Ricks Picks

How Would Saul Alinsky Have Handled ISIS?


Obama’s pledge to “destroy” ISIS would have been more credible if it had come from the Ames, Iowa police chief, or the head of the Sacramento VFW. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for destroying these radioactive cockroaches – and the sooner  the better, since they grow bolder and more numerous by the day.  But even the police chief – and for that matter, the librarian, the PTA chairman in Tallahassee and the dog catcher in Turlock — know that we cannot hope to even hinder ISIS, much less destroy it, with air strikes alone. Leave it to our dangerously inept commander-in-chief to assure the enemy in advance that there will be no U.S. boots on the ground. Instead, Obama has purported to threaten them with an international coalition that in fact does not exist and which, even if

it did, would lack the take-no-prisoners mindset required to exterminate an enemy as savage as ISIS.  More likely is that Obama’s politically calculated four-point plan will strike not fear, but contempt and disdain in the hearts of the enemy.  It will soothe their febrile brains like poetry from the Rubaiyat, perhaps inspiring them to believe that planting ISIS’ flag on the roof of the White House is not such a crazy dream after all.

ISIS vs. Idaho Vigilantes

Many will have difficulty imagining how this could happen. Militarily speaking, it cannot. ISIS wouldn’t survive a confrontation with Idaho’s militia, much less a battle with U.S. troops. So how are they going to take the White House?  Recall the details of 9/11 to read their psychopathic minds. ISIS will not fight its way down Pennsylvania Avenue; rather, it will use radiological or biochemical weapons to extinguish life across a wide swath of Virginia, Maryland and D.C.  Then, when the dust has settled, the jihadis will plant their flag.  However, let them behead just one U.S. soldier and that will be the end of ISIS. Americans are already spoiling for a fight after seeing two reporters decapitated.  Do these guys even know about Pearl Harbor?

Some Americans, understandably tired of war, will object to confronting ISIS, especially with ground troops. But you can argue this only if: 1) you think they are just bluffing; or 2) you doubt their ability to hurt us.  Because neither argument is very convincing, there’s a good case for going all-out to destroy them now, before they strengthen into a far more formidable and dangerous foe. The fact is, there are already enough jihadis scattered throughout the world to cripple every American company that does outside of the U.S., and to turn every American vacation oasis into a death zone.  Although they have yet to blow up any suburban malls or detonate a radiological bomb in the heart of a large U.S. city, these evil goals are surely the stuff of their dreams.  They will seem all the more realistic when Obama’s half-assed, four-point bluff flops as badly as virtually everything else the man has attempted since taking office. These are dangerous times to have someone who never worked above the level of community rabble-rouser in the White House. What would Obama’s mentor Saul Alinsky have done about ISIS? My guess is that he would have continued to underestimate them until the moment his head rolled onto the ground.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Brian Hemeryck September 19, 2014, 9:14 pm

What is different, and what scares me about ISIS is a complete lack of a shred of empathy. They behead and execute with no conscience whatsoever. This group and its recruits from around the world would walk into a school and execute every child, women and men in the building for no reason other than inciting terror. How do you respond to this? The roots of disenfranchised people are deep in our existing societies both in the United States and here in Canada.

A response is required that must involve boots on the ground combined with Intel that identifies this behavior as it cruises the internet. I also agree that the middle east needs to step up and root this out of its backyard as well. This is a failure of the respective governments to provide adequate opportunity to their own people, and to society that has apparently worked to not properly instill a strong sense of ethics, responsibility and moral grounding to the next generation.

I don’t normally comment on this site but this to me represents a serious threat to all our democracies.

mava September 19, 2014, 6:18 pm

Any true solution, must necessarily be a negotiation. It must involve a trade, an exchange. Loose some, gain some.

But what is there to exchange if someone wants me to wake up and go to work to pay for their medical bill?

What is in it for me? NOTHING, that’s what. So, how can here be a “solution”? The other side wants all the benefit and doesn’t even bother to offer me any upside!

They go outright lying about it then. They say things like : “Everyone is gonna need it, sooner or later”. Not true! Bill gates isn’t gonna need it, not from Andy, anyway. So, how is that solution working out for Bill? Or is he not a human being anymore? Doesn’t have a right for the pursuit of happiness?

The solution would be for everyone who feels that they should “never say never” to sign up for a communist care, where they all share their luck and at least something will always be there. However, others, who do not feel that way, should not have to do this. And if you didn’t sign up, then you do whatever they way you see fit, and you cannot demand the common system to take care of you.

This, would be the solution. Because, it requires no violence, no theft.

And I guarantee you as god is my witness, that this solution will not ever be allowed or even pursued by the commies!

Because, no matter what they say, it lack the violence and the theft, and commies cannot live without violence and theft, for they are leaches to begin with.

mario September 20, 2014, 4:47 am

Does it not occur to you that the socialists see how unfair the system is and want to protect the screwed over little guy from the hell that the rich overlords put them in? It’s not so unreasonable Mava! Of course such practices need to be executed well and rarely are, THATS the real problem.

mava September 21, 2014, 3:35 am


I hear you. Yes, I am familiar with that idea. Let me re-state it to make tho post complete: “Because the system is bad, some people are using it to gain social credit (money) and power unjustly. The solution to this is to screw the system yet in another perverted way, in order to compensate.”

I consider this to be a myth. No one really acts with this purpose. Yet, it is true, many are saying this, to explain their rationale. It is one of convenient lies. Here is what I mean:

“We should bail out American automobile manufacturers, because we cannot allow our great nation not to have a domestic auto producer”. A myth. A convenient lie, that is used to cover this: “I, or my wife, or my cousin, or my son, paid BIG bucks for doing nearly nothing. Some payments will take years to clear (retirement). I do not want such a plush situation to dissolve.”

Why it is a myth, 3 reasons:
1. This is a proper place to use an American saying “two wrongs don’t make right”. We should not assume that the solution to a problem lies in creating yet another problem. If there is a problem, then it needs to be taken care of, exactly where it exists.
If some people make profits undeservingly, due to a problem in the system, then these people must be stopped, the opportunity removed, and may-be some funds returned. Take ISPs (Internet Service Providers), they rake up big bucks because our anti-monopolistic government created a nice cushy monopoly for them, and all they need to do is to keep raping their customers as the choice is against the law.

2. Not all “Rich” necessarily have used the system to gain their fortunes. It is not fair to make them pay for what they did not do.

3. This a myth, because (at least in the case of Obama Care) the proposed “fix” is intended to harm those who have nothing to do with the alleged rich. Since ObamaCare literally forces everyone into it, it then denies any say in the mater to those poor who do not want to have healthcare insurance.

So, again, Mario, socialist are saying this, yes. But as I have shown above, their “theory” has zero worth, and not only it is worthless, but it is harmful, as it corrupts and deforms the existing system even more, and because it is based on violence, which is not a solution. (Of course I do not expect socialists to understand this. They have undeveloped mental facilities. Otherwise, they would have seen it long ago, that socialism doesn’t work in practice, and cannot work in theory.)

mava September 19, 2014, 6:05 pm

Supreme court is not functioning, John Jay. We can see that because there is no law according to which we must pay income taxes. We know that because many, many have already researched and proved it. The latest was Aaron Russo, who put them on record admitting the conspiracy (he got killed for this).

Yet, the supreme court is silent. This means only one thing, – they have long been in on the deal.

And no matter how bad is Andys life, he still doesn’t have the right to make others pay for his needs. He calls theft “a solution”, as if it was allowable or acceptable to take from one to give to another. He understands only violence. Thinking about this, there was an another example of defining “solution” wrong, in terms of violence. It was the famous “final solution”.

If you do not serve other people enough to have them serve you, there is no solution. And there should not be. Essentially, what he wants is for other people to serve his needs, but for himself to never be required to serve them back. “Ha-ha, I don’t make enough money (don’t want to work hard enough), so don’t even ask me to, but since you work a lot anyway, I think the solution is for you to be violently made to serve me”.

John Jay September 19, 2014, 9:25 pm

Re: Supreme Court

This would never have happened if I was still Chief Justice.
However, I must admit I do enjoy my retirement.
And 219 years of COLAs really do add up!

mario September 20, 2014, 4:43 am

Mava I would agree with you if the system was fait but its not. The rich abuse their privilege and screw the little guy along the way while screaming we all have equal opportunity…total BS, and that’s why good governance and laws are needed in a society. Of course that pretty much doesn’t exist making all matters worse.

Cheers, Mario

John Jay September 19, 2014, 6:32 am


Speaking of the Affordable Care Act………….
Here is a view on that matter I saved from one of my fringe websites:
“Note: Regarding Obamacare being a tax, or not. The Constitution forbids non-apportioned direct taxes, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, except income taxes as per the 16th. The 9th. and 10th. amendments provide that if a power isn’t granted to the Federal government, then that power is left with the states or people and also that the people have more rights than those enumerated in the Constitution.
Being that Obamacare is not income and not a power provided to the Federal government by the Constitution, it is Unconstitutional and null and void.”


