Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

September 18, 2008

FIRE CHRISTOPHER COX?.... John McCain has apparently decided he has to say something different and/or unique about the crisis on Wall Street, so he's come up with a new line: he wants to see Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox fired.

"The chairman of the SEC serves at the appointment of the president and has betrayed the public's trust. If I were president today, I would fire him," McCain says, according to excerpts for a speech on reforming the ailing U.S. financial markets he will deliver today in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

"The primary regulator of Wall Street, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) kept in place trading rules that let speculators and hedge funds turn our markets into a casino," McCain says."They allowed naked short selling -- which simply means that you can sell stock without ever owning it. They eliminated last year the uptick rule that has protected investors for 70 years. Speculators pounded the shares of even good companies into the ground."

I suppose this shameless grandstanding is preferable, at least politically, to explaining why the fundamentals of the economy are "strong" and why McCain was against the AIG bailout before he was for it, but only marginally.

First, the president cannot fire an SEC chair. It's procedurally impossible. As ABC News reported, "[W]hile the president appoints and the Senate confirms the SEC chair, a commissioner of an independent regulatory commissions cannot be removed by the president." That seems like the kind of thing McCain ought to know before spouting off on the subject.

Second, the SEC did allow all kinds of short selling, but that's legal under the federal regulatory system that John McCain -- and his advisor, Phil Gramm -- helped put in place. After more than a quarter of a century in Congress, has McCain ever proposed changing these laws and imposing stricter regulations? No. Has he ever, before today, criticized Cox's oversight of existing trading rules? Not as far as I can tell.

Third, I'm not an expert, but I'm fairly certain short selling is not the underlying cause of the current crisis. The sub-prime mortgage fiasco and over-leveraged banks are. If McCain wants to make a case for firing Cox, he should at least get the cause right.

Steve Benen 2:28 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (52)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

First, the president cannot fire an SEC chair. It's procedurally impossible. As ABC News reported, "[W]hile the president appoints and the Senate confirms the SEC chair, a commissioner of an independent regulatory commissions cannot be removed by the president." That seems like the kind of thing McCain ought to know before spouting off on the subject.

It depends on what you mean by "the president." Since I'm John Frakkin' McCain I most certainly can and will fire anyone I damn well please.

I'm John McCain and I approved this message.

McCain 08!

Posted by: John McCain on September 18, 2008 at 2:34 PM | PERMALINK

But wait, I thought it was McCain's senate commerce committee that "oversighted" all these aspects of the economy?

Posted by: SYL on September 18, 2008 at 2:35 PM | PERMALINK

Naked short selling is already illegal. McCain serving up Cox is rich...as one of the legislators who made this mess possible, he really should serve himself up to be fired. As part of the Keating Five, he should have been ousted from the Senate long ago. The fact this connection isnt made in the public eye points to the homework the Obama campaign needs to work on.

Posted by: Scott on September 18, 2008 at 2:36 PM | PERMALINK

So, McCain wants Bush to do what he can't, against a guy who only did what McCain, et al., allowed them to do?

McCain is senile. He's just plain gone already.
.

Posted by: Grand Moff Texan on September 18, 2008 at 2:36 PM | PERMALINK

Hey, Steve, don't just blame McCain/Gramm on this one. Gramm-Bliley-Leach has PLENTY of Dem support, starting with the Slickster himself having Bob Rubin, alumnus of top Obama donor Goldman Sachs, ramrod the effort.

Stuff like this is why I'm voting Green or nobody.

Posted by: SocraticGadfly on September 18, 2008 at 2:36 PM | PERMALINK

He's wrong, of course, about how the SEC worked to cause this crisis:
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/09/regulatory-exem.html

The current excess leverage now unwinding was the result of a purposeful SEC exemption given to five firms.
You read that right -- the events of the past year are not a mere accident, but are the results of a conscious and willful SEC decision to allow these firms to legally violate existing net capital rules that, in the past 30 years, had limited broker dealers debt-to-net capital ratio to 12-to-1.
Instead, the 2004 exemption -- given only to 5 firms -- allowed them to lever up 30 and even 40 to 1.
Who were the five that received this special exemption? You won't be surprised to learn that they were Goldman, Merrill, Lehman, Bear Stearns, and Morgan Stanley.

