About Me

Name: halthouse1
Email: exetertraining@aol.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
[Click to edit me]

Major Sell-off In Bonds and North Korea Verbal Spanking (Not)

Posted by halthouse1 on Thursday, May 28, 2009 6:01:56 AM
The Political and Financial Markets Commentator (http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com)
 

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Major Sell-off In Bonds and North Korea Verbal Spanking (Not)

But First An Update On The North Korea Crisis From Hillary Clinton

As I had surmised, the Obama administration's answer to the crisis of a madman firing missiles and setting off nuclear tests is as expected: reliance on trying to get the madman to a negotiating table so that he can agree to terms he has no intention of abiding by and some more of those tough U.N. resolutions and sanctions. Read:

Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton visits United States Army Garrison (USAG) Yongsan, Seoul, South Korea - 20 Feb. 2009

(Fox)"North Korea will have to pay a price for its aggressive actions, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday, and she urged Pyongyang to return to the six-party talks that it abandoned in favor of nuclear weapons.

"North Korea has made a choice, chosen to violate the specific language of the U.N. Security Council (Resolution) 1718. It has ignored the international community, abrogated the six-party talks and continues to act in a provocative and belligerent manner," Clinton said during remarks with Egyptian Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit.

"In the United Nations, as we speak, discussions are going on as to the consequences that North Korea will face coming out of the latest behavior, trying to rein in the North Koreans and get them back into a framework they have chosen where they fulfill their obligations," she said..."

Pyongyang must be quaking with fear. As I have said many times before these are hopefully Obama's words for public consumption with covert action behind the scenes. This leader is a grave danger to the entire world, and mere table talk will unfortunately be an utter failure.

What Does A Steep Yield Curve Mean...If Anything In This Case

When I was a bond analyst for a sell side firm out of business school, a steep yield curve was a way to get retail investors into long bonds which in turn translated into more revenue for the firm. That is because the "spread", or the amount that a firm can make, is typically greater the further out on the maturity spectrum that you go. Back then for the purposes of Wall Street the steep yield curve proved to be a great marketing ploy.

Lend your money to your government Buy a United States government bond, second Liberty Loan of 1917, U.S. Treasury will pay you interest every six months. 1917

What Is This Steepness I Speak Of?

The steepness of a yield curve is the difference in yield between short-term bonds like the two year, and longer-term bonds like the 10 year. The yield of the 10 year treasury is currently 3.66%, and the yield of the treasury 2 year is .92% for a difference of 274 basis points which is close to record steepness.

Typically, a yield curve will steepen when the Fed lowers short term interest rates (it has no control over long rates other than open market operations)to stimulate the economy, and investors in fixed rate securities such as treasury bonds sell to move into the stock market, pushing yields up.

Is This Time Different?

In this case, could the rise in long term rates signify something other than economic expansion? Could it be inflation fears fueled by the amount of stimulus that has been injected into the economy? Could it be a normal adjustment in the level of rates due to that age old concept of supply and demand?

The federal government will be borrowing in the neighborhood of $2 trillion (with a t)in 2009, and the foreign governments that are providing this liquidity definitely have something to say about where rates will go from here.

China is the single largest foreign owner of treasuries, and without it's participation in new auctions, or worse yet if they decided to be sellers, yields will rise significantly.

What if the "green shoots" as the pundits on T.V. love to call them are really stink weeds, and the economy is not beginning to come out of recession? What will the trillions of dollars of stimulus money injected by the government chasing too few goods do to the level of interest rates due to spiking inflation?

We can only hope that President Obama and his band of merry men led by Tim Geithner and Ben Bernanke have some semblance of a clue as to what it is that they are doing. God help us if they do not! Sphere: Related Content
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

Posted by halthouse1 on Monday, May 04, 2009 10:38:10 AM

Monday, May 4, 2009

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

When the crisis and danger is finally recognized by The New York Times, it becomes even more apparent that the situation is in fact dire. The articles below had been written by me back to March, when the level of the problem in Pakistan became obvious, to all except the Obama administration which continues to tell us that the situation is being monitored and the Pakistani government is on top of things. Hillary Clinton remains the invisible Secretary of State.

