I had this passed along to me by Nick Loffer and thought it would be worth noting as the time drew closer:
Friends and Fellow Taxpayers of Maryland,
Americans for Prosperity Maryland invites you to our Official Kick Off Press Conference and Rally April 2nd, 1 p.m. at The Lawyers Mall at the State House in Annapolis. Tell the Governor and General Assembly how you feel about our economic situation and policies in place!
Americans for Prosperity is a national organization that promotes limited government and free market principles at all levels.
The Maryland Chapter was formed to educate and advocate these principles through grassroots movements because we all have had enough of the failed policies that hurt Maryland. We will be an effective force for improving the economic and governmental landscape so that all Maryland Taxpayers can be prosperous.
But we still need everyone’s help and voice! Without concerned citizens like you these events could not take place. It is time to make your mark on behalf of everyone in Maryland!
You can help Maryland by showing up to the Press Conference and signing our petition to Gov. O’Malley and the General Assembly urging them not to accept any Federal money with strings attached.
Tim Phillips, the National President of AFP, will be the keynote speaker and an organizational meeting will follow.
AFP has been involved with the Tea Parties that have been organized and have been successful all over the Country. Please support these events to continue the fight for sane economic policies.
We will meet starting at 12:15 at the Navy-Marine Corps Stadium parking lot for free parking and trolley service to the State House.
For questions, comments, or more information please contact State Director Dave Schwartz at dave@afpmaryland.com – (443) 797-5144
Or
Nick Loffer – afpmd@live.com
Let us all make a difference for Maryland and We hope to see you there!
Again, one has to ask who is against prosperity? Until very recent times when Uncle Sam seemed to want to get his mitts into everything, the system we had was working pretty darn well.
I believe in equality of opportunity but there’s no way we can have equality of outcome unless misery is shared equally. Sure, as a kid I wanted to be a pro baseball player but with my lack of talent there no one would pay to watch me play – that is, unless the government decided on affirmative action for skill-challenged players like me and let me in that way. But would I have truly earned it?
Perhaps I use an apples-to-oranges comparison but it’s the job of the market to pick winners and losers, not that of Barack Obama. However, by hook or by crook it appears BHO has usurped the task – just ask Rick Wagoner about this, or those people unfortunate enough to still be holding Chrysler shares. In either case, prosperity is not forthcoming once the federal government has its way and to me that’s an outcome which should have never happened.
I think Chrysler is privately held by Cerberus Capital Management, and Daimler probably still owns part of it, but no shares are traded publicly. That was one of the bones of contention when they came begging for money. If Cerberus didn’t want to put more money into Chrysler, then why should the government bail them out.
Your question is really pointless. Nobody opposes prosperity, but the 40:1 leverage ratio that was allowed by the SEC under Bush created a false prosperity that could not be sustained. If the ratio is reeled back in to 15:1 or less, then we can still prosper. People just won’t be able to take out a home equity loan to buy a $40,000 car or take a cruise, which they shouldn’t be doing anyway if they can’t afford it.
The question was supposed to be rhetorical and a sendup of those environmental groups who paint Republicans as being for dirty water, air, etc. because they oppose overly stringent environmental rules that tip the scale against progress and a prosperous way of life.
My question to you though is what do SEC leverage rules have to do with taking out a home equity loan? I’m not saying that the leverage rules aren’t overly favorable to the borrowers; then again I’m not convinced we can blame that for our current economic mess. Where I do agree with you, however, is the idea of borrowing too heavily against perceived future home equity, particularly for luxury items. I can’t say I’d support hard and fast rules against that practice because I do think that a free market is the way to go, but lenders really should have used better judgment and hopefully borrowers will begin to as well.
Yes, Michael, but the rhetorical question is ridiculous, as well. As is the name of the group. It should be “Americans for Conservative Governance Maryland”. No one opposes prosperity. We just have different opinions on what policies will help create it. In addition, you are attempting to demonize all environmentalists by pointing at the extremists. Any sane and rational environmentalist (like myself and millions like me) knows that there is a balance to be struck between good stewardship and the economy. In fact, if done properly, a “green economy” could prove to be ultimately more profitable (and keep money from going abroad) than our current economy.
As for your second paragraph, I see you’re still stuck on the right wing meme of “bad borrowers caused this mess!”. I know you’re smarter than that, Michael. This is a credit crisis that stemmed from the Credit Default Swap market and the MBS market. It showed up, first, in the auto industry and home mortgage industry due to high risk sub prime loans. Don’t mistake the symptom for the cause. And, before you get started on the CRA, remember this: Less than 20% of defaulted loans were CRA loans. Our loss of wealth has everything to do with SEC leveraging rules, deregulation, and Mr. Cox not doing his job of oversight at the SEC.
And before you write me off as a complete Democratic partisan… Bill Clinton signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act into law in 2000, that kicked off the next decade of deregulation. This was a truly BI-PARTISAN effort to deregulate our financial sector, and we are now reaping the benefits.
all in all, we need a government that governs least, for the best solution… increasing the power and intrusion of government will not solve this crisis… like a bandaide, we need to rip it off quickly to start the healing…
and vote out the bastages…
t