"HK" wrote in message
...


I think it perfectly appropriate for the identity of the bondholders to be
made public. Obama didn't put these companies at risk; they put themselves
at risk.

Normally, I would agree. But their concern was due to the current level of
resentment against all financial institutions and the physical threats that
have been the result. There's a lynch mob mentality that exists right now.


It wouldn't have bothered me if all the troubled financial services
companies went bellyup, and their assets sold off to less troubled
companies. If they had behaved responsibly, they wouldn't have gotten in
as deep as they did.

You are lumping them all together (which is, in part the problem that
exists).
As I previously pointed out, the Chrysler bondholders are the ones that kept
the
company afloat and provided the funds to pay employees and conduct business.
Chrysler used up all their money, then the Fed money. (which, BTW, I don't
think is even secured)

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


I think it perfectly appropriate for the identity of the bondholders
to be made public. Obama didn't put these companies at risk; they put
themselves at risk.

Normally, I would agree. But their concern was due to the current
level of resentment against all financial institutions and the physical
threats that have been the result. There's a lynch mob mentality that
exists right now.


You mean, like crazed christian conservatives surrounding a family
planning clinic? Or texans threatening to secede?

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


I think it perfectly appropriate for the identity of the bondholders to
be made public. Obama didn't put these companies at risk; they put
themselves at risk.

Normally, I would agree. But their concern was due to the current level
of resentment against all financial institutions and the physical threats
that have been the result. There's a lynch mob mentality that exists
right now.


You mean, like crazed christian conservatives surrounding a family
planning clinic? Or texans threatening to secede?


Fer cripes sake, stay on the subject will you? You do that all the time.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


I think it perfectly appropriate for the identity of the bondholders
to be made public. Obama didn't put these companies at risk; they
put themselves at risk.

Normally, I would agree. But their concern was due to the current
level of resentment against all financial institutions and the
physical threats that have been the result. There's a lynch mob
mentality that exists right now.


You mean, like crazed christian conservatives surrounding a family
planning clinic? Or texans threatening to secede?


Fer cripes sake, stay on the subject will you? You do that all the time.

Eisboch


Oh...I thought we were discussing lynch mobs.

"HK" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


I think it perfectly appropriate for the identity of the bondholders
to be made public. Obama didn't put these companies at risk; they put
themselves at risk.

Normally, I would agree. But their concern was due to the current
level of resentment against all financial institutions and the physical
threats that have been the result. There's a lynch mob mentality that
exists right now.


You mean, like crazed christian conservatives surrounding a family
planning clinic? Or texans threatening to secede?


Fer cripes sake, stay on the subject will you? You do that all the
time.

Eisboch


Oh...I thought we were discussing lynch mobs.


No. We were discussing Rule or Attwood. Which is better?

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


I think it perfectly appropriate for the identity of the
bondholders to be made public. Obama didn't put these companies at
risk; they put themselves at risk.

Normally, I would agree. But their concern was due to the current
level of resentment against all financial institutions and the
physical threats that have been the result. There's a lynch mob
mentality that exists right now.


You mean, like crazed christian conservatives surrounding a family
planning clinic? Or texans threatening to secede?


Fer cripes sake, stay on the subject will you? You do that all the
time.

Eisboch


Oh...I thought we were discussing lynch mobs.


No. We were discussing Rule or Attwood. Which is better?

Eisboch


If there is resentment against financial institutions and their
managers, it is because it is deserved. Those greedy *******s tool
intolerable risks with the livelihoods, savings, futures and retirements
of millions of Americans. None of them are going to jail. None of them
are suffering like the families they ruined. I feel no compassion for them.

Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...


I think it perfectly appropriate for the identity of the
bondholders to be made public. Obama didn't put these companies at
risk; they put themselves at risk.

Normally, I would agree. But their concern was due to the current
level of resentment against all financial institutions and the
physical threats that have been the result. There's a lynch mob
mentality that exists right now.


You mean, like crazed christian conservatives surrounding a family
planning clinic? Or texans threatening to secede?


Fer cripes sake, stay on the subject will you? You do that all the
time.

Eisboch


Oh...I thought we were discussing lynch mobs.


No. We were discussing Rule or Attwood. Which is better?

Eisboch

He'll have to Google that.