"The officials emphasized that there was no reason to believe that the arsenal, most of which is south of the capital, Islamabad, faced an imminent threat."(see below)

Funny, as a concerned outside observer I feel there is an iminent threat.

The problem is that we do not really know who is in charge of the government, or more to the point who do those in charge of the government (and by extension the nukes) hold allegiance to. All this as Pakistan remains our "reluctant ally"


Guest Blog: Pakistan: Time for Contingency Plannin...
Pakistan, the Taliban and Islamabad: Is Anyone Out...
Does President Obama Know About the Goings On In P...
Yesterday Pakistan, Today North Korea
Is Anyone Keeping An Eye On Pakistan?

Pakistan Strife Raises U.S. Doubts on Nuclear Arms (New York Times)

By DAVID E. SANGER
Published: May 3, 2009
WASHINGTON — As the insurgency of the Taliban and Al Qaeda spreads in Pakistan, senior American officials say they are increasingly concerned about new vulnerabilities for Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, including the potential for militants to snatch a weapon in transport or to insert sympathizers into laboratories or fuel-production facilities.

The officials emphasized that there was no reason to believe that the arsenal, most of which is south of the capital, Islamabad, faced an imminent threat. President Obama said last week that he remained confident that keeping the country’s nuclear infrastructure secure was the top priority of Pakistan’s armed forces.

But the United States does not know where all of Pakistan’s nuclear sites are located, and its concerns have intensified in the last two weeks since the Taliban entered Buner, a district 60 miles from the capital. The spread of the insurgency has left American officials less willing to accept blanket assurances from Pakistan that the weapons are safe.

Pakistani officials have continued to deflect American requests for more details about the location and security of the country’s nuclear sites, the officials said.... Sphere: Related Content
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

Posted by halthouse1 on Monday, May 04, 2009 10:35:15 AM

The Political and Financial Markets Commentator

Monday, May 4, 2009

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

When the crisis and danger is finally recognized by The New York Times, it becomes even more apparent that the situation is in fact dire. The articles below had been written by me back to March, when the level of the problem in Pakistan became obvious, to all except the Obama administration which continues to tell us that the situation is being monitored and the Pakistani government is on top of things. Hillary Clinton remains the invisible Secretary of State.

"The officials emphasized that there was no reason to believe that the arsenal, most of which is south of the capital, Islamabad, faced an imminent threat."(see below)

Funny, as a concerned outside observer I feel there is an iminent threat.

The problem is that we do not really know who is in charge of the government, or more to the point who do those in charge of the government (and by extension the nukes) hold allegiance to. All this as Pakistan remains our "reluctant ally"


Guest Blog: Pakistan: Time for Contingency Plannin...
Pakistan, the Taliban and Islamabad: Is Anyone Out...
Does President Obama Know About the Goings On In P...
Yesterday Pakistan, Today North Korea
Is Anyone Keeping An Eye On Pakistan?

Pakistan Strife Raises U.S. Doubts on Nuclear Arms (New York Times)

By DAVID E. SANGER
Published: May 3, 2009
WASHINGTON — As the insurgency of the Taliban and Al Qaeda spreads in Pakistan, senior American officials say they are increasingly concerned about new vulnerabilities for Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, including the potential for militants to snatch a weapon in transport or to insert sympathizers into laboratories or fuel-production facilities.

The officials emphasized that there was no reason to believe that the arsenal, most of which is south of the capital, Islamabad, faced an imminent threat. President Obama said last week that he remained confident that keeping the country’s nuclear infrastructure secure was the top priority of Pakistan’s armed forces.

But the United States does not know where all of Pakistan’s nuclear sites are located, and its concerns have intensified in the last two weeks since the Taliban entered Buner, a district 60 miles from the capital. The spread of the insurgency has left American officials less willing to accept blanket assurances from Pakistan that the weapons are safe.