Posted by: Elvis Elvisberg on September 18, 2008 at 2:37 PM | PERMALINK

Steve:

When John McCain takes the oath of office next January 20th, I have confidence that the string pullers will wait until February or March before they start the processes to remove him from office as being mentally unfit. Then we can have Sarah as the president! That scares me even more than a McBush presidency.

I am running a countdown clock (123 days) labeled "Deliver us from evil". I may change that to "Deliver us from evil???".

Posted by: SadOldVet on September 18, 2008 at 2:37 PM | PERMALINK

Short selling is/was a significant part of the problem. Obviously, we would still be in a big mess but it might have only been 95% as bad.

Recently, the SEC got rid of the uptick rule which makes it far easier to short a stock. Until recently, I never knew why they needed such a 'silly' rule like that. Of course, I am too young to remember the early 30's. Now, I know why we had it and I think it was a big mistake to get rid of it.

Posted by: neil wilson on September 18, 2008 at 2:39 PM | PERMALINK

"Third, I'm not an expert, but I'm fairly certain short selling is not the underlying cause of the current crisis. The sub-prime mortgage fiasco and over-leveraged banks are."


Awww Steve, go easy on the old fella. He's clearly thinking about the FIRST depression.

Posted by: neilt on September 18, 2008 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINK

Fire that ReThuglican corkscrewer. Go ahead.

Just another ReThug that let the investment bankers rip off the economy.

Fire ALL the ReThuglican corkscrewers, including McCain and Palin.

Posted by: And a pit bull would have made a better Vice President, too. That's TWO things. on September 18, 2008 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINK

It's clear that McCain is completely unhinged and that his financial advisors are as clueless as he is.

It will be interesting to hear what Cox has to say about this accusation.

Posted by: bdop4 on September 18, 2008 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINK

YEEEEEEHAWWWWW! Hey, Maw, get me mah pitchfork & blamin' stick, it's ScapeGoatin' Time!

"First they came for the Chairman of the SEC, and I said nothing for I was not the chairman of the SEC...eventually...they came for me...and there was no one left to say anything."

Posted by: slappy magoo on September 18, 2008 at 2:44 PM | PERMALINK

also: they got rid of the uptick rule?!?!

That's sheer lunacy!!! That simple little rule has kept the market from plunging into the abyss for 70 years now.

What on earth could be their justification for making the market MORE volatile??

Posted by: neilt on September 18, 2008 at 2:45 PM | PERMALINK

This is so simple, and in it's way, so relative to the McSHAME of today compared to the McCain of 2008.

It's called tranference; you think others are doing what you are thinking about doing yourself. Your thoughts transferred, and their is no basis for this transfer.

Talk about Politicizing the melt-down! He knew he was going to play politics with this before he accused Obama of this. Well, if you don't call "calling for the resignation of..." politcing, I don't know what it is.

Remember, all this regulation that he is now railing for have been held back by the lobbying efforts of Schueman, who represented Fannie and Freddie when they were lobbying for LESS regulation.

These guys are lower than gutter scum.

Posted by: barkleyg on September 18, 2008 at 2:46 PM | PERMALINK

Short selling is/was a significant part of the problem.

This is a bit like saying that coughing is a significant part of the problem when you have pneumonia.

The underlying issue is a massive amount of bad debt (Atrios' "big shitpile") which must be unwound. All short selling does is create a pointer to those with exposure to that bad debt.

Posted by: jimBOB on September 18, 2008 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINK

Suddenly I'm reminded of a line from the Simpsons:

Mr Burns: "Smithers I want that man killed."

Posted by: thorin-1 on September 18, 2008 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINK

I am now going to publicly admit that I have soul my soul to THE DEVIL. I did this because of my blind ambition to be the President. And because of that blind ambition I sold my Soul to THE DEVIL. This is why everyone now says I am no longer the John McCain that they thought they knew. And they are right. I am not. I am now simply a puppet of Lucifer and, as such, dance to His tune. Like an insect who has had it insides sucked out of it by another , larger, insect I may still have a body that looks like the old John McCain but that remaining carcass is nothing but a shell that is animated by THE DEVIL ITSELF.

