably successful -- saving the economy for what turned out to be a bargain price.
That stance has much merit. Most sane people would agree that the price was a bargain for averting financial collapse, which could have caused human misery on the scale of the Great Depression. As Douglas Elliott, a former investment banker now at the Brookings Institution, told the New York Times in September: "This is the best federal program of any real size to be despised by the public like this."
Warren Buffett is quoted as saying "If The Bailout Didn't Happen, I Would Be Eating Thanksgiving At McDonald's." What a capacious statement from one of the richest beings on Terra firma. Surely the extreme right will have their spin on Buffett's claim that the bailouts redeemed a dying country. Buffett goes on to say that "If that crisis wasn't handled properly by the government, he adds, no one in the private sector could have done anything."
Big Government proved itself invaluable with its decision to "bailout" several areas that couldn't sustain life on its own, and yet the conservatives, the laissez-faire advocates, or libertarians shall still claim government is excessively large, corrupt and inefficient, or inappropriately involved in certain areas of public policy or the private sector. Well the number one authority says otherwise.
Other big government news which went viral this week when John Tyner potential flier of the high skies was asked too submit to a full body search prior to boarding his ride for a hunting trip with his father-in-law. (This because he denied the TSA a full body scan)
"Junk" touching pat downs is obviously not something Mr. Tyner is willing to concede to, regardless if its new protocol by the TSA (Transportation Safety Administration) or not. If "Hand to stuff inspection" is not acceptable then how do we ensure that Mr. Tyner is not the bomber with nitro taped to "his junk"?
As a GWOT expert (Global War On Terror), I tell you these measures are a invaluable tools in today's society. Just like "water boarding", (Topic for another blog), as unpopular and disgusting as these tools are, they are a reality of a country post 9/11. As despicable as you may think they are, its saves lives! The less informed think that Americas security is as simple as the Justice League flying in on their capes and mustering up their super human powers to foil the bad guys. Unfortunately that's not the reality of eradicating terrorism.
Today is the first time NFTOS has disagreed with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann. To boost his theory, Keith entertains Isaac Yeffet, whom was instrumental in creating EL AL's (Israel's air transportation) protocol for "interviewing" passengers prior to flight. (Which is highly successful). Unfortunately Americas TSA employees are not former Israeli Secret Service operatives in the field of anti terrorism. (all el al TSA equivalents are former military SSO's). One would imagine that if Americans despise current TSA ops, that interviews or interrogations (el al's alternative to scans and junk checks) will probably go over like a pregnant nun.
The facts are readers, that any and all terrorist will stop at nothing for their cause.
Children under the age of 12 are exempt from either scanning and hand checks.
4 out 5 Americans are for the current protocol that the TSA employs today.
EL AL has 40-50 flights a day....America over 2400.
Therefore, to be safe, we all have to put up with the inconveniences of a search or a scan if we choose to fly on a commercial airline. The protest that the scanner can see through your clothes and can see your junk is of little consequence to me and to the safety of our country, as the alternative (should you be holding explosives in your junk) is not acceptable.
To say that the TSA is saving an image of your junk or your lovely lady lumps” for some sort of gratification purposes is ludicrous. Seriously readers, quit fluffing your egos', as more is at stake here than your junk or lady lumps.
Faux News Analyst Vs Faux News Analyst
Surprising to see a Faux news analyst (Peter Johnson Jr) attacking Faux News "Golden Boy" (AKA Ann Coulter). Maybe Mr. Johnson missed Rupert Murdoch's memo on pwning fellow tea bags. It's great to see that Coulter hasn't changed over the period, as she still can't give us a solution to any of her bitches. A typical republican for you.
There is a reason why Coulter fears the scanning process, there is a reason for Ann Coulter wishing to keep her secret hidden! The below scan shows what Democrats have known for years.
Your only option to date is to take the scan or take the grope, next time a flight blows up and it’s because they relaxed the rules, deems the Mr. Tyner's of the world are culpable in their deaths. Your penis, or your junk, isn't that interesting, stop pretending that it has the head of a cobra and is a key to some secret identity.
Because the story has gone viral and is now Internet lore doesn't change the fact that our skies need to remain friendly. Its irrelevant whether Michael Chertoff ( past US Secretary of Homeland Security) developed the scanners, or that George Soros owns stock in Chertoff's scanning venture (let it be clear that Chertoff was appointed by the axis of idiots named Bush and Cheney). The fact is this protocol works, and until a viable alternative is provided, we need to ensure that our planes are safe. If you don’t like it, keep your junk and lady lumps at home.