Posted on 10/10/2009 8:18:53 PM PDT by RobinMasters
William White predicted the approaching financial crisis years before 2007's subprime meltdown. But central bankers preferred to listen to his great rival Alan Greenspan instead, with devastating consequences for the global economy.
William White had a pretty clear idea of what he wanted to do with his life after shedding his pinstriped suit and entering retirement.
White, a Canadian, worked for various central banks for 39 years, most recently serving as chief economist for the central bank for all central bankers, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), headquartered in Basel, Switzerland.
Then, after 15 years in the world's most secretive gentlemen's club, White decided it was time to step down. The 66-year-old approached retirement in his adopted country the way a true Swiss national would. He took his money to the local bank, bought a piece of property in the Bernese Highlands and began building a chalet. There, in the mountains between cow pastures and ski resorts, he and his wife planned to relax and enjoy their retirement, and to live a peaceful existence punctuated only by the occasional vacation trip. That was the plan in June 2008.
(Excerpt) Read more at spiegel.de ...
Ping.
Thanks for the post.
ping
Like a Greek tradgedy...
Thanks for post.
So did a guy with a sign on a street corner in downtown Detroit. Uncanny!
bttt
How much of all this misery was caused by a few in Congress and the Senate? Their pushing of low prime loans to those that could not afford them for housing along with their defenders ACORN and associated groups that pressured banks for those same loans...and hope to continue their efforts toward the same outcome I see...
Well, can the complete international banking failures be blames on just a few Congressmen with greedy ideals? Maybe Dodd, Rangel, and the gay guy (can’t remember his name).
That might actually be true... Their insistance of loans to those that could not afford them along with the push by ACORN and associates against banks created this mess. The banks then sold these assets (so to speak) to other banks and mortgage houses to make money themselves. Who is to blame?
Well, I would have to make our government to blame for the whole mess - international and all! They were the greedy ones who tried to force banks to make ill-backed loans which they later sold as “government backed” paper to financial institutions. Our own government is the cause of this major failure - not regulations as they would insist upon...
This is a great article! There were many people who were sounding the alarm about different aspects of meltdown.
Here is another link which is very lengthy and has numerous fascinating links within it. Amazing how far back the roots of this crisis go and how many people were ignored.
http://www.crashopedia.com/index.php/Main_Page
parsy, who hopes you enjoy
You are ignoring reality. Nobody was forcing these banks to do squat. They couldn’t write the loans fast enough. There were high fees, and they could money reselling them, and off the derivatives. The reason why this is important is that Congress is trying to some degree to fix things, and Wall Street would like nothing better than to stop them.
Heres a good link to a Wall Street guy who figured out the con game Wall Street was running:
parsy, who hopes you enjoy
Well, maybe you missed ACORN and associates outside of these banks protesting that they did not loan to minorities! Maybe you also missed that fact that Congress passed laws that focused on loans made to minorities and of course those that could not afford homes. Maybe you missed most of the last decade!
Yes, banks made the most of Governments “do it” programs so they could also make money - just who made that possible with low or no interest loans and forced loans to minorities regardless of credit ratings?
I doubt that you really looked into the cause of this crisis but rather took too many left leaning comments to heart.
If you really want to determine the cause, just find out how many of those loans that failed were because the individuals that got the loans were not qualified or were promised things that they did not qualify for.
Yes, if the government guarantees loans to individuals, most all banks will be happy to provide those loans...now if they fail - go the the government for help. That is what has happened with government guaranteed loans - same as those that Barny Frank has...
I was b*tching about bad loans back in 2001. I actually changed parties on March 15, 2001 and posted it on FR. But read the links I provided. Its a lot more than the simplistic “the banks twisted the poor widdle bank’s arm.” From Issa’a GOP report from house, CRA loans were never more than 3% of originations. The CRA fault seems to be that doc standards were first lowered with those loans, and the lenders were pleasantly surprised by low default rate. The default rate shot up thought when middle class and rich started getting loans. Not CRA ones. They had enough savvy to tell banks to “stuff it” when they got upside down.
Please read the links. Do you want one to Issa’a Report?
parsy, who has read up on this stuff
I really don’t need to read those kind of excuses again...yes, the banks and all capitalistic enterprises were to fault...but why is that? It was because the government made it a risk free enterprise! If you don’t understand that than I am wasting my breath. Fannie Mae and associated groups that were backed by government monies made all of that possible!!
4 am bump! ;-)
You’re not wrong. Government had a big role in it. But not just thru CRA alone. Gov’t also de-regulated some of the things that might have limited or prevented the meltdown. There is plenty of blame to go around and Wall Street is the bigger villain by far. You are cutting off a full understanding of the problem when you stop at gov’t.
parsy, who encourages you to read some of these things
Well, actually deregulation played a very small part! The major part of the problem was the simple fact that regulation was not actually DONE! Government usually has no decent (knowledgeable) people in charge of regulation so just how are they to perform their jobs! What, leave it to Congress - those idiots, especially when it involves economics!-—geez.
As to the Fed, FTC, and most other groups, just who do you think was qualified to regulate? Most were just biding their time and collecting their pensions.... Regulation for the most part is a JOKE!!
So...now that we know that government regulation is just a joke, how do we regulate rampant criminal activity? Well, I really don’t know - it is a major problem but I don’t see an easy solution. Politics is too corrupt to solve it - what is your answer?
By the way...those things were deregulated by “Barny Frank” so that those unfortunate individuals could buy houses without the necessary down payment or decent credit... Then he made sure to pass laws to insure that minorities could own houses without credit...
Re-set the regulations on Glass Steagall. Put derivatives on exchanges. Ban some outright. Set positions and limits on energy commodities. Set leveraging limits. Enforce consumer protections. Ease up on cram down laws to keep lending more real. Make bankruptcy easier. No more bailouts.
parsy, who would start there
Blaming Wall Street is like blaming the sharks for showing up when you go chumming for dolphins.
Well, sorry...don’t understand your statements - not exactly an economics major here.... Assuming that you are correct in your requests - just what will that gain us? With the political forces against all capitalist remedies..just how to you think that this could occur?
Actually, most of your regulations/limitations would not do so much to limit the problem as to qualify it to a limited degree. If you really wanted to prevent the run-away abuse of most of the problems - just make it a loss for those that participate in it - that is capitalism.
With housing problems, that means that those that lose money in the market actually lose their money...no government interference! The same with any and all stock market activity. Keep the GOVERNMENT OUT of BUSINESS! You might be surprised at the changes that occur...
Of course that means no GM interference, no Bank interference, no Mortgage interference, etc.... You would be surprised at the changes that might occur...
Yeah, but the sharks are still sharks whether you chum or not. The sharks should have been kept on a shorter leash. Read that crashopedia link and you will be amazed how this thing happened. That portfolio article is by the guy who wrote Liars’ Poker. The scheme was criminal in its implementation.
parsy, who can send you more.
Think about it. I know it's a tortured metaphor, but think about it. Think ecology.
Me neither and I am still learning and have a bunch more to understand. But some parts of it are simple. Gramm, Greenspan, and some of Obama’s crew should have known better than to do what they did. They relied on the market to police itself and that just isn’t going to happen over the long haul. never has. never will.
Like the article this thread references, rising asset prices should have been a clue. Putting Glass-Steagall back means banks can be depository banks, like for human beings or they can be investment banks that do all the high finance stuff and are riskier. That means they will not be too big to fail, and if they do they don’t take the whole system with them.
On top of all this, there were side bets on the economy by people who had no interest in the transactions. Like insurance. But whereas the only people who are interested in insuring our house is us and the mortgage company, they let anybody bet on the deal. Imagine if an ex-wife had a bet that your house was going to burn down. And most of this seems to have been off exchanges where nobody knew who had what.
You just have to read up this stuff and those links are good places to start. I’m still trying to understand all the machinations.
parsy.
I am trying to think but I am getting sleepy.
parsy who says it is 3:00 here....
Pffft
So many are out of touch with the level of corruption within the whole central banking system.
“The Creature from Jekyll Island” is one of the few publications that sheds light on the darkness.
We’ve been set up, this is all no accident, and the bankers really don’t give a damn.
Well, you said the sharks should be kept on a leash. Sharks on a leash? Is this a sound idea, even metaphorically?
... sleep? HAH!
Well, that is not exactly overflowing with detail... actually, most were anxious to make deals and money on transactions during this period. The problem is that most of the profit was bogus (through bad real estate deals or the selling of such), so it really does still go back to those the allowed this to happen.