I used to be John McCain and I approve this message.

Posted by: stormskies on September 18, 2008 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINK

short selling, even without the up-tick rule, had nothing to do with the recent market panic; neither did hedge funds. also, mccain seems to ignore the fact that cox did step in to protect a handful of financial stocks from naked short selling (or enforced the law even more). as usual, he gets the history completely wrong. what is wrong with him; is he just a pathological dissembler or is there something physically wrong with McCain?
Cox and Pitt before him certainly weren't the best SEC chairmen--they cared more for the exchanges and companies than for transparency and investors--but he certainly does not bear singling out here for the wrongs that mccain lists. the report today that they allowed the Big 5 investment banks (now just the Big 2, soon to be just Goldman) to leverage themselves up to 30:1 is the problem.

Posted by: larrybob on September 18, 2008 at 2:52 PM | PERMALINK

I knew McCain reminded me of someone, but for the longest time I just couldn't think of who?

Then he pulls this stunt and it suddenly came to me, Captain Henri Renault from Casablanca:

Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds?

Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!
[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]

Croupier: Your winnings, sir.

Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much.
[aloud]
Captain Renault: Everybody out at once!

Posted by: majun on September 18, 2008 at 2:52 PM | PERMALINK

Short selling has been around for along time and is not inherently evil. I suspect they picked on short selling because they do not think their supporters will understand leveraging and debt to credit ratios. "Selling stock you do not have?!?!?! Outrageous!!!"

With GOP style crony-capitalism, the current crisis is virtually a feature and not a bug. Privatize the profits, then come to Uncle Sam when the bills coe due.

Posted by: airron on September 18, 2008 at 2:53 PM | PERMALINK

SocraticGadfly is either full of sh*t or a rethug troll!

The actual vote in the Senate was 55-44 with only 1 dumbocrap voting for it (Hollings). The rethug troll version interjects a conference report that passed 90-8. Saying that is the vote that counts is a typical repugnican attempt to confuse voters.

Billy Bob Clinton did, of course, agree and sign the bill. But then again, Billy Bob was among the best Republican Presidents we have had recently.

Posted by: SadOldVet on September 18, 2008 at 2:54 PM | PERMALINK

Way back upthread, Scott wrote that naked short selling is already illegal.

Maybe we have a difference of definitions, but I thought naked shorts had always been legal. Back in college, one of my professors explained it with this familiar bit of doggerel:

He who sells what isn't his'n Buys it back or goes to prison.
Posted by: Quaker in a Basement on September 18, 2008 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

I suppose this shameless grandstanding is preferable, at least politically, to explaining why the fundamentals of the economy are "strong" and why McCain was against the AIG bailout before he was for it, but only marginally.

Well.....it's decisive. Decisively wrong, even decisively stupid, but decisive. Now would McCain like to explain how being decisively wrong is any different from four more years of Bush?

Posted by: Gregory on September 18, 2008 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

Billy Bob Clinton did, of course, agree and sign the bill. But then again, Billy Bob was among the best Republican Presidents we have had recently.

The other night I was listening to BBC World News and got to hear Robert Reich ever so politely and nicely throw Robert Rubin under a bus. He didn't do it by name, of course, and he was very polite about it. But he shoved him nevertheless. It warmed the cockles of my heart to hear it.

And I've been saying for years that Clinton was the best Republican president we've had. I have no problems pinning a chunk of the blame for this mess on his head - and on Rubin's head as well. But it's important to remember that the reason he gets the blame is because he was doing what the Republicans wanted him to do. You can't blame Clinton to shift the responsibility off of the Republicans - he was doing what they wanted at the time.

Posted by: NonyNony on September 18, 2008 at 3:06 PM | PERMALINK

Mr Burns: "Smithers I want that man killed."

Better yet -- after the Ramones do a punk version of "Happy Birthday" for Burns' party:

BURNS: Have the Rolling Stones killed!

SMITHERS: But sir, those aren't...

BURNS: Do as I say!

Heh.

Posted by: Gregory on September 18, 2008 at 3:07 PM | PERMALINK

Aren't we about at the point where McFool has to start adding a disclaimer to his campaign-stop speeches? Something like, I'm John McCain, and I don't know what in the hell I'm talking about any more. Wheeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!

Posted by: Steve on September 18, 2008 at 3:10 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, if anyone listens to This American Life, they just aired a story about the Naked Short Selling issue and the report stated that, while short selling is legal, Naked Short Selling is not, but that this does not really happen all that often and actually as this crisis began Cox issued an order forbidding the naked short selling. McCain is an idiot, and thinks he can just throw out terms that no one including himself even understands and it will make him sound smart.

Posted by: Nick on September 18, 2008 at 3:12 PM | PERMALINK

If Elvis Elvisberg's comment at 2:37 PM is correct, then Cox isn't to blame for the 2004 rule change.

The Christopher Cox biography at sec.gov begins:
"Christopher Cox is the 28th Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. He was appointed by President Bush on June 2, 2005"

Posted by: Cap'n Chucky on September 18, 2008 at 3:13 PM | PERMALINK

so what are the odds that mccain's incoherence and lack of message discipline will be spun next week as his handlers fault? "let mccain be mccain" will be bellowed by chris matthews and chorus, 'cause, of course, the press is never wrong.

Posted by: larrybob on September 18, 2008 at 3:15 PM | PERMALINK

Right bad guy, wrong reason Grampy McSame. This is from http://bigpicture.typepad.com/

How SEC Regulatory Exemptions Helped Lead to Collapse

The losses incurred by Bear Stearns and other large broker-dealers were not caused by "rumors" or a "crisis of confidence," but rather by inadequate net capital and the lack of constraints on the incurring of debt.

--Lee Pickard, former director, SEC trading and markets division.

>

Is Financial Innovation just another word for excessive and reckless leverage?

Apparently so.

As we learn this morning via Julie Satow of the NY Sun, special exemptions from the SEC are in large part responsible for the huge build up in financial sector leverage over the past 4 years -- as well as the massive current unwind

Satow interviews the above quoted former SEC director, and he spits out the blunt truth: The current excess leverage now unwinding was the result of a purposeful SEC exemption given to five firms.

You read that right -- the events of the past year are not a mere accident, but are the results of a conscious and willful SEC decision to allow these firms to legally violate existing net capital rules that, in the past 30 years, had limited broker dealers debt-to-net capital ratio to 12-to-1.

Instead, the 2004 exemption -- given only to 5 firms -- allowed them to lever up 30 and even 40 to 1.

Who were the five that received this special exemption? You won't be surprised to learn that they were Goldman, Merrill, Lehman, Bear Stearns, and Morgan Stanley.

As Mr. Pickard points out that "The proof is in the pudding — three of the five broker-dealers have blown up."

So while the SEC runs around reinstating short selling rules, and clueless pension fund managers mindlessly point to the wrong issue, we learn that it was the SEC who was in large part responsible for the reckless leverage that led to the current crisis.

You couldn't make this stuff up if you tried.

Posted by: Pat on September 18, 2008 at 3:16 PM | PERMALINK

Obviously McCain has brought Jim Cramer on as an economic advisor.

Posted by: chrisbo on September 18, 2008 at 3:16 PM | PERMALINK

The market mechanism to challenge public companies' performance and strategies is the short selling of their equities. The only chance investors have of holding public companies responsible for their poor performance is through short selling, especially when regulation is lax. Limiting short selling is similar to limiting liability law suits, the goal is to protect bad business policies from traditional remedies.

Posted by: Brojo on September 18, 2008 at 3:17 PM | PERMALINK

Hey, Steve, don't just blame McCain/Gramm on this one. Gramm-Bliley-Leach has PLENTY of Dem support, starting with the Slickster himself having Bob Rubin, alumnus of top Obama donor Goldman Sachs, ramrod the effort.

Stuff like this is why I'm voting Green or nobody. Posted by: SocraticGadfly

At least your vote won't be wasted as it is unlikely Obama will take Texas, and Jesus Christ could be the Green Party candidate and still get his ass kicked in the Lone Star state.

Posted by: Jeff II on September 18, 2008 at 3:22 PM | PERMALINK

McCain is parroting the right-wing talking points as put forth yesterday on Kudlow's show. Kudlow was screaming for Cox's head as well as calling for a reinstatement of the uptick rule.