If that is true, then you would think a certain Supreme Court Justice ( or all of them for that matter) would have cited that and struck it down.
Unless, of course…………
The 3 letter acronym guys had the goods on him ( or all of them)
Perhaps someone reading this who has a more complete understanding of Constitutional Law would like to post his opinion on this.

Troll September 19, 2014, 3:29 am

All things being (un)equal:

Nice little pattern on the e-minis from A 1890.25 and C 1968.0

Erin September 18, 2014, 9:05 pm

Long time follower/poster here and fellow shareholder in Snipp. My question is regarding the T/A in Snipp. I am invested in SPN on the venture exchange which has much more volume and liquidity. Like you, I believe Atul in one smart guy with many great ideas and I won’t be trading my shares anytime soon. My question is…As accurate as you are with that stuff, how could a grey market (OTC) possibly be measured with so little volume and such sporadic trading? I could see the venture exchange T/A with much more liquidity but the OTC?
I also do know that they are working on upgrading to the QB listing on the OTC markets and time will tell what they have going on with that but I am sure that my shares are in good hands with Atul and company. Thank you for bringing them to the table for me!


The Hidden Pivot Method works no matter how thin the price action, Erin — even when the coordinates one uses are price dots rather than price bars. To test this, watch the pattern that has just developed in SNIPF (that’s the U.S. symbol) on the hourly chart, where A=13.90 on 6/4. SNIPF tripped another buy signal yesterday at 0.2536 that implies a move to exactly 0.3503. That’s assuming that it can get past the key “Hidden Pivot” resistance between here (currently trading 0.2724) and the target. RA

Erin September 19, 2014, 6:31 pm

Thanks Rick. I will try to connect the dots!

Jackson September 18, 2014, 4:07 pm

Gary said. [try reversing the eyes you see through].


Andy Gutterman September 18, 2014, 3:03 pm


I’m all too familiar with this. I live it every day. Experienced it when we sold our house in 2008 and watched all the profit go to my wife for medical care before she qualified for Medicare. We didn’t have insurance then and I don’t have it now. Thankfully my wife gets Medicare. (she is 5.5 years older than me)

Today if something happened that cut the income to zero we’d be broke within six months, with a very bleak future. Lucky for me I’m selling SAS, so in another year I can leave the ranks of the financially depressed, never to worry again. (I don’t think the world as we know it is coming to an end, commerce will always be there)

Puts a whole different perspective on these discussions. If you have security then its hard to understand the plight of those that don’t.


mario September 18, 2014, 11:27 am
John Jay September 19, 2014, 9:33 pm

That’s not so bad!
Consider the following:
One in four Americans thinks the sun goes around the earth!

Everything suddenly makes a whole lot of sense, doesn’t it?
The last piece to the puzzle just snapped into place!

Jason S September 18, 2014, 1:13 am

To get back on topic, how would Saul deal with ISIS/ISIL? He would probably look to try and play them. Likely it would be a golden opportunity since they are isolated right now on the other side of the world and don’t pose much of a direct threat currently. But they have increased Americans’ concern and that is something he would use to further his agenda.

In the long run this would likely backfire. These ISIS/ISIL nutjobs are dangerous because they are purposeful, inspired and unpredictable. I am not sure how we handle the situation since short of unleashing the full horror of our military on them (without politicized restraint) will not likely be successful for long. Just ask the Russians and how Afghanistan worked out for them. They were pretty committed to their war, going as far as disguising grenades as toys so children would pick them up and lose limbs. Every adult caring for a disabled child was one less enemy to fight.

I am just glad to hear (yesterday on Bloomberg) that the folks in thinktanks have taken things like ebola into consideration and worked out contingency plans for it. Because if you want terror, there is a ready sourced material and it is easy enough to get through airport security and spread around. If they do that, that may be enough to ire up America to combat terror with military horror.

Andy Gutterman September 17, 2014, 8:15 pm

I got the vote in 1969. Voted for Nixon in 72, Ford in 76, Reagan in 80 and 84, Bush in 88, Bush in 92, can’t remember who ran in 96, but didn’t vote for Clinton, voted Bush in 2000.

Then I woke up.

Opened my mind and started to hear different opinions.

Opted out in 2004, voted Obama in 2008, but when I realized he sold us down the river I voted for the New Mexico guy in 2012. Liberatarian Party, if I remember correctly.

I’d love to see a rational Repuplican run in 2016, someone who can appeal to everyone, not just the Radical Right. Romney shot himself in the head when he said 47% of the people were deadbeats. Just who did he think was going to elect him?

I’m basically a Republican at heart. Voting Democratic was very difficult in 2008, but it was made easy when McCain chose Sarah Palin as his VP. Definitely didn’t want THAT deadbeat in power!



“I’d love to see a rational Repuplican run in 2016, someone who can appeal to everyone, not just the Radical Right.”

C’mon, Andy, you can do better than that. First of all, the press picks the GOP candidate, and they invariably choose the one that looks the most beatable. (Hello, Mitt!) Our left-tilting, half-wit scribes are so paranoid about this that they shelled Christie for two months just to make sure he was a political dead duck. As for a “rational” Republican running, exactly when did we last see an “irrational” candidate run? You’ll have to go back a lot further in time than Goldwater if you’re going to answer that question honestly. RA

Chuck September 17, 2014, 11:22 pm

also Palin was an experienced state governor. Boy did the dem shills go to extremes to do her in. SNL skits, every woman with ANY left leanings, and of course Wash Post etc. pulled out all of the stops to stop her. I was not a big McCain fan – and do get a kick out of Obama’s trials and tribulations. I cannot get too worked up over POTUS anymore…….they do very little other than TPTBs bidding.

gary leibowitz September 17, 2014, 5:51 pm

OUCH! Sorry the attention strayed away from topic. I was a bit over worked when I kept seeing my comments “reviewed” before being allowed to post. Not even sure if he does this with other bloggers.

I do agree that I get obnoxious and pound some points home more than I should. I will reedit my phrasing so I don’t offend people with my emotional outbursts. I commend Mario and Andy for being lucid when giving the opposing view yet not offensive. I can only state that I will try my best to calm the waters.

Off topic: I am now watching Ken Burns Roosevelt series. The elite ran the system in the turn of the century but the ones that took office managed to change the landscape for the common man. It was interesting how Teddy’s beliefs and outspoken mannerism resonated with the people. He won based on his strong convictions and anti-establishment theme. His terms in office reflected that policy. Both parties that took office from that time period created a dramatic shift of balance between corporations and the workers. Teddy or Wilson, different parties, different philosophies both saw a need to give more power to the people. Fast forward one hundred years and we seem to be living in a bi-polar political landscape. Politicians have found it easier to accept graft for favors and at the same time pass legislation that keep the poor and middle class afloat. It is a shame that real fiscal responsibility isn’t a mandatory requirement.

gary leibowitz September 17, 2014, 6:06 pm

BTW, the 10 year note looks like it has more room on the upside. It could hit 3.5 percent without violating the very long trend line down. Not sure if it will get there but I do see an intermediate trend change. Just one persons observation. As for the recent SPX trend, it has stayed above first line support whenever we see a correction. That is one powerful testament to this very long bull run. I would be very surprised if the recent move stalls out before breaking new highs again. I now see as the upper range on SPX at 2070. This is a premature argument since we have not yet cleared the way above 2011.

Traveler September 17, 2014, 7:05 pm

Will just say that Wilson was responsible for the 4 of the worst laws enacted in the first half of the 20th century: the 16th, 17th and 18th Amendments, and the Federal Reserve Act.

Wilson has always been my candidate for worst president ever due to the far reaching effects of the edicts passed during his tenure.

Obama will likely surpass Wilson when it’s time to look back.

For Gutterman’s benefit: to paraphrase Thatcher, the ACA will work … until you run out of other people’s money. At 17% of the economy soon to be headed toward 20% very quickly, it’s not sustainable. TANSTAAFL!

Andy Gutterman September 17, 2014, 2:33 pm


I’m sure I will get banned for this post. Your right wing, extremely rigid comments over the years have finally gotten to me. I have tried to stay out of the politics until now.

You can have a forum of radical right wingnuts who all say the same thing, over and over, even if it isn’t true. Or you can allow people from the center to get involved as well, such as Gary and myself.

Referencing Paul above, like most people on the extreme right, anyone in the center is a leftist from his perspective. What Paul forgets that its that King Republican Bush who gave us two very expensive wars, gave us the Great Patriot Act that diminished our freedoms, and passed two gigantic tax cuts that benefited mostly the rich, while continuing the policy of grinding the middle class under the boot of excessive government, as they lost out over the last 50 years from the supposed benefit of lower taxes on the rich. Trickle down didn’t reach the middle classes or lower, witness the anemic or negative income growth (decline) for most of the population, as they went further and further into debt to make ends meet.

Al that trickle down and a rising tide will lift all boats has gotten us is the wealthy got wealthier and we got Big government for the rest of us, to try and enable us to survive and think we were getting ahead, with various small scale social programs to hand out enough government money so we would not realize how we got the shaft from the Republicans.

You started this, Rick, so if you want to ban me for disagreeing with you on politics, go for it.

With respect to the ACA, at least Obama had the guts to try and do something about our extremely broken healthcare system. Not the best solution, but at least 8 million previously uninsured people got insurance, and I can assure you that none of them were in the 1%, let alone the 10%. I don’t recall ANY Republican offering anything other than more grinding down of the American population as they have done over the last 50 years.

Obama may be a clown, but at least he has tried to fix what is so horribly broken. Maybe if the Republicans had been inclined to fix as well we would have had a better ACA. But no, the Republicans are the party of NO. NO, NO, NO, NO! “We cannot allow anyone we disagree with to succeed!” “We must fight positive change any way we can!”

History will show that on the night when Obama got elected the Republicans decided then and there to oppose anything Obama did and would try and defeat him no matter what it took. Passing legislation that might help the American people was the last thing they wanted to do. All I’ve head from the right for the last six years is “Get rid of Obama!” Nothing else.

As the rest of America other than the 10% continue to get ground under the boots of failed Republican policies.

What I have found over the years is you can change the mind of a liberal but you cannot do the same for a conservative. I have a close friend who is more liberal than me who has a position I disagree with. With information and discussion I am slowly able to get him to see why his position is incorrect.

I have never been able to do that with a staunch conservative. I find most conservatives to be extremely rigid and will not allow new information in that can change their minds, let alone their opinion.

They are the true adherents to “Don’t confuse me with the facts, my mind’s made up!”



We’ll just have to agree to disagree, Andy — about nearly everything, it would seem.

Concerning Obamacare, the vast majority of Americans will not qualify to benefit from it as you evidently have. In fact, most of us are already paying far more for health insurance, with hugely larger increases looming after the election. Enjoy, but be aware of how much those of us who work 60 hours a week are paying to make your healthcare nearly free.

As for just who is on the extreme right, your own extremist view on this could benefit from a tour of actual right-wing-extremist web sites. A good way to find them is to Google the question, Is Joe Rich Jewish? RA

Oregon September 17, 2014, 5:43 pm

Andy, I disagree that you, who demand people with more money must pay for your healthcare, are a centrist. A centrist should handle their own affairs.

mava September 17, 2014, 7:18 pm


What a load of crap! I am not a conservative! Yet, RA allows me to post. I am not Republican even.

I must note that all leftists (commies), always say that everyone who disagrees with their theft, is necessarily a part of some pro-cronyism movement, in US being represented by the GOP, they say.

What about just regular, little people who oppose theft and armed robbery? Huh? Like myself? ACA did not help me. It made my insurance worse. I now pay more and get less! I don’t want anyone to help me, and I don’t want to pay for any bums either.

Your socialist propaganda doesn’t just piss off Republicans. It annoys everyone who is anti-theft.

About taxes. You know why it didn’t trickle down? Because taxation is theft. And theft will never make you better off! This has nothing to do with who pays and who receives, and how much. This has everything to do with humans placing a value judgment on everything. Thus, when you steal (taxation is never voluntary, always an armed robbery, just because you voted doesn’t make it any different for me), you waste the loot even less usefully that the little that you earned. If I had a great enemy, I would try to support that enemy financially, to make his moral foundations rot. And once rotten, by easy life of theft, he will never be able to amount to anything.

That, btw, its the whole reason for an affirmative action, to rot out the blacks from the inside and thus remove them from competition, too bad they don’t understand it, while gulping on freebies.

So, if you were truly concerned about the poor (which no socialist ever was), then you would want to stop the redistribution cold.


Give ‘im hell, Mava! RA

paul September 17, 2014, 7:43 pm

Andy and I have been polar opposites for several years on nearly every single issue. I’ll cherry pick the one issue nearest and dearest to Andy’s heart…affordable healthcare. Andy supported, endorsed, and voted for Obamacare. My contention is that Obamacare or the ACA, didn’t make health care affordable. In fact the the ACA costs are projected to go up by 6% yearly and will cost 20% more in 2020. By this measure alone the ACA is a failure and the democrats put the whole country through hell to make it law.
To say Im angry at the democratic politicians for playing their voter base for suckers while enriching themselves and their campaign contributors would be an understatement and the same democratic voters who supported this malfeasance are the first to still blame the republicans for anything and everything. I can come to no other conclusion that left leaning voters have lost all logic and reason.

paul September 19, 2014, 1:45 pm

Update on Obamacare. Obamacare continues to run amok and defy the rule of law.
GAO reports:

In 2009, President Obama assured Americans that under the law no taxpayer money would be used to fund abortions.

Liberals have no need to compromise as long as liberals can out vote conservatives. My suggestion is for conservatives to hunker down and let the down cycle run its course. Eventually the moderate liberals will get whacked by the lack of law enforcement or financially in their wallets and then they will come to the table with open arms and sincerity instead of of haughtiness and noses up in the air.

Saul Alinsky would be proud.


“Obamacare and America Decline”: This is a superb essay by WSJ columnist Holman Jenkins — a must-read for anyone with anything good to say about Obamacare. Click here. RA

SA1 September 17, 2014, 7:53 pm

Don’t ban Andy, Rick. He promises to take some pressure off “el garo” and give the rest of us food for thought. Or should I say raw meat to savvey.

You (Andy) said: “Obama may be a clown, but at least…” Correct-a-mundo! he’s YOUR clown. I would never support a clown as my president. Well not since Emmett Kelly died, anyway.

You said: “I have tried to stay out of the politics until now.” That was a good idea, and you probably should have continued in that vain Andy. Your coming out has given us moderate, patriotic, God fearing/loving Americans a window into your soul and fodder to feed the fires of our Spirit; I too can count on my two hands (no toes required) the number of posts I have made here, but as you said to Rick, “you have finally gotten to me”. (just joking, I graduated from Purdue University with a minor in math. No fingers or toes required to count.)

How can you think Rick is a radical right winger? His favorite city is San Francisco for cry’in out loud. I mean I would’nt be caught dead there! Las Vegas! Yes! Now there is a playground! Food, gambling, fashion, excitement and a totally different type of sexual behaviour.

You said: “Referencing Paul above, like most people on the extreme right, anyone in the center is a leftist from his perspective.” Well, you can reference me and anyone in my 3rd grade class (60 years ago) as well. Center is both left of right and right of left. Well done, Andy… move on to the 4th grade.

You said “All (sic) that trickle down and a rising tide will lift all boats has gotten us is the wealthy got wealthier and we got Big government for the rest of us”. What has Obama done to slow the wealthy from becoming wealthier? Hmm, lets ask his top financial campaign bundler, Jon Corzine.

And how has he managed to shrink “Big government”? Government grew much bigger under Obama, than it did under Bush thanks largely to Obamacare and the expanded welfare, no illegals left behind programs required to support the new Democrats pouring across the southern border.

You said “Obama had the guts to try and do something about our extremely broken healthcare system” Yeah right, in smoke filled, totally partisan back rooms with an Iron Curtain shielding his pledged “transparency” from the light of day. Remember Pelosi and Reed saying, Just vote for it, you can read it later!”? It passed only because an Ignoramous Supreme Court judge couldn’t distinguish between a tax and a penalty (fine).
You said “What I have found over the years is you can change the mind of a liberal but you cannot do the same for a conservative.” That’s the one true thing you managed to say, Andy. I’m sure most of us will acknowledge that our parent’s seemed to grow much wiser as we grew older. Of course, that is because as we grew older, we grew more conservative in our thinking and therefore more in line with our parent’s conservative views. So, yes, it is easier to change the mind of a liberal, since if you wait long enough, he will eventually grow up.

“Show me a young Conservative and I’ll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I’ll show you someone with no brains.” ― Winston Churchill;

“Conservatives believe in equality of opportunity. Liberals believe in equality of outcome.” – Mike Rosen ”

And on the lighter side, “What is the difference between a parasite and a liberal? The spelling!” – Ziad K. Abdelnour

Finally, you said “at least 8 million previously uninsured people got insurance,…”

Grrrr…. I ask you, how does that compare to the 30 million who will lose their insurance and the many millions more who will pay higher premiums and deductables?

To begin with, those 8 million may have been “uninsured”, but they certainly had healthcare as good as you or I, except that theirs was free. No hospital emergency room would or could legally turn them away if they were truly in need of care. Their care was paid for by you and me, in addition to our having to pay for our own healthcare. I am making the assumption here that you are not sucking from the welfare teat.

On the other hand, ObamaCare will hurt twice as many people as it helps — because the law isn’t nearly done with canceling people’s insurance. And on top of the cancellations,… “On average, US workers with on-the-job individual coverage contribute $999 a year in pre-tax dollars and have a deductible of $1,135, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. On ObamaCare exchanges, all but the lowest earners will pay more (even after subsidies), pay with after-tax dollars, face deductibles of $3,000 to $5,000 for silver and bronze plans and lose access to many doctors and hospitals they’re covered for now …a conservative estimate is that 25 million people, out of the 60 million in small group plans, get dropped in 2014. Add that to the 5 million or so whose individual-market already canceled on Jan. 1, and you have a lot of losers.” – By Betsy McCaughey, New York Post, January 14, 2014

I have to stop here, Andy, because , “you have [really] finally gotten to me”.

To answer Rick’s question “What would Saul Alinsky say?” No doubt in my mind. He says “Nice job, Barak! I knew that investing in your future would pay great dividends! America… you are screwed! You had a good run, but in the end, our communistic socialism wins out!”

And unfortunately, he is RIGHT!


Thanks for the help, Dale –especially the nice summary of Obamacare’s winners and losers. Concerning Alinsky, I’m pretty sure you got it right. RA

Redwilldanaher September 17, 2014, 11:58 pm

Poor Andy, not even right about the composition of Rick’s participants and well, as for everything else, it’s been covered.

My take is that most here most closely resemble libertarians. As for framing things, Andy and Gary are in the severe minority yet again as very few others here have failed to figure out that the rethuglicans and democrips work for the same string pullers.

That legacy noise needs to be left behind to truly be honest.

Jason S September 18, 2014, 1:03 am

I think you are right that most of us that read this forum are libertarians and I think that Andy still would classify that as “radical right wingnuts” since we don’t believe in big government and prefer for people to be accountable to themselves and each other.

It is the lazy that hand over their liberties to a “benevolent” government to oversee their care because they don’t want to take the responsibility for it themselves.

Andy Gutterman September 18, 2014, 2:04 am

It would be nice if you could check your facts before commenting.

My healthcare isn’t free, since I don’t have any. Couldn’t afford the subsidized rate last year and still be able to pay the mortgage. Book sales have fallen off a cliff this year, the software revenue has not grown large enough to replace it. I’m hopeful I can try again next year but most likely will have to wait for Medicare before I get coverage.

Until then I’m hopeful nothing happens that bankrupts medically.

Prior to the ACA insurance was completely out of reach for me under any circumstances. I almost made it this year but could not take the risk.

So when I do have to go to the clinic the bookshop pays for it, as its a deduction to the corporation. Nothing free about that. What gets paid to the doctor does not get paid to me.


mario September 18, 2014, 10:45 am

Hey Andy,

I like this point about ACA… 8 million more are getting healthcare than before. I like the idea of govt of the people, by the people, for the people. But seems in the end its a half-assed half-baked ruse…. the cost to everyone else is far too high, etc. Many years ago I went neutral on politics…different colors but all part of the same screwed up broken self-serving system. I won’t dive in on the partisan points in the forum….I’d get overwhelmed in a flash…

Cheers, Mario

Andy Gutterman September 18, 2014, 2:52 pm


I totally agree. But that’s what you get when half of the legislature does not get involved in the solution, but just sits on their hands as well as doing everything to oppose it. So we got what we got because it was the best we could get under the circumstances. Doing nothing was not a solution.

Its the same with the budget deficits and debt. Half or more of Congress just wants to kick the can down the road for someone else to solve.

I always thought you got elected to Congress to solve problems, but I guess in this new age that isn’t true. You get elected to oppose the other party and nothing else.

That’s what we’ve had for the last six years, I don’t see any changes coming up in the mid-term election to change that.

As long as the Party of Nothing has power, nothing will happen.

I remember a few years back when the House took a vote to shut down military bases inside the country to SAVE money. Any state with a Republican voting voted against it. Not In My Backyard! Do this somewhere else!

That is not how you solve problems.


Redwilldanaher September 18, 2014, 10:39 pm

I almost can’t believe what I’m reading from “Andy” this week.

El Garo with more time on hands – check
El Garo with sufficient tech skills – check
Andy unhinged, sounding remarkably partisan a la El Garo – check
El Garo hacking Andy’s account ? – too easy???

paul September 17, 2014, 11:17 am

I have to agree with Rick here…true words through and through. Since the democrats took power they have brought the country to a new level of low. I’ll spare you the conspiracy theories but note that Obama has never recanted his mandate of the fundamental transformation of the USA.
“Yes, Jason, I agree that all politicians are lying, vainglorious scum. As Mencken once said, every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under. I vote Republican/Libertarian nonetheless because even if most of them are almost (but not quite) as stupid, ineffectual and cowardly as their Democratic counterparts, they are not evil; nor, by and large, do they think that Big Government should run our lives.

I cannot think of a single Republican who has held office during my lifetime who was more dangerous to the few freedoms we still enjoy as Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and some other Democratic stalwarts. Not a single Republican voted for Obamacare — the worst piece of U.S. legislation ever enacted — and that is reason enough to give them the benefit of the doubt over Democrats. RA “

mava September 17, 2014, 8:46 am

For what is worth, I haven’t notice Gary consciously trying to offend anyone. His point of view is aggravating to some? Let THEM grow up? He has a right to his point of view. We are all love what America used to stand for, right? Well, it used to stand for the fact that a man has a right to his opinion, right or wrong. I think that he is mostly wrong, but who made me a judge?

He is right about one thing: what is the point of discussing anything if we all agree? Dissent is the fuel of the argument and the truth is born out of argument.

However, this is a private forum. If RA tells you, like may-be 20-th time already (that’s only on my memory), that you’re too verbose for his taste, take a hint, may-be, Gary? Because, freedom of speech and all, we’re all literally, guests at his house. Just as you would expect him to do if it was your forum.

(Being verbose myself, however, I do understand how he gets there. I doubt it is from the desire to grab attention. Just trying to explain the point. We are not all as gifted as RA at expressing a point as if it was a point of the spear)

We can’t call ourselves civilized if we can’t all get along with each other without requiring a government.


You are being w-a-a-a-y too kind, Mava. Gary offends nearly everyone in here, and he does it most of the time. Check the archives on this, since you seem to have either forgotten or overlooked the innumerable ways he does it. For one, Gary is not merely loose with the facts, he deliberately misinterprets and misquotes all of us in order to create straw-man arguments. Did you perhaps miss my response to his claim that I had “predicted” the demise of Apple and Facebook? RA

Redwilldanaher September 17, 2014, 11:46 pm

Check the archives on this, since you seem to have either forgotten or overlooked the innumerable ways he does it. For one, Gary is not merely loose with the facts, he deliberately misinterprets and misquotes all of us in order to create straw-man arguments.


gary leibowitz September 18, 2014, 6:49 pm

Rick on Facebook you were adamant it would flame out. It was only after their revenue stream was seen that you changed your mind. While you have acknowledged it can generate revenue you have still insisted it’s valuation is in the sky. On the particulars about the trades, short term, I have no reference.

You repetitive comment on Apple and Microsoft made it clear you view these companies as past their life cycle. If I mixed up your statements with the rest of this boards opinions I apologize.

I am curious what your long term views for all three are. For the record.


I said I’d ban you if you annoyed me, and now you have, gratuitously revisiting a Facebook “argument” with invented statements I supposedly made, and opinions I supposedly expressed. This ban won’t be for life, as is the case with Vlad, but I’m going to institute a ‘Gary break’ for a month and see how it feels. It’ll be good opportunity for you to use your time more productively.

If you or anyone else who wants to keep you around can substantiate the statements you’ve made above, I’ll reinstate you. As far as I’m concerned, and based on the fact that I know my own mind where FB, MSFT and (especially) AAPL are concerned, everything you’ve said is absolute claptrap. You should email the evidence to me, since your posts to this forum will no longer get past my filter.


mario September 19, 2014, 5:19 pm

Well Gary I suppose its sort of like the stubborn husband who ends up on the couch because his wife says

“….I said not another word!”

and he doesn’t believe her 🙂

Rick Ackerman September 16, 2014, 9:58 pm

Gary, you seem like a decent guy, and that’s why I am reluctant to ban you as I did Vlad. But you work so diligently at annoying others in the forum that one might infer you have some sort of personality disorder. Do you realize that you have posted 2658 words under the current topic header? My entire commentary was only 549 words! You really do need to get a life.


Update (September 19, 12:32 p.m.): Gary has been banned, although not necessarily forever. My reasons are noted in a response to his Sep 18 (6:49 p.m.)post below. RA

Chris B. September 16, 2014, 10:54 pm


I have been reading your columns faithfully for years. I rarely comment (3 times today though… sheesh) but you must agree that Gary is a valuable contributor to this forum. He is well spoken and polite, yet incredibly aggravating to some. He provides opinions that spur debate, that are at times educational, and regularly comical.


(and Gary, I applaud your perseverance in the face of such strong criticism – right or wrong)

Redwilldanaher September 17, 2014, 2:11 am


They haven’t even fooled the great unwashed but Garo’s still touting their wonderous deeds. Is he out of touch with his peoples? It would seem so. My guess is that the man on the street would ask Garo what he’s smoking…

mario September 18, 2014, 10:21 am

Intellectually and idealistic stubborn, overbearingly repetitive, makes some very good points mixed in with the rest, always polite… can’t ban one of us for that! 🙂

redwilldanaher September 18, 2014, 2:02 pm

Check the archives, I’m on record as being opposed to Garo being banned. But, it’s Rick’s forum after all…

redwilldanaher September 19, 2014, 6:52 pm

Oh the irony!!! El Garo on temp ban and thus saved from facing the music! The FED has just ADMITTED that the FED has LEVITATED THE MARKETS!


Fed’s Fisher Admits “Fed Has Levitated Markets”, Warns Of “Signs Of Excess”
09/19/2014 10:24 -0400

FOMC voting-member Richard Fisher is among the sanest voices in the Eccles Building asylum and he is once again sounding alarms that all is not well in US financial markets:


Furthermore, Fisher notes The Fed can’t force companies to hire, and would like to see rate hikes as early as Spring 2015.

Garo, I know you’re reading out there somewhere. You need to be added to Bismarck’s legendary quote!

You have tried justifying this levitation every which way for 5 years and now even the FED has come clean. YES Garo, there is a Levitation!

He is right of course…

gary leibowitz September 16, 2014, 5:36 pm

Rick do us all a favor and just ban me. I can truly understand how painful my words are. You cut me off when my words disturb you too much. You give pathetic reasons. Why not just state that this forum has a specific agenda and anyone not willing to adhere to that policy is banned. Not out of foulness or outrageous claims. God knows everyone on this board would be banned.

Imagine the ONE consistent person on this board that has views that are main stream and reasonable. I state this as fact since the last many years we have survived and thrived. We didn’t get swallowed up into a black hole. The sky did not fall as many here attest to.

Why even debate with your own conscience? In fact I implore you to. that way I can go out with a stellar record. My predictions had more worth than anyone here. if you ban me my record stays intact. But please ban me for the “real” reason. I guess you can even state I am a narcissist with my ludicrous delusional stand that I have been correct all these years.

ter September 15, 2014, 11:38 pm

I neglected to mention JJ’s shrewd contribution to the discussion, particularly necessary reminders of past lies and deceptions.

John Jay September 16, 2014, 3:07 am


My best guess for the creation of ISIS?
To allow an end run to take out Assad in Syria using ISIS as an excuse to get around Russian disapproval.

To me that crystal clear, rock steady video of that convoy of brand new white pickup trucks filled with smiling “Terrorists” was worthy of Frank Capra!
“Looky here! Oh, Lordy, Terrorists!”
I almost laughed out loud!

Compare that to the irregulars when Libya fell apart.
A hodgepodge of old, beat up pickups full of disheveled looking thugs, in a shaky, out of focus video.
Those guys were truly scary and believable.

Anyway, it was good enough to keep the proles distracted.
And Hillary and Slick Willie are as popular as ever in Iowa it seems.
So, there you have it!

Oregon September 17, 2014, 6:02 pm

Always enjoy your commentary JJ.

What I like most about this particular circus act is the name, ISIS. Sounds great, reminds me of the Bob Dylan song, and sorta means we are fighting against the Goddess of health, marriage, and love. Someone could have chosen SISI, but it’s not manly to bomb sissies.

ter September 15, 2014, 11:27 pm

Further, Agence-France Press has reported that the largely imaginary(in Syria, not expatriates) moderate rebels and the ISIS jihadists have agreed to a non-aggression pact (pending the effects of the bombing, I suppose), “a monitoring group said (last) Friday”. This is the “Syrian opposition” Obama intends to assist militarily, as he has been since they began their war on the Syrian people and government. Last February, a referendum on a revised constitution including retention of Assad, received 90% approval from those voting. According to the president, Assad’s is an illegitimate regime which is incapable of regaining popular confidence. Can anyone knowledgeable believe him? The monitoring group relaying this news was The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

Chris B. September 16, 2014, 4:38 pm


your use of facts will only serve to derail the discussion – please refrain from such endeavors, and proceed to your nearest red, white and blue blindfold distribution center.

Thank you,


gary leibowitz September 16, 2014, 5:24 pm

Better to go it alone? Invade countries with pathetic reasons such as “For American Interests”. How many years has it been with the “Mission Accomplished”. The standing argument after a decade of occupation is that we should remain in Iraq?

Not one person here can give me a clear definition of who our enemy is in the Middle East and who we can trust? What exactly would be YOUR strategy for permanently defeating terrorists in that region? Has our efforts so far worked? Why not and how to fix it?
Bottom line: We can’t and never have been able to “fix” these problems.

Knee jerk reaction from most here is to attack and ask questions later. Define a target seems to be enough for now.

Don’t look now but I thought Israel and the world would already be obliterated from the IRAN nukes by now? I thought it was a NATIONS intent to gain nukes as priority ONE. By everyone’s estimate they already have it. Have your children practice fire drills and hiding under their desks.

ter September 15, 2014, 11:04 pm

Frank and Mava have made the point, Frank unequivocally, that ISIS et al. are US creations. US government supplied them with arms from Libya, trained them in their use , and tactically instructed them (by special ops and British SAS) in how to ambush convoys then execute prisoners. Bases in Jordan, Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia were used. I suggest the aim of “bombs on the ground”, lots of lots of them, on ISIS in Iraq AND Syria is to carry out the mission planned for Labor Day week-end 2013. You remember–the “surgical strike” on Assad’s military. Pentagon planners devised a second “Shock and Awe” like 1991’s on Baghdad, from which that city has never recovered, to punish the alleged users of poison gas. Damascus would have been leveled. In practice, USAF’s surgery may be fairly compared to that of a blind, palsied inebriate attempting removal of his appendix with a cleaver. Fortunately, the American public shouted “No” to that undertaking. BO had been correctly informed there was no evidence the sarin gassing was accomplished by the Syrian army. In fact, it was bungled handling of gas canisters by the terrorists that released gas.

mava September 15, 2014, 9:28 pm

And here is the weird way in which playing along with the warmongers in government makes us all safer in the short run:

If we support further invasions, then there is no need for another false flag operation. If we reject the future interference with the outside affairs, then the same government who created 911 will feel compelled to do something bigger, a lot bigger.

At this point, if we stop the warmongers cold, it will cost us another false flag, which we may not be able to soberly live through, without giving in. It is like “getting off the needle” (quitting narcotics).

But, if we give them the green light, then it is like increasing the dose and frequency. Next time we will find ourselves in even tougher predicament, and the bets are going to have to be even larger.

My forecast is that most people will not explain why, but they will chose no pain in the short term. Imagine that there is a sequence of personas in your body, not just one. Why would you compel yourself to quit something, if you should decide to continue, it will be some next person to go through the pain of quitting?

Same here. Our short lifespan versus the continuity of government makes is absolutely certain that only bad decisions will be made and only short term benefits will be pursued by the public, while from the government, exactly the opposite will be true: the decisions will be made that benefit the expansion of the government long term, those that are “good” for the government.

This is why the empires fall, but I bet no book will tell you this…

mava September 15, 2014, 9:11 pm

Because the USG insists that it has some ridiculous right to keep things secret from its owners, the people, then there is absolutely no reason to expect that the USG will act in the interest of the people.

What proof is there that ISIS is not yet another child of CIA? There are none, and can’t be as long as there is the secrecy.

So, then the only logical assumption is that ISIS is the CIA, just like Alcaida.

Once this is assumed, then everything falls in place. The more ISIS -like groups are out there the easier it is to obtain bigger budgets. The bigger the budget, the bigger the parts of it that can be stolen directly, and the bigger the possible corrupted deals that could be done to benefit the CIA insiders indirectly.

Further, the existence of groups like ISIS, makes for a good reason for invasion and regime change, which currently, is of very much use, because the dollar is about to get lost.

Going back to the regular American, what does he care about any foreign problem? If some people decide to venture abroad, they should assume all the risks. And about those risks, exactly how many threats traveling Americans did face before US started to police the globe?

I am with Richard Maybury on this. All of this crap is un-American to begin with, and all of it has a cause in the government.

gary leibowitz September 15, 2014, 4:13 pm

ISIS estimated to have between 20,000 and 30,000 members. Iraq has 250,000 troops. Iran has well over 500,000 troops.

Someone please tell me why we are even there? The commie scare like in Vietnam? Name me ONE country or region that became stable after our “help”.

WMD’s? One other request. Tell me what the area would look like today had we not invaded Iraq.

We already invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, helped the rebels in Syria, fought and decimated Al-Qaida. How’s it going? The consensus is to continue to wage wars on another countries soil? Really?

The paranoia is so pervasive here. You don’t trust the Middle East to take care of it’s own problems and at the same time you don’t trust our own government. How can you ask our government to get involved in nation building when you distrust their motives on our soil? Tis a puzzlement.

Larry D September 15, 2014, 5:01 pm

You’re barking at the moon again, Garebear. Still smarting after Big O pulled a Woodrow Wilson on you? Try this website instead:


Give the President a piece of your earnest and formidable mind. Maybe someone on his staff will even care what you think. Then, move on to scolding HRC with your musings just to make sure she doesn’t get tough either.

Oregon September 15, 2014, 5:12 pm

And why can’t you trust our gov’t to handle 30,000 ISIS’ if you think they are trustworthy and capable of handling the money, the economy, and future of 400,000,000 Americans.

Oregon September 15, 2014, 5:33 pm

I need to revise my statement from last week Gary: Although I think you are a good analyst of markets, I think your politics and understanding of human nature is garbage.

gary leibowitz September 15, 2014, 6:59 pm

Really? How has it gone with the US against the Muslims in the past? Are we less loved or more with all the actions in the Middle East? Imagine the United States getting “help” from a Muslim country. Do I really need to emphasis this?

Step back and understand that we are seen as the aggressors. Can you honestly give me a reason we invaded Iraq to begin with? Empathy. Try reversing the eyes you see thru. You can’t dictate to the world how they should behave, what religion is acceptable, and what their form of government should be. Can you imagine any religious country demanding we abide by their rules?

No one ever answers my direct questions.
How has it gone with our meddling in other countries in the past? Name me just ONE where it worked.

This silly talk about “our enemy” is as much a farce as the WMD’s that Saddam supposedly had. Was a coincidence that we got concerned after 9/11 when we supplied all their nasty weapons in the fight with Iran. I guess we forgot and forgave ourselves. We play with other nations and prop up one dictator after the other just to feel “safe” that the turmoil stays on their home front. Syria? Who exactly should we support? Iraq? What political group are we supporting? Iran? Are we for or against the people living under a wacko regime? What ever happened to the nukes there?

Keep patrolling the world. it has NEVER worked. If the end game was to disrupt the region it has. Yet here we are going at it again? Insane! The nations surrounding the region has a much greater and immediate threat to their own safety. 50 years after we used Cuba as a playground for the rich and famous we are just seeing a glimmer of change. South America and our suppression of public uprisings has taken 50 years to settle. We meddle and throw words like “for the safety of American interests” as a slogan for intrusion into their lives.

IT HAS NEVER WORKED. Please counter this statement. Perhaps in the bizarro world it has.

In the end, like all the rhetoric and panic from this board things manage to settle themselves. Just look back on all your worries that the end is here. Gee, I would be dead 10 times over if even a scintilla came true. Has anyone read “The world according to Garp”? Similarities are striking.

You look for excuses to bathe yourselves in a feeling of despair. It seems that is the only emotion that keeps you going.

We had one terrorist group, thru our own ineptitude, managed to destroy 2 planes and 2 buildings on American soil in the past 50 years. All other democratic countries deal with this violence on a regular basis. How many years was the Irish conflict?
How many lives lost? If they can survive all their conflicts I suppose we can also.

How would the world react if China was to intervene on another countries behalf? We do it all the time because God and our one true religion is on our side. We always know what’s best for other nations.

BTW, there is a coalition and there will be other nations on the ground fighting the “godly” fight for truth justice and the American way. If you want to intervene I suggest you get rid of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. They are and will continue to disrupt the region without having it spill onto their soil.

Fear and distrust is the major theme running in all articles. Talk about repetitive!

bailintheboat September 16, 2014, 4:00 am

Some say that the Korean War, and Vietnam though not a clear winner, is what stopped communism’s advancement in it’s tracks. I tend to agree.

Oregon September 16, 2014, 6:03 am

Navin, I really wish you were smart enough to see my point; that I am against US gov’t involvement in other nations just as much as I am against big gov’t domestically, and for the same greedy, inefficient reasons. If you removed the blinders occasionally you could have saved yourself another 500 word diatribe.

I am surprised that you have so much time to write now that you are unemployed, I would have that you would be busy tending to the less privileged now that you don’t have an excuse not to.

“IT HAS NEVER WORKED. Please counter this statement.”
Germany. Japan.

gary leibowitz September 16, 2014, 5:07 pm

Oregon, you are using a defeated NATION in a world war as the argument that US intervention works? Perhaps you forgot that there were other nations fighting way before we entered. Perhaps you think the situation over the last 70 years is comparable? Please. Try again. Give me ONE example of US involvement AFTER WWII that remotely worked. You know an undeclared war or even one where we went it alone. Remember the attack on France and Canada when they didn’t cooperate with the war in Iraq? I hope no one here buys French fries?

Love the history lessons but seem to be stuck on a few points. Who is our allies in that region? Who do we train? Is there a clear strategy? How will the end game work out? This situation is as bad as it ever got in South America. no, much worse. How did that turn out? If you can’t answer these questions then perhaps we shouldn’t be there. I guess we can wing it.

As for your disparaging personal remarks, go F yourself. I never made any personal attacks to anyone. If you don’t like hearing my opinions or think I am too obstinate with my views place me on ignore. I don’t give a rats ass who listens or responds.

I am amazed that my outrageous liberal opinions have been correct thru this whole time. Your radical conspiracy theories on every aspect of our life is an extreme form of paranoia. Just go thru the minutiae of doom/gloom world ending opinions by this group and tell me which of us is obstinate. To declare that everything in our lives is being controlled and manipulated for evil intent can only be credible if you have evidence. To suggest that human beings, even powerful evil ones, can hid every aspect of their craft for decades is a fantasy. No one is smart enough. For every evil doer in an organization or group the possibility of being discovered multiplies exponentially. For instance: the insistence that world powers are preventing markets from crashing and civilization from crumbling begs the question HOW? I am not talking about what is transparent, like purchasing bonds, propping up banks, changing rules to prevent homes from crashing. These are known entities. You can debate its long term effectiveness and that is a real debate. What you can’t do is state earnings are fake. Hidden agendas that never see the light. Pandemics, permanent rift in the oceans due to offshore drilling, nuclear holocaust by rouge nations, 9/11 conspiracies, terrorist groups and hidden moles in the United States ready to destroy our way of life.

My repetitive arguments counter everyone else’s repetitive arguments but you only see me as being repetitive. FUNNY! Exclude my posts and just cut and paste all others written words from any random article, jumble them up, and regurgitate them out on any other article. You would never know they weren’t meant for that particular article.

Oregon September 16, 2014, 10:56 pm

Nice Navin. You seem happy in your retirement.

Oregon September 17, 2014, 5:31 pm

Navin, you said US intervention, “… HAS NEVER WORKED. Please counter this statement.”

I did, then you change it to, “Try again… AFTER WWII”.

How about Korea? South Korea is doing pretty well, and we’ve been there the whole time.

Also love how you went on the bellicose offensive with, “Your radical conspiracy theories on every aspect of our life is an extreme form of paranoia.” I like that the best. I would like you to back that up with even one statement I have ever made that satisfies your position.

I’ll give you one more history lesson Gary, if I may call you that. The foundation of this great country was built with aggression, occupation, genocide, and often lacking a clear strategy. This country we live in is the largest, most successful, aggressive occupation the world has ever seen. I am not saying I like it, agree with it, or would want to continue it, just that’s the way it is. But don’t worry, you have said many times that we can just vote it to be different, right?

If you want to be a part of a more peaceful empire perhaps you should go join Mario in China, where they are slowly taking over the planet without firing a shot.

mario September 18, 2014, 10:16 am

Indeed Oregon…

mario September 18, 2014, 10:34 am

Gary this where I have to side with the gang that wants to hang you by your thumbs. Oregon did NOT say he was in favor of US interventions and your on his ass like a cheap suit rambling on and on about it… You seem to completely miss or ignore some very fundamental, known, extremely [email protected]@cked up realities and somehow twist and rationalize them away. Try more deliberately pondering and parsing what you’re reading before writing another diatribe in reply….

Cheers, Mario

redwilldanaher September 18, 2014, 3:01 pm

Once again this: mario September 18, 2014 at 10:34 am

is why Mario retains credibility as a somewhat regular voice of dissent and El Garo, well, remains El Garo…

gary leibowitz September 18, 2014, 6:37 pm

Mario I do see where I lumped everyone’s opinions into a response by Oregon. For that I apologize. I get paranoid when I respond to Ricks articles. There is usually a ganging up approach. Oregon I do see that you never mentioned need for intervention.

As for equating WWII to all non-declared wars since, there is no comparison. Korea is a mess. North Korea along with Iran are wild cards. You have no idea if their insane dictators will trigger a world war.

Sorry but there is no intervention by us that worked without a full world commitment. It only happened in WWII.

The Middle East is a much more complex region than South America ever was. I will tell you straight out that no amount of U.S. intervention will change peoples religious and political affiliation. You can’t force an alien life style on a region. it must find its own path. The paranoia in the U.S. against Muslims have never been worse. Yet here we are trying to democratize Muslim nations to emulate our Christian ways. When we allowed South America to find its own path the result was a “normalcy” of trade between these countries.

Oregon, why you insist upon calling me Navin I will never know. As for our own situation we were not terrorist, but revolutionaries. There is a distinction. We never wavered from the political frameworks of England. We broke away from our Mother country because of economic reasons. The wealthy land owners were being taxed unfairly by England. It was a war started by the very well to do and did not have general citizen commitment to the cause. In fact our nations government and laws are based on their doctrines. Once you start with a religious polarizing government policy, no understanding of citizen empowerment, and a long history of changing dictatorial rule, you will never be able to use external means to change it. Has to come from within.

Brief history of Japan before WWII. From an oligarchy to parliament system at the turn of the century. Economy deteriorated as the military took control. Radial discrimination added to the problem. We stripped them of military power since WWII. You can interpret that as a successful U.S. intervention. I exclude that since their nation was shamed into defeat and forced to change over many decades by an inclusive Allied Force.

Germany had similar history thrown at it. Economic sanctions and punitive measures were in place after WWI. Economic bad times resulted in the Nazi party. The end result was the same, dismantling their dictatorial military regime with decades of money and combined free world support.

In both cases it took a world war and total stripping of their military power along with decades of policy building. Has this ever happened since?

We tried for a decade in Iraq but since their political structure is based on an exclusionary religious foundation, it became obvious that will never work.

Oregon September 19, 2014, 4:33 pm

Navin, this is a perfect example of why I call you Navin. The aggression, occupation, and genocide I refer to in these United States has less to do with England and more to do with the native inhabitants of this continent. You do know there were people here before the pilgrims, right? You do know there was a ‘Hearts and Minds’ campaign that got a little bloody, right? I’ll have to assume you don’t have any native blood and therefore can’t see this truth backward through your own eyeballs, or whatever b.s. you talk.

I am not complaining, just saying it is so. There are truths that exist outside the truths in American textbooks, but one must look for them outside American textbooks.

For someone who knows it all, you don’t know shit from Shinola.

I still think you are a good analyst of the markets though.

Andy Gutterman September 15, 2014, 2:22 pm

I’ve always been fascinated by the ineffective use of terrorism by the terrorists. When 911 happened I wondered why they didn’t follow it up with a few well place gasoline tankers exploding in malls. A few events like that would have shut down the economy overnight.

On the other hand if their motive is to get us to piss off as many people as possible by invading other countries…..


Redwilldanaher September 19, 2014, 12:18 am

Except that we’ve always been at war with…

bailintheboat September 15, 2014, 10:48 am

The terrorists are quite happy keeping us engaged on as many fronts as possible. One war to the next. That’s the way they operate, that is their intention, the whole game plan. Saul Alinsky might have thought of that himself.

John Jay September 15, 2014, 5:46 am

I find it very hard to believe that DC has been taken by surprise by ISIS and their volunteer marauders from Western Nations. For as many CIA/NSA/NRO etc. Spooks with local agents in the MENA, not to mention spy satellites in orbit, and the ubiquitous Hellfire equipped Drones I will argue that DC knew and approved of this whole new Terrorist Threat.
Approved it at the very least, if they are not outright running the show.

The smoking gun for me was that video of that long column of brand new white pickup trucks with heavy machine guns mounted on the beds.
With all the U S Intelligence in the MENA, not to mention KSA, Mossad, Egyptian, Turkish, and even Russian agents over there?
And no one noticed or shared the news?
Am I supposed to believe all those pickup trucks and heavy weapons were bought on ebay?

I am certain large shipments of trucks and heavy weapons are very carefully tracked.
And that column of pickups would have turned into the Highway of Death from the Iraq war, unless…………
It was all part of another clumsy, bloody, CIA type operation, with God only knows what goals in mind.

When was the last time we got the whole truth from DC on any subject?
To see the future, look to the past.
Gulf of Tonkin, Laos, Cambodia, Iran Contra, Fast and Furious, POWs abandoned after Korea and Vietnam.
Always a flimsy cover story to cover the real deal.
So be it.

Now, to lighten things up, here are a few funny comments from ZH!

Caviar Emptor

After every human has died from the biowar, the WS algos will still trade with each other every day. As programmed.

Grouchy Marx

In 1968, a newspaper cost a quarter, Sunday edition. Now, that same quarter will buy you a newspaper company.
But the truth? You won’t find that available at any price.


When I was a young man, in 1875, I would buy twelve tins of RJ Reynolds “George Washington” brand cut plug tobacco for a silver dollar!

Mike September 15, 2014, 5:07 am

Interesting article Rick.
My sense is that is that Obama’s focus is on his legacy first and foremost. Furthermore, it seems (at least for now) that he will do just about anything he can to avoid sending troops into combat so as not to have his legacy include leaving office having brought us into the middle of a war.


I think you’re right, Mike. Concerning his legacy, such as it is, my prayers are for a GOP majority strong enough to repeal it. RA

Jason S September 15, 2014, 5:24 pm

Rick, the GOP is just the flip-side of the coin. They want smaller, less intrusive government about as much as a vegan wants to sit down on the leather upholstery at a steakhouse.

They are all myopic narcissists with the collective wisdom of Wyle E Coyote and a plague on both of their houses.

Rick Ackerman September 16, 2014, 9:54 am

Yeah, sure. And the GOP would have put Sotomayor and Kagan on the Supreme Court, and created their own version of Obamacare.

Jason S September 16, 2014, 4:57 pm

No, they would not have but they would have had to make changes to the healthcare system. Those changes would have entailed the GOP accepting wheelbarrows full of healthcare corp. lobbyist money and allowing those companies to “write” a different healthcare system law than what we have now but which benefits them as much. Would the hypothetical law be better? Maybe, maybe not. But the legislation process is polluted and the politicians are self-serving regardless of party.


Yes, Jason, I agree that all politicians are lying, vainglorious scum. As Mencken once said, every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under. I vote Republican/Libertarian nonetheless because even if most of them are almost (but not quite) as stupid, ineffectual and cowardly as their Democratic counterparts, they are not evil; nor, by and large, do they think that Big Government should run our lives.

I cannot think of a single Republican who has held office during my lifetime who was more dangerous to the few freedoms we still enjoy as Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and some other Democratic stalwarts. Not a single Republican voted for Obamacare — the worst piece of U.S. legislation ever enacted — and that is reason enough to give them the benefit of the doubt over Democrats. RA

Jason S September 18, 2014, 12:43 am

Rick, I totally agree with you and too vote Republican because they suck less but I wish for a different option than evil vs. ambivalent.

gary leibowitz September 15, 2014, 5:00 am

First off this whole mess started with us “getting involved” where we had no reason to, in a region that had no stable government. Mission accomplished indeed. That administration managed to erupt the whole region. I suppose that was their plan? Who knows but I guess our involvement in South America in the 70’s taught us nothing. The even sillier notion is that this is our war. Not even close. To decide to become police and executioner for the world requires us to have clean hands, and good intentions. It even assumes there are governments that want us there. How is the nation building in Iraq going?

Here are the facts. The region absolutely needs to clean up its own mess or we will never get out of the region. Our continued mopping up of failed government policies will never change those policies. ISIS is smaller than even Al-Qaida was. Not even a remote stretch of the imagination could allow the United States to declare war simply because there is a possibility they will attack us on our soil. Sorry but that weak excuse can be used for mass genocide when ever or where ever we go. Perhaps you are forgetting that they are a group with no friendly nation, no allegiance, no country. Sure they get support for raising havoc in the region thanks to some Saudis.