Pakistani officials have continued to deflect American requests for more details about the location and security of the country’s nuclear sites, the officials said.... Sphere: Related Content
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Pakistan, the Taliban and Islamabad: Is Anyone Out There?

Posted by halthouse1 on Friday, April 24, 2009 7:04:22 AM
The Political and Financial Markets Commentator (http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com/2009/04/pakistan-taliban-and-islamabad-is.html), Mike Haltman
 

Friday, April 24, 2009

Pakistan, the Taliban and Islamabad: Is Anyone Out There?

Beating a Dead Horse

If I am getting tired of talking about the same thing, then people must be getting tired about reading about the same thing. This situation was once a dangerous thought, then a dangerous development, and now it is seemingly an extremely dangerous reality.

Slowly but surely, as discussed in this blog ad infinitum, the Taliban is moving towards Islamabad and a de facto takeover of the government of Pakistan. Much like Hitler was appeased by France, the UK and the Soviet Union in the 1930's when he was allowed to take Czechoslovakia, the Taliban has been appeased but does not seem satisfied by what they were given either.

What will be the result if there is a full takeover of Pakistan by the Taliban, and more importantly the weapons that Pakistan controls. The world, as the saying goes, will be up a very brown creek without a paddle. There have been questions all along regarding the current government of Pakistan in terms of it's allegiances, and that is who we are counting on to put down this dangerous, dangerous situation.

What are the world leaders saying:

- After Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told lawmakers in Washington on Wednesday that the Pakistani government was "basically abdicating to the Taliban and the extremists," Islamabad has seen a flurry of diplomatic activity.

Huh? Any thoughts on how to diffuse the situation Madame Secretary, or do we just go with the flow on this one?

- German Chancellor Angela Merkel called Prime Minister Gillani to express her concern. And Western diplomats met with Pakistani lawmakers throughout the day to assess the government's likely response to the threat.

Really? Is that making anyone feel better?

- This is what the Taliban had to say:

"Taliban fighters from the nearby Swat Valley have infiltrated the area in recent days, emboldened by a government-sanctioned peace deal allowing them to enforce Sharia, or Islamic law, in the valley, a onetime tourist paradise.

Prime Minister Yusaf Raza Gillani told reporters in Islamabad on Thursday that the government would see to it that the peace agreement isn't violated. "The government will not allow anyone to challenge the government," he said in a statement.

But in Buner, the Taliban remained largely in control despite the stepped-up paramilitary presence.

"We will not leave the area," a Taliban commander, Mufti Bashir, told local journalists.

Map locates the Buner region

Since entering Buner from Swat, the Taliban has reportedly set up checkpoints, begun patrolling roads and ordered barbershops to stop shaving beards, which are favored by Islamic militants. The moves have prompted some residents to flee..." (LA Times)

President Obama, I don't want to be an alarmist here, but what are the plans besides calling the Prime Minister and voicing our concern, or going to United Nations demanding this to stop.

This is the Taliban that does not answer to any international voice, and if this development that could turn disastrous for us all is not stopped and stopped now, your health care plan and the rest of your socialist agenda could be rendered moot. Sphere: Related Content
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Axis Of Idiots

Posted by halthouse1 on Monday, February 23, 2009 12:00:00 AM
Provided by a friend of The Political and Financial Markets Commentator at http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com
 

(Too bad we don't have folks on Capitol Hill willing to speak out like this. J.D. Pendry is a retired Marine Sergeant Major who writes for Random House.

He is eloquent, and as taught by the Marines, he seldom beats around the bush!)

 

'THE Axis of Idiots'


Jimmy Carter, you are the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home, and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You're the runner-in-chief.

 


Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses to the U.S.S. Cole and the First Trade Center Bombing and Our Embassy Bombings emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately, they grew bolder, until 9/11/2001.