Posted by: Daryl Cobranchi on September 18, 2008 at 3:26 PM | PERMALINK

The other night I was listening to BBC World News and got to hear Robert Reich ever so politely and nicely throw Robert Rubin under a bus. He didn't do it by name, of course, and he was very polite about it. But he shoved him nevertheless. It warmed the cockles of my heart to hear it. Posted by: NonyNony

Yes. Of Clinton economic policy advisers, those two are certainly at the opposite end of the spectrum.

Posted by: Jeff II on September 18, 2008 at 3:30 PM | PERMALINK

Short selling is the laughable scapegoat for those people who feel the need to cover up their gross incompetence.

Posted by: BombIranForChrist on September 18, 2008 at 3:53 PM | PERMALINK

John McCain should know about gambling- shooting craps is his favorite table!

what a frakkin hypocrite.

Posted by: RememberNovember on September 18, 2008 at 3:56 PM | PERMALINK

As Elvis posted above, the SEC did fuck up, but for reasons different than what McCain is complaining about, and that may well have been before Cox was there.

The big debate we'll see in the next couple of days is the Resolution Trust-like bailout that is being whispered about on Wall St. Do we want the govt to take on all that bad paper from the big firms? Is there any other option?

I suspect whatever bailout gets pushed through in the next few weeks would be vastly different than what might happen after the election.

New oversight isn't likely to come till later anyway.

Posted by: JJF on September 18, 2008 at 3:58 PM | PERMALINK

Yep, even Michael Savage wants the head of Chris Cox. I guess he did screw up something (along with a lot of other folks.) I know Cox's sister (a notable artist) and have taught her daughter; yeah "he's a nice guy" but we need to put the pressure on everyone whose prints are on this mess.

Meanwhile, for some irony look at
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080918/wall_street.html?.v=44,
"Stocks surge on report of entity for bad debt"
September 18, 3:37 pm ET, By Tim Paradis, AP Business Writer (was on Drudge literally within a few minutes.) It is telling and weird, how the stock market, the "nerve center of American capitalism", goes up and down in rapid swings depending more than anything on whether the government is offering some cover for what is happening.

Posted by: Neil B on September 18, 2008 at 3:59 PM | PERMALINK

Excellent! This guy is good for stupid at least once every 12 hours! Great reporting; Steve Benen, we love you!

Posted by: The Gallup Trollop on September 18, 2008 at 4:00 PM | PERMALINK

SadOldVet... not a troll, or anything like that. You may be an obfuscator, or worse.

On Gramm-Leach-Bliley ...

You omitted the House vote, which was 343-86. I'd say that entailed significant Democratic support. The Dem split, in fact, was 138-69 in favor. Such "liberal" Dems as Barney Frank pushed hard for some version of what became G-L-B, if not for every detail in the final bill.

And, House Dems didn't have to cave that blindly, nor did Senate Dems originally in opposition, on the Senate vote on conference.

Try reading my post.

I am, as I said, an intended Green voter, and I'm not full of shit.

And, it's disingenious to claim the Slicker was the best GOP pres in some time, or per NonyNony, that he was just along for a GOP ride.

And, Jeff II, I'd vote Green in Ohio or Florida. Or Pennsylvania.

Posted by: SocraticGadfly on September 18, 2008 at 4:36 PM | PERMALINK

House Dems voting Yes on Gramm-Bliley-Leach include:
Champagne Charlie Rangel, David Bonior, Jim Clyburn, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Martin Frost, Blagojevich, both Udall brothers, Ellen Tauscher, Patrick Kennedy, Steny Hoyer, Alcee Hastings, Sandy Levin, Robert Wexler, Jackson-Lee and many others.

As noted above, Frank supported much of the thrust of G-B-L, but voted no on the actual bill. (And, he’s on record elsewhere as supporting much of the idea of tearing down the Glass-Steagall wall, or at least chunks of it.)

Posted by: SocraticGadfly on September 18, 2008 at 4:43 PM | PERMALINK

I thought just yesterday McCain wanted to put the task of understanding the crisis to a high level commission. That was less than 24 hours ago. Now he wants to take procedurally impossible unilateral action and fire the head of the SEC? Okay now close your eyes an just imagine a McCain administration. Think about it. Okay open your eyes. Now if you didn't just say omfg, you might be a red neck.