Finally, this group will be gone in 2 years time. Perhaps another group will take its place. A few thousand raving maniacs with no formal doctrine and no chance of forming its own government. If we don’t step aside and let the countries that have the most to lose fight their own battle we will ALWAYS be running interference for countries that are not exactly our friends. Syria? Iran? Turkey? Are these the countries we are fighting to protect? Even Iraq’s religious exclusion in government isn’t exactly going as planned. This region is a mess. We can not influence the outcome no matter how much we try. I do believe the surrounding countries have more to lose. Iran could very well fight off ISIS. If they could have hundreds of thousands of troops fight Iraq all those decades they certainly can defeat ISIS. Iran is Shia, ISIS Sunni. Hello? Please explain to me why we are involved? Because we stared something we can’t finish? Let Iran attack Saudis for funding this. Let the countries in that region find their own path. Have we not learnt anything? How did the Christian Crusades go?

The argument that ISIS is a threat to the United States is as foolish as stating we had legitimate reasons to kill Saddam. Where was the international condemnation of us when it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. No invasion, no silly notion that the phantom weapons of mass destruction would be launched against us. Heck just look at Russia, North Korea, and Pakistan with their weapons and tell me they are less of a threat.

I would love to hear just one historian explain the reasons why ISIS is a direct threat to the United States. They threaten the Middle East. We lived with fanatics and despicable dictators in that region for hundreds of years. You really think a band of religious fanatics that can’t even make peace with the majority of Sunnis is going to be a major problem for us?


My essay addresses each of your comments, Gary. You need to re-read it, in particular the sentence about stopping ISIS before they grow even more formidable. Which they will. It’s scant comfort to think Europe will have to deal with them first. RA

gary leibowitz September 15, 2014, 5:21 am

Mario, glad you responded to my post from the last article. The flaw with your argument is not that government’s stake is so high. I agree it is. The problem is assuming governments can control all aspects of the economy. They would have to in order to prevent another crash. If the world economies fail to generate enough credit to offset the debt, or if they fail to force inflation back with real wage growth than the game is over. Investors would panic at the first sign that companies profits are evaporating. I have never heard of markets staying levitated when their earnings dry up. My argument is one of entropy. When one side of the equation gets too big it becomes unstable and eventually has to be released.

You place too much faith that governments are smarter than the rest of us. When they get it right they can cause a powerful upward trend. Even if they do everything right they can’t control the dynamics of world economies. War breaking out, famine, individual or corporate greed, political gyrations. Sorry but it is impossible to have a scenario where we no longer have extremes in economic cycles. It has never happened before, and will never in the future.

redwilldanaher September 15, 2014, 7:47 pm

Mario explained to you why this time is different. You responded with more nothing. Great read. Thanks.

gary leibowitz September 16, 2014, 6:50 pm

You make assertions that they WILL be a threat to us. We already went down that road with Saddam. He was as much a threat to us as any of the dictators in that region. Lets start with Syria and Iran. Not a solid argument to place troops on the ground. Paranoia creates reason enough to attack. Nothing in their actions suggest anything other than they want us to stay out of their affairs. It is a fight that has to be settled in that region. Have we found any sign or thwarted their attempts here on our soil? They are not a country. Terrorists can’t be fought as if they have a home, political system to overthrow, or even arm the opposing people. To equate their horrific response to foreigners as a pretext for war is as dangerous as it gets. I do believe Russia has been caught red handed invading another country. Please tell me why terrorists should be attacked on foreign soil without any direct allegiance to any country there, while Russia can attack a sovereign nation?

How can you make a connection to their actions attacking our way of life? Should we go to war with all militia groups here in the United States? Send ground troops in Mississippi? Destroy Nazi and KKK? Silly argument. if we can’t do it here why are we there? Perhaps OIL and other self-interests play a part?

Sorry but the what if scenario doesn’t justify action. With such a tenuous excuse we can find reasons to attack any nation. How has a decade of involvement gone for us there? Why can’t we learn from history?

Frank September 15, 2014, 3:11 am

In fact the CIA trained and equipped the Syrian “rebels” of al-Nusra, ISIS (al CIAda long before this) in the first place! In order to create a force that will ultimately be able to destroy the Persians, sorry, I mean the Iranians. These wars are about protecting the Federal Reserve’s petrodollar. Which countries have dared to venture off the petrodollar reservation and which countries are the one’s we’ve bombed or about to bomb? Iraq (Bush), Libya (Obomber), Syria (Obomber) and very soon to be Iran and Russia. Even the Saudi’s are at the point of giving up on the petrodollar.

The Obomber’s a puppet just like Bush was. The U.S. overthrew a democratically elected gov’t of Ukraine and imposed its own gov’t with Yats the Israeli, in order to pressure the Russians. Too bad that instead of ISIS being the tip of the spear against the Iranians, instead it will be the tip of the Russian and Chinese spear, tromping on Jerusalem for 42 months (in the outer court) and forming the Russian left flank. The Jihadi’s will move up into the soft underbelly of Europe, Greece, Italy, Spain and France. The Russians will cross into eastern Europe and overtake Germany. The Obomber’s already allowed the enemies of America into the gates. They’re here. If you think this is just about ISIS then you should stick to financial investing. This is about a global government, and one of the biggest enemies is the well-armed American middle class which will be destroyed. At the very least take a few of them with you when you go, okay?

Rick Ackerman September 16, 2014, 7:50 am

I hadn’t expected this discussion thread to degenerate so quickly into conspiracy theories and little else. To borrow Rodney King’s line, can’t we all just stay on topic? Let me refresh it with three key questions: Do you think ISIS means business? If so, do you think they will eventually threaten the Western world? How can we stop them?

For your information, I will be switching to a ‘Question of the Week’ format with the September 29 edition. With perhaps only a dozen regulars posting here these days, each flogging the same old arguments and mostly ignoring the essay itself, writing a weekly commentary has ceased to be worth the effort. If the new format engenders little but navel-gazing, then so be it.


Postscript update: My marketing guy tells me I have to keep the commentaries coming. My compromise will be to make them more trading-oriented.

Chris B. September 16, 2014, 4:24 pm

It always bothers me when a supposedly intelligent individual flippantly brushes aside another person’s assertions as “conspiracy theories”. Especially when many of yesterday’s conspiracy theories are today’s conspiracy facts. Frank’s worldview may be considered cynical by some, but many of his claims are verifiable and only require a willingness on one’s part to seek out the information. Sometimes stepping outside your cozy environment is the only way see things as they truly are. However, leaving your comfort zone can be a life changing experience, and not necessarily for the better.


With just a few exceptions, including the creature from Jekyll Island, I’m too cynical to believe in most of the myriad conspiracy theories that get bandied around. Why? Because they implicitly ascribe cunning, know-how and extraordinary success to agents, most particularly the CIA, who couldn’t rig a Monopoly game. RA

Andy Gutterman September 15, 2014, 2:39 am

We should make a trade. Hire the Peshmerga to go after ISIS in return for giving the Kurds the land in Iraq that once belonged to Kurdistan, thus giving the Kurds something they have wanted for a long time. Independence.

I think you would see them go after ISIS with a vengeance, if they thought it would win them independence from Iraq.


Hidden Pivot Graduate
Help Page

Click here
for a help page needed as a Hidden Pivot Graduate.

Keep Your
Skills Current

Click here
for a special deal for graduates of the Hidden Pivot Course who want to stay on the cutting edge


Start a Subscription
Lost my password

Seminar Information page.

Tuesday, March 5, 2019

The consistent accuracy of Rick Ackerman’s forecasts is well known in the trading world, where his Hidden Pivot Method has achieved cult status. Rick’s proprietary trading/forecasting system is easy to learn, probably because he majored in English, not rocket science. Just one simple but powerful trick -- managing the risk of an ongoing trade with stop-losses based on ‘impulse legs’ – can be grasped in three minutes and put to profitable use immediately. Quite a few of his students will tell you that using ‘impulsive stops’ has paid for the course many times over.

Another secret Rick will share with you, “camouflage trading,” takes more time to master, but once you get the hang of it trading will never be the same. The technique entails identifying ultra-low-risk trade set-ups on, say, the one-minute bar chart, and then initiating trades in places where competition tends to be thin.

Most important of all, Rick will teach you how to develop market instincts (aka “horse sense”) by observing the markets each day from the fixed vantage point that only a rigorously disciplined trading system can provide.

The three-hour Hidden Pivot Course is offered live each month. If it’s more convenient, you can take it in recorded form at your leisure, as many times as you like. The course fee includes “live” trading sessions (as opposed to hypothetical ‘chalk-talk’) every Wednesday morning, access to hundreds of recorded hours of tutorial sessions, and access to an online library that will help you achieve black-belt mastery of Hidden Pivot trading techniques.

The next webinar will be held on Tuesday, March 5. Click below to register or get more information.

Knowledge Base Link