You keep looking at the results of these actions rather that the cause. Yes, there were lots of unscrupulous actions by banks and other institutions because of this. You unfortunately keep blaming those that took advantage of it rather than those that caused it.
I still say that 90% of the problem was government active action in the real estate market which caused banks to actively take on those poor risk loans (because they were backed by government) and eventually put themselves at risk because of these actions. This in turn caused a downturn in the general stock market (because so many large firms invested in sordid real estate loans) which caused a major crash or depression.
Fie on you! I am calling 1-800 INVENTION as we speak, and I bet I get rich with this idea! Leashes for sharks.
parsy, who says cut taxes as soon as I get rich!
Yeah, but that is kinda like a thief blaming his crime on the police not stopping him. Gov’t fell down on the job. (See SEC and Madoff) But that don’t mean gov’t shouldn’t try. Thats why I raise so much heck about this. Attitudes about regulations needs to change from “not necessary” to “absolutely necessary.”
parsy, who is going to bed
Oh, BTW, that crashopedia one is full of detail thru its links.
parsy, who is drooping
Wow... I can’t believe that you are taking the Government failures so lightly - they are the supreme law enforcement group after all... If the supreme law enforcement of the land fails - who do you complain to?
You are sort of right - but fail to see the overall picture and failure of government! This is catastrophic! You just don’t see it yet!
My gosh...Regulations by the ultimate authority (our stupid government) is your aspirations... Heaven help you...
You know...while I was trying to understand YOU... I have to confess that you are a bit of a strange character. An unknown regardless of your long association with Free Republic. I wonder just where you are on most subjects - at this point.
From looking at your previous comments, I would suggest that you are a middle of the road Republican who supports McClain. If I’m wrong, please correct me.
With that, that means that you are NOT a conservative, but a moderate that is trying to belong here.. Where do you belong on the political spectrum - you get to decide?
I don’t take the failures lightly. That is why I gig the GOP every chance I get about their gov’t nihilism. The failure of the police to do their job means you start whomping up on the police. The GOP, however, and is expressed here ad infinitum, don’t like regulations and so they sit around like bumps on a pickle and massively fail to do their job.
And the more they spout off about the “free market” being able to police itself, the more the GOP peanut gallery claps them on the back. It is sick and twisted. If the GOP hasn’t figured out yet that if you leave the market alone they will bankrupt everyone, then they are living in Ayn Rand Fantasy Land.
Read that crashopedia piece. It ought to make you sick how your representatives failed to do their job, which consists of sensible regulation.
Here’s a thought. Quit giving the sorry *ss GOP slackers a free ride. Write them a letter like this:
“Dear Sir,
I have been a Republican for x years. I am sick of hearing you spout off about bad the gov’t is when you are either too stupid, too lazy, or too bought and paid for to do your job. You better get your sorry smug butt to work regulating Wall Street, or next election I am going to vote for whoever runs against you. Do you get it! No more of this no-regulating b*llsh*t.
Sincerely,
Your name”
Imagine the effect of thousands of these letters to the brain dead, knuckle dragging GOP incumbents from their conservative base. From their supporters who they have been shining on for years. I bet you can get their attention.
The democrats ain’t no rocket scientists either, but when one party is just dead set against regulating the Sacred Cow of Capitalism, you gotta expect meltdowns like we just had.
parsy, who had breakfast and is full of energy
On March 15, 2001, I quit the GOP after 30 years and became a democrat when Bush signed off on the Bankruptcy Reform Bill. I posted it here on FR. I thought the bad lenders were being unfairly protected at the cost of real human beings. I even channeled up Ayn Rand from the dead to do post about how lousy the bill was.
Now, 8 1/2 years later we have people like Karl Denninger saying the same thing. Someone asked me why I became a Republican in the first place and my answer was “ because George Wallace got shot.” So I am not some little screaming liberal. I could have been happy with Wallace and a Curtis LeMay type running mate.
Where I see the GOP, which I think has been devolved back to Neanderthalism by its economic Libertarian parasites, is where the liberals were back in the 60s and 70s. They had this little theory that if you just gave money to poor people, because we were a rich nation, that everything would work out just peachy. It was a warm and fuzzy thought and we shouldn’t get mad at them for having it.