In all honesty, this sounds like a classic case of let's blame the scapgoat.

Posted by: Mick on September 18, 2008 at 4:50 PM | PERMALINK

My gawd, I can't believe how much misinformation about naked short selling is flying around the interwebs today!

Short selling is a legal and legitimate means of trading, and probably necessary depending on who you talk to.

But legal short selling is predicated on delivering what you sell to who you sold it to! That means you've got to borrow any shares you sell short to complete the transaction.

Naked short selling occurs when the borrowing and then delivering does not happen. It is fundamentally the same as printing counterfeit shares of a stock, which dilutes the value of actual shares held by long investors. It is blatantly illegal and always has been. The problem is that, lately anyway, it has not been enforced. At all.

Hundreds, perhaps thousands of companies have been severely impacted by this practice. There are literally hundreds of millions if not billions of "Failure To Deliver" transactions on the books. It may be true that many of the companies impacted are rightly shorted because their prices are overvalued relative to the companies's true worth, but in what way is this artificial pressure placed on the supply/demand curve a remotely legitimate means of dealing with it?

The ultimate irony here is that the temporary rules regarding naked short selling put into effect over the summer only protected a handful of financial powerhouses, MOST OF WHICH WERE THE VERY ENTITIES RESPONSIBLE FOR FACILITATING MOST OF THE NAKED SHORT SELLING GOING ON!

The SEC throughout has been corrupt to the core by not dealing forcefully with this issue. The new rules going into place this week are barely a band-aid over the sucking wound this situation has created. One comment I read yesterday said it's akin to telling a bank robber, "Do that again and you're going to jail! But you can keep the money this time..."

Posted by: Redwood on September 18, 2008 at 5:08 PM | PERMALINK

Cox was bought in to do nothing and he has done nothing so whats the problem??

Posted by: Don Lowell on September 18, 2008 at 8:29 PM | PERMALINK

You idiots think youre so smart. Actually the President CAN fire the SEC Chairman. Get your facts straight next time.

Posted by: Ron J` on September 18, 2008 at 9:48 PM | PERMALINK

Capitalism can only work on a fair, level, and stable playing field. The fundamental problem was that the whole game was rigged and the government regulators didn't care or were no longer empowered to fairly regulate the market. This is of course entirely a Republican thing having to do with the mystical "free hand of capitalism" or some other mumbo jumbo. It was all pretty much a big rip off, shell game and the whole house of cards is now collapsing.

Now, we're pretty much just giving trillions of tax dollars to rich people. No action from Congress or the People was apparently even required. So the country that cannot possibly afford billions for heath care, or education, or housing or fighting poverty is just gonna prop up a bunch of rich people too stupid to figure out a legit way to make money. If that's a good investment for the future of America then we're all F%^KED because these people are apparently so stupid that they have managed to bring America to it's financial knees.

Posted by: Glen on September 19, 2008 at 12:55 AM | PERMALINK

First, the president cannot fire an SEC chair.

Wrong. The President can assign the chairmanship to any of the already Congressional approved commissioners, without further Congressional action.

Posted by: Neo on September 19, 2008 at 1:01 AM | PERMALINK

You are plain wrong. Know your facts the SEC Chairman does indeed serve at the pleasure of the President.
Read/learn--don't spout ignorance.
http://www.stephenbainbridge.com/punditry/comments/massive_misinformation_on_the_web_the_president_can_fire_the_sec_chairman/

Posted by: Bill on September 19, 2008 at 9:34 AM | PERMALINK

I am a walmart woman and we have saved, investing what we could into the market! I think Mr. Cox should be fired!!

Posted by: Ruth on September 19, 2008 at 11:04 AM | PERMALINK

I agree with senetor maccain he is right federal govorment can not interfere in markets.

Posted by: john smith on September 19, 2008 at 1:23 PM | PERMALINK

OK-is this right? They do naked short selling and then we give them money to buy the stock to cover their positions and then when the stock goes back up they sell it again? is that what we are doing? It is revolution time, and not with lawyers and the media....

Posted by: Larry O on September 20, 2008 at 3:26 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly