Relative to the financial bailout it should be of no consequence who the investors are. In this case it happens to be taxpayers.

In all cases when an investor puts up his or her money and when that investment is significant, the customary and practical condition is the investor exercises a commensurate degree of control upon corporate direction. In this case that customary condition has been abandoned. Taxpayers have involuntarily made this investment and in that context I would think the customary scheme would be more of an obligatory condition.

Frankly, I find it entirely unacceptable and actually stupid that taxpayers have been asked to cough up trillions of dollars and have little or no say in events that follow and are having access to many of the details hidden from them.

I hope I'm not the only person who happens to think this contrary scheme is totally wrong and is absolutely backward relative to how this normally works. I see this as another and very glaring example of how the vast majority of citizens of this country are not equitably represented. Which happens to be the precise reason we are in this mess in the first place. In many ways the citizens of this country have had their rights trashed by the Bush administration and by congress. You know that 'wrong track' thingy that is often talked about? Well guess what?

This is a problem. Anyone who can't see where it's going isn't paying attention. Government is worried because of changing public perceptions relative to government use of authority. A great many people are concerned that government has crossed over the line when it comes to issues of privacy and the general state of freedom. The gross transgressions of the Bush presidency and the harm those transgressions have wrought to the nation have played a significant role in this changing public perception. This will end with a condition that no matter what government does or has done the military will be called upon to intervene. This means government can do whatever it wants and in spite of a constitutional prohibition against it the government will use the military to quell any disturbance - justified or not. Government will call all such instances domestic terrorism no matter what it really is.

What do you think will be the reaction of citizens when in the coming years citizens demonstrate and there are armed troops all over the place? This will have a negative effect on the right of assembly at the very least. People will feel threatened by their own government. For that reason alone this should not be done. Stating this as being a response to the terrorist threat is bullshit. The dumb bastards in our government just don't see the relationship between citizens feeling threatened and the inevitable response to that threat. The worst possible thing a government can do is  act in a way that will be perceived as taking away freedom. We already have the DOD operating as a major participant in domestic intelligence. This is the next logical step in the infringement upon our freedoms. Here comes the police state. Very fucked up.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27989275/