Randi Rhodes Forums

POST EDITED BY BUSHWA TO ADD:

We're trying to get back to new members having to post a minimum number of times before being permitted to create threads, but we don't want to delete new posts from new members just because they're newcomers.

So, for the time being, when they create a new thread about "Today's Show" (whatever day that happens to be), we can put them here!


Several callers on Monday asked "why are we attacking Libya"? Most said, its about the OIL.

Nope. "Thereitis" mentioned this in a post about the attack on Libya, but, the post seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle of debating on the morals of the attack.

Its about the W-A-T-E-R.

Libya sits on top of a HUGE aquifer of ancient water.

You can live without oil. But, no one can live without clean, potable water.
Check out:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4814988.stm

Randi, Pan Am 103 was NOT a British airliner. Pan Am was an American company. I've heard you say at least twice today that it was a British flight/airliner. Yes, the flight was originating at London Heathrow and blown up over Scotland. But the primary target was an American airline and the vast majority of those who died onboard were Americans. I understand your overall point about Kaddafi retaliating for the U.S. strike launched from the U.K. but just wanted to set the record straight on the flight that he blew up.

Well, I'd have to amend my previous post about Lybia's OIL v. WATER. It "might" be about the WATER!

Like the rest of us, I find myself wondering why, when there are so many countries where their people are treated badly, the US seems to concentrate "intervention activities" mainly on those countries with large deposits of oil or other minerals.

Many nations have risen, and fallen, based on their water resources for the last thousands of years. Oil is the "new" big power, but, water is still key to survival and industrial activities throughout the world.

(But she's still on the air, and that's the good thing. I guess it doesn't matter much where the show originates).

Maybe for old times' sake she should play the Stereomud theme at the opening for her first show back. Except people might get flashbacks to the Bush years.

Welcome to any and all newbies! Dont be newbies for long, ok!

Lots of new posters on the RIP Simon thread. Kinda comforting to see people coming to post out of empathy instead of outrage (or faux outrage) for a change.

Why is Randi moving back to Florida from DC? Is Howard moving with her?

Randi has it partly right. Her metaphor of the shredding of good loans with bad loans and securitizing them is partly correct. It is not nearly as complicated as it has been presented. In fact it is quite simple. If you do not know what MERS is, you should look up this criminal enterprise. The letters stand for Mortgage Electronic Registration Service. Initially, Mers was alleged to have been formed because of the high rate of real estate loan refinancing and the need to repeatedly register the new deeds of trust and promissory notes. A mortgager would register the note with Mers. Mers was supposed to give the loan a number and electronically keep track of the loan. Now when Mers registered the note with the county recorder, it would not state the actual owner on the note. It would state that MERS was the beneficiary. This is illegal because MERS never put up a penny for the loan. Mers is also a corporation registered in another state and thus had no standing when it came to foreclosing on a property. Furthermore, the identity of the investors who belonged to MERS is hidden. There are a number of scams that have been run using MERS.

No this is where Randi had it partially correct. Yes there was shredding of the promissory note. but it was not metaphorical. It was literal. When a mortgagor registered the loan with MERS, MERS would make an electronic copies of the promissory notes and actually shred the ORIGINAL promissory note. Then they would sell the promissory note over again one, 2, 3 or more times. Each time they sold the note to a different investor, they would sell it for the full value of the note.This is why there are at times 2 or 3 investors who show up to take back a property in foreclosure. Because there is no original promissory note, the servicer of the loan cannot legally foreclose on the property and there is a cloud on the title of the property because of these shenanigans. The only way to get clear title is to resell the property. In this way the property will receive a new deed. This is why banks would rather sell the property in foreclosure than modify an existing loan.

so nobody should leave their homes, i have been thinking that for a while now...fuck wall street, they are all criminals anyway, note that not one has gone to jail, jesus, that is fucking sick

Hi-real quick this may have a thread. Why are the republican and business interest wanting to end Medicare and Medcaid? There is a very important study conducted by Emery University in the early 1990's. What it stated plainly, is that the private insurance business has a failed future because of the implementation of these social programs. This is a very important study. I found it while looking with a better search engine at a college in 2004. I can't find it any longer. This study points to why they must destroy Medicare and Medicaid.

Interesting, ebonee1. Thanks for posting. Do you, or did you work in the mortgage industry?

I don't know of the study you're speaking, per se, but several studies have shown the main reason private health insurers were afraid of the public option is the same reason they were, 40 years ago, afraid of Medicare and Medicaid. They're far more efficient. The levels of waste, redundancy, and inefficiency in private health insurance are gargantuan. In comparison, Medicare and Medicaid are very lean, tight machines with extremely low overhead. Another falsehood of privatization shot down...

This is exactly the talking point the Democrats should be shouting out loud b/c I can't hear what they're saying (are they saying anything?) You stated it so clearly and easy for some of the under-informed I live among to understand. I'm gonna be a copycat!!!! Thanks.

Hi,
When Randi came back from the break about 1:30pm today, a few bars from song was being played. I really like this song, and I first heard it last year on tv, as the theme for Chase Bank commercials. It's got a harmonica playing, and later into the song there are singers. Help me out.

So, is Obama's sudden fighting stance right now something we can trust? Or is he just galvanizing his base for re-election? I don't know... I voted for him and was a *huge* huge supporter of his. However, I've been disappointed by his capitulating to the republican party on so many issues.. And yes, I know he's got a tough job, and has done some very good things - AND I'm still disappointed. The disappointment began when health care for all went under. I know that regardless, I'll be voting for him in 2012 - what else can sane people actually do?

Sarah