IS CHANGE MAKING AMERICA UNTRUSTWORTHY

We have had two major places where change scares me:
1. Business law circumvented through intimidation
2. Dishonored agreements between nations to favor nations with a history of and commitment to violence.

1. Senior Chrysler bondholders were villified by Obama and their representatives were prevented from keeping their identity secret except to the bankruptcy court. This exposed them to intimidation incited by the president's villification. The bond investors are little people as shown in the Associated Press article

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g3iCudvEHr_SFxASOkt7S4vyuzqwD98KPOE03
"On Friday, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an appeal from a trio of Indiana state pension and construction funds trying to block Chrysler's deal to sell most of its assets to Italy's Fiat Group SpA. The court, however, kept the deal on hold until Monday to allow an appeal to the Supreme Court.

The Indiana State Police Pension Fund, the Indiana Teacher's Retirement Fund and the state's Major Moves Construction Fund claim the deal unfairly favors the interests of the company's unsecured stakeholders ahead of those of secured debtholders such as themselves."

Effectively changing the priority under the business law retroactively and using intimidation to the detriment of investors creates a third world environment for people who were responsible and made a decision to provide for their future. This cut them out of their position and they were forced into a larger loss than they would have without the "at the President's pleasure" manipulations. The three large unsecured institutional investors are TARP recipients and who knows what their actual outcome is when their relationship with the politicians and their receipt is taken into account. The UAW will receive major payback under the changes.

2. Israel had letters of understanding exchanged with the United States in 2004 and subsequently endorsed by a resolution by congress that a long term understanding that any final peace agreement would allow Israel to retain some of the close in settlements in exchange for land from within the Israeli border.




Can investors judge their risk and invest to provide for their future without fear of the game being changed to favor another group of junior investors or ????
Can America be trusted? Saul Alinsky said that the end justifys the means and this implementation of those ideas is why some of us thought that Sarah Palin would have been better in diplomacy than Obama .

Changing the priority of the bond investors and ignoring an understanding on the OSLO agreement per Krauthamer raises the question. Is the new American mantra,

"Penalize success to reward failure."

Israel has a successful economy with opportunities for the people. They have a good tourist trade. Hamas ruins Gaza and keeps it in chaos. Why would we give aid without conditions?

The parable of the talons
There is a reason for the Road to 911 and Sandy Berger don’t want us to see the falacy