What we should get mad at them about is when the illegitimate birth rate among blacks started increasing from the 20%s to the 30%s to the 40%s and still climbing (what about 70% today), the liberals should have woken up. They should have said, “Uh oh, maybe we miscalculated here. Let us revisit our original premise because this is clearly turning into a massive clusterf*ck. We are having children of welfare mothers getting on welfare with illegitimate children of their own.” But no. They could not confront their own flawed theory.
Same with the GOP. They had this little theory that if you just left the markets alone, they would properly regulate themselves, because we were a nation who believes in limited gov’t, and that everything would work out just peachy. It was also a warm and fuzzy thought and we shouldn’t get mad at them for having it. (Heck, I was a Republican then and I had it too)
What we should get mad at them about is when the bubbles started bursting and real wages didn’t keep up with the trickle down theory, and jobs started moving overseas, and the wealthiest Americans doubled or tripled their wealth while most average Americans were having to live on credit cards. The GOP should have woken up. They should have said, “Uh oh, maybe we miscalculated here. Let us revisit our original premise because this is clearly turning into a massive clusterf*ck. We have had an S&L bust, a LTCG bust which nearly took out the economy, a dot.com bust, etc. and clearly the markets can not regulate themselves properly. But no. They could not confront their own flawed theory.
So back to your question. Am I a moderate Republican? No. Technically I am a Democrat now out of disgust at my former party’s stupidity and “liberal-like” thinking, i.e. “let’s never confront our theory, it could never be wrong”. I am a conservative who believes the country is more important than pointy-headed libertarian twits. I am a conservative who is more progressive on the economic issues.
parsy, who hopes that answered your question
Well about all I can say is WOW!... You are so...wrong in your ideals that it is hard to counter...
Yes, the Republicans are a mess and did not even try to uphold their beliefs. Yes the Democrats are MUCH worse and why would you even think about going that route...geez...
Now since you seem to be old (30 years) I can understand a bit why you want the Democrats in charge - support you in your old age, etc... (and they do tend to help out there).. I am also old and needing support - but I would gladly give it all up for some kind of future for my kids!
But really...do you actually believe what you were saying?
Of course markets should be minimally controlled to prevent dishonesty from taking over - seems to be a common problem with mankind, don’t ya think?
But, government takeover or control only makes the government the evil - and they are really good at it! Just look at today’s Congress and Senate to see the results of letting government control our lives and the money system...
You sir, are living in a dream world - not unlike a lot of Democrats that I know...unfortunately. Would be really nice if the world behaved as we would like - not going to happen - so the question is what do you do?
You can take all the money from those that earn it and distribute to all those that “WANT”... good luck with that (the Democratic theory).
Just what makes you think that those that earn won’t give up and do something else? Are you really so stupid to think that these earners will just continue to work so that they can give their earnings to those watching...?
Yes, you are in a world of “let’s just all get along” without any idea about how the world really works! Thank goodness you’re not a Republican - NOW! Don’t think the party could afford you...
You sir, are a TRUE Democrat... Looking for money from those that earn it so that you can live the life that you expect!
If you really want to know why the financial system crashed - look to the government that decided that poverty was no excuse not to own a home. Take that ideal and put into the financial system (Fanny Mae, etc.) and help it along with groups like ACORN and their affiliates - well, a wonderful thing happened...
The so-called astute business groups took a long look at this situation and decided that they could make some money since the government was essentially backing these loans. Well, who wouldn’t! They even decided to sell these “government backed” assets to others to make more money...
Well, you can see yourself where this leads...
Sell now and often... geez... You are one dense fellow actually if you think that the Democrats offer a solution...but that is why I can’t get along with my Democratic girlfriend...so I can somewhat understand your confusion...
Dude, I’m in my mid 50’s. And re-distribution works both ways. I like Reagan. Voted for him twice. But he redistributed from the poor and middle class to the rich. The rich got cash. The poor and middle class got credit cards. Bush II re-distributed from the poor and middle class to the rich. He signed off on Bankruptcy Reform.
parsy, who says think about it
Re-distribution is NOT suppose to be a goal of government!
Just what makes you think that it is? Since you are so engrossed with distribution of wealth - why not go out and earn it... Quit trying to take it from those that do...(The Democratic way)...
Oh, and obviously, you are worried about your future! Don’t blame you but for me it is much more serious (over 60 let’s say) but hate government intervention...and worried about my offspring.
I would not vote for Democrats if they were the only party left - and they might well be without a Democracy. Me, I will fight to the end to uphold the Constitution regardless of party - of which I belong to none...and I might add that neither of our current parties adhere...
Redistribution can not help but be a function of gov’t. If it was every man for himself, you would have no society or civilization. The USA is stronger because of social security, minimum wages, wage and hour laws, worker’s comp, etc. It would be even stronger if the GOP (and the Dems) would regulate the financial markets the way they should be.
I am glad to see you are not a republican. You’re thinking. There is hope for you yet.
parsy, who is inspired
Sorry, but that is really WRONG! Government is there to provide a civil background - not to promote any job opportunities, good or bad. You obviously have a different idea of governments role which I doubt that anyone can dissuade you from...
The only role of government is to provide a safe background for business - not to interfere or persuade. Any time they get involved in anything else, it is ALWAYS detrimental to business...
Yes, minimum wages are good (in a sense) but also bad for business in that it contributes to bad business decisions. Almost all government regulations can be judged similar. Yes, you can say that it is good for the individual, but bad for business... So, whether it is justifiably good on the whole is still up for grabs. That is actually, the norm for most government decisions - if I had to vote, I would be about 55% against almost all of those...
Almost all of these things would have come about regardless of government intervention - simply because they would have been good business practices. It’s kind of like hiring the cream of the crop by paying top wages to those that actually deserve it - rather than giving those that are minimally qualified - think affirmative action...(not exactly a good business practice).
All of these government programs are good to some, but negative to the long term growth of the economic system.
So...yes, some government intervention is necessary - not good but necessary. It does help to prevent problems but of course it also introduces problems itself. All things need some sort of regulation...to prevent human nature from expanding beyond their initial intentions.
If that is your definition of Democratic political help, you are lost already...
“So...yes, some government intervention is necessary - not good but necessary. It does help to prevent problems but of course it also introduces problems itself. All things need some sort of regulation...to prevent human nature from expanding beyond their initial intentions.”
Then we agree.
parsy
Heh...well that is one small point of agreement! The rest you avoid like the plague - which I would also if I were you... It is such nonsense that it would be too hard to defend. Now...let’s hear you defend the current Democratic administration...that you seem to adore...
“Well what about Breakfast at Tiffanys? I think you remember the film, and as I recall, I think, we both kinda liked it.”
Only good thing coming out of administration is maybe financial reform and that’s not clear yet. Crap and Played sucks. Indecision on Afghanistan sucks. His speeches suck. Health care is a mess. His Czars, are like commissars. One other good thing is that he is spending money like crazy because that is probably only thing that is going to save our b*tts. If he can just get it down to working man level where demand can grow.
parsy, who fears not inflation at this point because we are already sunk.
Interesting...I did a search on your moniker and came up with one entry... and yet, you’ve been a member for so long...
Oh well, lets say financial reform is a dream - envisioned by Barny Frank and his worshipers. Geez, he is responsible for most of the housing problems himself! Yes, he is a joke!
Financial reform...ha, what a joke! We have those that caused the problem in charge of fixing it...well, maybe you could guess the outcome.
I’m sorry, but you are so out of touch with reality that it makes it very hard to state facts. I actually blame the MSM for their obscuring of facts and your problem of actually searching for same...
Yes, some of what you say is true - Afghanistan, Health Care (government care), my favorite Czars...etc... but you still seem to cling to government solutions - never happen.
You really need a good dose of Beck or someone like him... At least he is asking the right questions...
One entry???? That’s wrong. Here since August 1998. First freeper to post a thread under the influence of percocet. (I had been to dentist) First freeper to post a thread entirely in code. First freeper to channel a dead person for a thread (Ayn Rand)
parsy, who wonders why everyone doubts him
Hmmm... that is interesting. Try a search yourself. I only came up with one instance. Maybe I entered it wrong...
I can see your join date...but it is strange that you do not show up in my search...
AT any rate, this is a side issue - you are still a strange creature that calls himself a past Republican but caters to Democratic principals... So...?
Have you come up with anything other than my search?
I copied this one off my legacy stuff a month or so ago. Sometimes the legacy stuff shows up and other times not.
Ayn Rand Against Bankruptcy Reform!!!
I was recently a guest of television medium, Jon Edwoods, host of Crossing Under. The popular show can be seen nightly on the Psy-Fi Channel. A transcript of the interchange follows.
JE: I’m getting vibrations from someone. Does the letter ‘R” mean anything to anybody?
ME: Me!
JE: Okay Robert, Roberta, Ralph, something with an “R” or maybe a “P”.
ME: Me! It stands for “Russian”.
JE: I get that. I get that. Rushin to his death. Somebody was rushin somewhere and got hit by something...
ME: No, Russian. She’s Russian.
JE: That’s right. I see more clearly now. She was rushin to go somewhere. I knew I would get it. She was rushin out the...
ME: No. She was Russian. Like from Moscow. See.
JE: Yes it’s getting clearer. She was in Moscow and I see a “C” for Chechens, Chernobyl....
ME: No she was here, an American, but she was born in Russia
JE: Yes she says to tell you she is with Jesus now... she was your mother, your aunt maybe or...
ME: No her name was Ayn...
JE: That’s right Aaaauuunt as in Ann, her name was An—na——sta-—sia..
ME. No. Just Ayn.
JE: Ann . You’re right A.- N.- N.
ME: A -”Y”- N.
JE: Yes sometimes it is a little fuzzy over there...She says to tell you she misses you...
ME: But I never knew her. She was a writer.
JE: Yes she says to tell you that she still rides in Heaven. Her horse...
ME: Not “rider” , “writer” “Writer” with a “W”...
JE: Writing! She’s still “Writing!” in Heaven about horses..., hearses...., whores...., hors d’oueves,...
ME: Horses? Oh, iron...
JE: Ironing horses. Yes ironing horses. She writes about ironing horses.
ME: No. Iron Horses! Iron Horses! You know “trains”...
JE. Yes, she’s telling me she writes training manuals on ironing horses...
ME: No. Trains like choo choo trains...
JE: Yes she’s coming through clearer now... She writes on trains....
Anyway, to make a long story short, after about two hours of dialogue, and one game of “I’m not Bonicelli, I’m M.M....” I was able to determine that Ayn Rand is opposed to the new bankruptcy reform bill. In her words, as relayed to me by Jon:
“I amf unalterably oppose-ed to the newf bill. It does nuttink but revard dose who make the bad loans. They arf looters who vant somethink for nothink! In mine book, Atlas Shruckt, I created de character, Midas Mulligan, who vas a banker until he vas forced by government compulsion to make de bad loans. Ven he was forced to make de bad loans, he quit de bankink business and moved to Colorado. A man like Midas Mulligan vould nefer ask the government to safe him from a bad loan. He vould be careful und not make de bad loan. He vould vant collateral. If he made de bad loan, he vould not cry like de titty baby. He vould not pay money to de government to change de laws. He vould take responsibility!”
Some people believe that Jon Edwoods only reflects back what the questioner want to hear. But after this demonstration, I amf a beliefer.
1 Posted on 03/19/2001 18:39:13 PST by parsifal
[ Reply | Private Reply | Top | Last ]
To: parsifal
I amf a beliefer. - A drunk Mickie Dolenz
2 Posted on 03/19/2001 18:42:37 PST by Senator Pardek
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | Top | Last ]
To: Senator Pardek
“I amf a beliefer. - A drunk Mickie Dolenz”
Are you trying to make a “monkey” out of me???
3 Posted on 03/20/2001 10:11:33 PST by parsifal
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | Top | Last ]
To: parsifalsenablersonFR
This is mrs.parsifal. He just showed me a hard-copy of this and was laughing his head off like it was the funniest thing ever written. I want all you freepers to know that he talked his way out of doing dishes last night because he said he had something real important to write. If he wastes anymore of his time on foolishness like this I want you to let me know immediately.
I am going to get an email address on yahoo. Will try to get “mrsparsifal@yahoo.com.” I particularly expect you ladies to help me out! There is no telling how much housework he has been getting out of. I would get on here at FR but he told me there was a limit of one person per family.
Thanks,
mrsparsifal.
4 Posted on 03/20/2001 17:19:10 PST by parsifal
[ Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | Top | Last ]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
[ Top | Latest Posts | Latest Articles | Self Search | Add Bookmark | Post | Abuse | Help! ]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
parsy, who went to great lengths to do this
And quite possibly ‘first freeper to refer to himself in third person’!
: )
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.