John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam . Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. You've accused our military of terrorizing women and children in Iraq . You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the same words you used to describe Vietnam . You're a fake. You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did to the Vietnamese. Iraq, like Vietnam, is another war that you were for, before you were against it.



John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can't win militarily in Iraq . You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof and said we should redeploy to Okinawa . Okinawa, John ? And the Democrats call you their military expert! Are you sure you didn't suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume? You're a sad, pitiable, corrupt and washed up politician. You're not a Marine, sir. You wouldn't amount to a good pimple on a real Marine's butt. You're a phony and a disgrace. Run away, John



Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanamo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot , who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned Southeast Asia to the Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was not a good teacher for you, was it? Lord help us! See Dick run.


Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster-sized pictures from Abu Ghraib in front of any available television camera. Al Jazeera quoted you saying that Iraqi's torture chambers were open under new management. Did you see the news, Teddy? The Islamic Nazis demonstrated another beheading for you. If you truly supported our troops, you'd show the world poster-sized pictures of that atrocity and demand the annihilation of it. Your legislation stripping support from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there. You're a bloated, drunken fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genoc idal maniacs. To paraphrase Jo hn Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in Washington



Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, the Hollywood Leftist morons, et al, ad nauseam: Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied, that the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers, that we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers - the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we'll run away again, and all they have to do is hang on a little longer. It is inevitable that we, the infidels, will have to defeat the Islamic jihadists.. Better to do it now on their turf, than later on ours after they have gained both strength and momentum.



American news media, the New York Times particularly: Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one united with the sub-human pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can't strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each time you face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.?

You are America 's 'AXIS OF IDIOTS.' Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us. Self-serving politics and terrorist-abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers. It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don't ever doubt that. Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam .. If you want our Soldiers home as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies.

Yes, I'm questioning your patriotism. Your loyalty ends with self. I'm also questioning why you're stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing. You don't deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform. You need to run away from this war, this country. Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it.


Our country has two enemies:Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within.



Semper Fi,

J. D. Pendry - Sergeant Major, USMC, Retired
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Great Non-Debate: Kennedy/Palin

Posted by halthouse1 on Saturday, January 17, 2009 9:56:22 AM

From The Political and Financial Markets Commentator at http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com

Monday, January 12, 2009

The Great Non-Debate: Kennedy/Palin

An Irrelevant Debate, But Let's Look At It Anyway

The Answer May Surprise You

Sarah Palin for Vice President or Caroline Kennedy for Junior Senator from New York

Each position has its' own skill set, job requirements, responsibilities and constituencies that are answered to. Some might say that the requirements to be Vice President are greater than that of Senator, and others might think the other way.

Each job in its' own right is of great importance:

The Vice President will be next in line to the most powerful position in the world as well as being tasked by the president to work on what are typically under the radar projects.

A Senator from one of the largest and some might say most important states (there will be disagreement on this), must work to have the needs of the whole State met while crawling through the maze of Senatorial politics, diversity of the population, partisan politics etc.

As discussed in this blog the other day, Caroline Kennedy brings what can only be kindly called a slim resume to the process, while Sarah Palin, whatever the feeling over her public persona which definitely rubbed this Republican the wrong way, has been a mayor and is governor of a state, albeit a small state.

What's In A Name Or Nickname: Hockey Mom vs. Political Royalty

Let's get down to the brass tacks of politics. If Caroline Kennedy were Mary Smith, we would not be having this debate, because she would not be at the top of the short list, or anywhere near the short list that only one man, Governor Paterson will be voting on (although he has recently voiced some thoughts about her resume).

Names and voices and verbal phraseology aside, is it possible, or more than that a fact, that perhaps neither of these women should have been, or to now be, under consideration for the offices that are in question? I think any sane thinker would have to say yes.

Not to say that one day each may not be, but please, not now!!!

For an interesting comaprison of the media and its' treatment of Hilary Clinton, Sarah Palin, Caroline Kennedy and Tina Fey, visit RenewAmerica.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »