'I'm having a very good crisis,' says Soros as hedge fund managers make billions off recession

I could not care less who they voted for that is in the past. What I would like to find out is who they financed and what they were promised.

A ponzi scheme is illegal Madoffs lied to all his clients as the money was not invested, that is both a legal crime and an immoral action. Soros did not cost the Englanders a dime because the pound had to “go to market” which the Bank of England was claiming had happen knowing it had not happened. So if Soros had not leveraged a bet against them the same thing would happen except the English losses would occur to a broader spread of contract holders instead of Soros.

The robber barrons played by the rules. The rules were bad. So they commit no legal crimes however their actions were immorl.

I do not know what the AIG contracts read for example the new CEO get $1 of salary so if he has a contract which gives him 10,000 shares a month retain bonus should he be forced to live on the $1 salary only?

Price of what? Madoff was saying investments as stocks when in fact there were little if any investments. Thus he know the people were only buying a story, but the crime is lying to them that the story was an investment.

Soros gives me the creeps. There is a sinister aura about him

Of course it was, he and his comrads started grooming Obama right after Bush’s second election. Obama did not go into politics untill he became a junior Senator in 2005, I guess they figured he had to get in somehow so that he could run for President. They are the ones who bakrolled his campaign and they are the ones he owes big time and the ones pulling his strings. He is their puppet, the infamous telepromter is so he gets it right when he is giving his endless speaches…

Liberals absolutely amaze me. Making excuses for robber barons, as long as they’re liberal too. How do you know the pound “went to market”? What’s the market? It’s perceptions, and perceptions can be manipulated and are manipulated. Do you know why, e.g., USB went to $9 in one week and went to $15 the next? Precisely because of the shorts in the earlier week, which got covered in the week after. So what was it’s value? $9 or $15? Or is it maybe $30? Nothing changed between the $9 mark and the $15 mark but perceptions. So, bottom line, you’re okay with Soros having nailed English taxpayers by driving their currency into the ground.

Soros is so vain he writes books about his predations. So he’ll write a book about this one too, except that it’s probably not over yet. And then we’ll know more. But no matter what he did or does, liberals will not only excuse him for being a predator and destroyer of peoples’ financial lives, they’ll praise him for it, just as they praise Obama, to whom killing children means nothing.

He is a very bad man, Redrosetea, and he is the financing behind the hard left in this country, at least until they can divert enough of taxpayers’ money into their coffers. He is a supporter of abortion, an atheist, an avowed socialist and a proponent of American foreign policy being dictated by “international institutions.”

Unfortunately, he is talented at making money at others’ expense. He contributes nothing to the world but his own worldview and financial uncertainty.

And Obama is his man, from the top of his head to the bottom of his feet.

We’re in trouble, Redrosetea.

Kathleen, you’re a star, it’s quite late over here so I shall give it a thorough reading tomorrow.

God bless.

Thank you, Ridgerunner.

Hopefully, the ‘uptick rule’ will be enforced, shutting out the short sellers. All that’s been happening the past few months is private deals being worked out to get the maximum possible for depressed mortgages. Then inflation will gradually return. They don’t wear robes anymore, but the wealthy noblemen still run the world.

Peace,
Ed

under **free trade ** everything goes to market it is a free trade philosophy that buyers and sellers in mass set the market ( not politicians)

It’s perceptions, and perceptions can be manipulated and are manipulated.

as the market churns the true value is shown

Do you know why, e.g., USB went to $9 in one week and went to $15 the next? Precisely because of the shorts in the earlier week, which got covered in the week after.

you’re joking right? Do you believe some liberal in charge put out a mandate to stop buying and increase selling until all shorts are covered?

So what was it’s value? $9 or $15? Or is it maybe $30? Nothing changed between the $9 mark and the $15 mark but perceptions.

most believe the profits will fall so take that new profit divide it by shares (that is the PE) then multiply by 20 (that is 5% yield) So what is the new profit? Since the current profit is negative you probably should sum the next 5 years of profits and pay that what number is it? Oh what rather than answers lets make it illegal for Soros to guess

So, bottom line, you’re okay with Soros having nailed English taxpayers by driving their currency into the ground.

The problem I have is people saying “Soros drove” unless Soros was in charge of the British Monetary system that is false. Let me ask you a real question if the British were trying to manipulate the market why are you seeing them as good, yet if someone bets the market will prevail you see them as a criminal?

Soros is so vain he writes books about his predations. So he’ll write a book about this one too, except that it’s probably not over yet. And then we’ll know more. But no matter what he did or does, liberals will not only excuse him for being a predator and destroyer of peoples’ financial lives, they’ll praise him for it, just as they praise Obama, to whom killing children means nothing.

Well I do not know if he is vain, and again if Obama killed anyone please contact the police.

I love the new “conservative” when asked

“Is manipulating the market wrong?” He must answer “Well you have to tell me who did it before I can tell you if it is right, good and American or evil”

“Is increasing government good?” He must answer “Well you have to tell me who did it before I can tell you if it is right, good and American or evil”

Etc, etc

I will try to respond to as much of what you said seems to make sense.

It’s absurd to say that “everything goes to market” if anyone has the power to manipulate it. Soros himself admits he drove the pound down. Why don’t you?

Never did I countenance market manipulation by anyone. You are the one who did that. Soros admits to manipulating markets. He brags about it. You think he’s a fine fellow. I think he’s a villain. I think he’s a villain because people like him produce nothing, cure nothing, create nothing, invent nothing, but make their billions by creating illusions and devaluing the assets of others.

You never did answer my question whether USB is really worth $9 or $15. Which is it?
I can get you closer than you got me. Ask your broker. It was driven down to $9 by one of the “short assaults” we have seen so much of this year. The people who are doing it roll through the financial stocks in waves. If you watch several of them, you can watch the waves. It’s as plain as plain gets. This market has been massively manipulated (as has the commodities market) for some time now. I guess you think that’s a good thing. I don’t, because a lot of people get hurt when the robber barons do that. I do not see why you are devoid of any kind of concern for the people who get harmed by the likes of Soros.

Now, what’s going to happen is that the government is going to massively subsidize the “liquidation” of a lot of the “toxic assets”; not foreclosed properties, but derivatives according to Geithner. Big investors, largely hedge funds, or so the market thinks, will buy them up at deep discounts with mostly government money. The difference, Geithner says, he will make good at the banks. The government will take virtually all the risk; not that there will be any risk because the assets will be deeply discounted sufficiently to cover the very small investment the investors will make. As the economy inflates, which this government is going to cause, the value of those assets will rise. The foxes are in the hen house.

Look, I have watched some bank liquidations by the FDIC and the giveways are getting richer and richer. The discounts and guarantees are beyond belief. Everything Geithner says about the TARP 1a redo he is proposing tells me it is going to be a gigantic transfer of wealth from taxpayers to big capitalists.

I don’t deny that I’m conservative in some ways, though I suspect I’m even more liberal than you are in some ways. But I do not think it is good for this society to engineer huge transfers of wealth from ordinary people to plutocrats who enjoy the favor of the politicians and, in fact, created this particular government. As you are a liberal, I am surprised you think that’s a good thing. That is what leads me to think you countenance it only because the players are liberals as well. I very much doubt that if Soros was a dyed-in-the-wool conservative who would, if he could, put Cheney in the presidency, you would be so approving of him.

Well I do not know if he is vain, and again if Obama killed anyone please contact the police.

When it comes to unborn, murder is legal. Obama is a law-maker. He signs abortion into law.

I love the new “conservative” when asked

“Is manipulating the market wrong?” He must answer “Well you have to tell me who did it before I can tell you if it is right, good and American or evil”

Most conservatives certainly agree with investing in the market. The free market is a good thing, which allows people to make money by investing in the country as a whole getting richer.
There is risk. There is possiblity of failure, and with that a possiblity to learn and self-correct based on those lessons. There is nothing dishonest about making money this way.
I would hope that most of us would not agree with ruthlessly manipulating the market with absolutely no regard for the welfare of others, such as Soros is doing, is somehow a capitalistic thing, a good thing… Such high intelligence in the service of parasitism is not what most conservatives praise when they praise the free markets. Such high intelligence in a sense puts him above the law, for lawmakers just are not at the level where they can formulate laws that will touch him. In terms of ethics though, there is little difference between a Soros and a Madoff. They are in the end both parasites. In terms of scale though, Soros is in a league of his own.

I guess to a Democrat, that one parasite supported Obama makes all the difference. It is not a question of principle anymore or making the greedy pay, but of closing rank around the party faithful.

“Is increasing government good?” He must answer “Well you have to tell me who did it before I can tell you if it is right, good and American or evil”

Milton Friedman has probably the best conservative answer to this.The role of government is absolutely necessary, but extending the role to areas where the government is not needed is where the problem lies.
It is not a question of who, but where. Dereliction of duty lies in not providing for adequate defense of country and borders, but even people on the conservative ticket such as Bush and McCain who run afoul of the conservative principles through extending government control and spending in areas where government ought not to go, are criticized very harshly by conservative commentators. MCCain-Feingold had conservtives steaming, and is a good example of this, as was Bush’s huge “compassionate conservative” spending platform.

If it was a question of who,then conservatives, like leftists, would be supporting or opposing people like Soros according to party affiliation alone. That is just not the case though with conservatives…

…Is a little bit of projection going on here?

it simply is not possible. only the monetary policy can do that, it is done by 1) under printing pounds, or 2) hold to high an interest rate ( which is done by selling government backed securities to banks for pounds). What Soros did is bet the English were doing that and could not hold that policy. They could not hold that policy because it disadvantaged English business by raising their cost on loans. It all “goes to market” The monetary policy of England could devalue or get kicked out of business deals, that is what the markets does. If the English had not been fighting the market Soros position would not have existed.

Never did I countenance market manipulation by anyone. You are the one who did that. Soros admits to manipulating markets. He brags about it. You think he’s a fine fellow. I think he’s a villain. I think he’s a villain because people like him produce nothing, cure nothing, create nothing, invent nothing, but make their billions by creating illusions and devaluing the assets of others.

these are interesting comments, first I would not know Soros if he walked up and shook my hand. Second when people on the Radio call Obama the Messiah I do not believe them, similarly when they tell me one person can use 100 million dollars to control the world financial system I do not believe them either. Now all logic says the main problem is historical, immoral (and mostly illegal) practices on Wall Street, that’s year end year out, generation after generation. yet no one will openly say that nor pursue stopping that,

It is worth 5 years PE. Hey, why not simply ask a Wall Street Special? (probably because you will lose you *** because he is paid to lie to you) Look I do not follow USB so why ask me to predict 5 years PE? Let me tell you it has nothing to do with “shorts” It is all about the 5 year PE. That is what the market will produce on that asset.

I can get you closer than you got me. Ask your broker. It was driven down to $9 by one of the “short assaults” we have seen so much of this year. The people who are doing it roll through the financial stocks in waves. If you watch several of them, you can watch the waves. It’s as plain as plain gets.

So roll with them. it will not be that simple. The market will not sell a $1 of dividend for $9 or $15. It will not hold a $9 price for a $1 of PE (it will cost $20)

This market has been massively manipulated (as has the commodities market) for some time now. I guess you think that’s a good thing. I don’t, because a lot of people get hurt when the robber barons do that. I do not see why you are devoid of any kind of concern for the people who get harmed

This was done by Wall Street with false “securities” as “credit swaps”, “derivates”, and who knows what else these are not real “securities” and now that is coming to light.

by the likes of Soros.

How about we pass a law “unless your name is Soros taking other people’s based on falsification is acceptable on New York’s Wall Street” Is that not what you really propose? You never discuss the 1,000’s who actually steal the money. Yet the guy who bet the money is being stolen that is the guy you seem to want in jail. it makes no sense to me.

Now, what’s going to happen is that the government is going to massively subsidize the “liquidation” of a lot of the “toxic assets”; not foreclosed properties, but derivatives according to Geithner. Big investors, largely hedge funds, or so the market thinks, will buy them up at deep discounts with mostly government money. The difference, Geithner says, he will make good at the banks. The government will take virtually all the risk; not that there will be any risk because the assets will be deeply discounted sufficiently to cover the very small investment the investors will make. As the economy inflates, which this government is going to cause, the value of those assets will rise.

If you want to fix the problem create a new class of investments called “zero to low asset value backed investments”, and jail any one who sells those as “asset backed securities” that is the problem pension funds will not touch the new class and that is why wall street is lying to pension funds to get these sales

The foxes are in the hen house.

The foxes in the “derivative” hen house are alone no assets there, same for the “credit swap” foxes

Look, I have watched some bank liquidations by the FDIC and the giveways are getting richer and richer. The discounts and guarantees are beyond belief. Everything Geithner says about the TARP 1a redo he is proposing tells me it is going to be a gigantic transfer of wealth from taxpayers to big capitalists.

Did Soros give him permission? just joking. It is a problem a big problem and I think you are right. Many people on Wall Street should be headed to jail for things done daily for 20 years, instead they are being bailed out

I don’t deny that I’m conservative in some ways, though I suspect I’m even more liberal than you are in some ways. But I do not think it is good for this society to engineer huge transfers of wealth from ordinary people to plutocrats who enjoy the favor of the politicians and, in fact, created this particular government. As you are a liberal, I am surprised you think that’s a good thing. That is what leads me to think you countenance it only because the players are liberals as well. I very much doubt that if Soros was a dyed-in-the-wool conservative who would, if he could, put Cheney in the presidency, you would be so approving of him.

What Soros does is by definition conservative that is free market trade and leverage of real assets. What Chaney did was immoral not conservative. The current “Republican” choice to back his actions under the false name of conservative is why they were thrown out of office. The idea that Obama declared his candidacy in Feb 07 and thus as a direct result the banking industry committed suicide in Aug 07 while Obama appeared to have no chance to win is simple delusional

A stock being worth “Five years PE” does not even make sense. PE is a ratio that’s knowable only if the price is already known. The PE of a stock varies from day to day, minute to minute, and can vary greatly among very similar stocks. It has absolutely nothing to do with determining prices in the first place.

In any event, the context of your comment suggests that you’re thinking of EPS, not PE.

No, if you will research it, you will find that many stocks undergo attacks by short sellers. The purpose is usually to drive the price of the stock down by overwhelming buyers, and most particularly the market makers. The idea is, then, to buy at an artificially lowered price, having sold stock they do not actually own, at a higher price. It adds absolutely nothing to the economy, and is a pure speculation. But it is a speculation with a difference; the difference being that you’re trying to change the perception of owners and potential buyers, trying to make them think the stock has less value than they thought, for reasons they do not then know. If you have been paying any attention to financial stocks in the U.S., you know for a fact that manipulation is going on. You can actually watch it happen.

There is no conceptual difference between credit default swaps and, e.g., VA or FHA guarantees, or PMI or FDIC insurance for that matter. They might not be prudent when the value of the underlying assets is misperceived, or when someone is waiting in the wings to change the perception of their value.

Short selling of any financial asset, if done massively enough and unexpectedly, creates confusion in markets. When the price of financial assets swings wildly, which massive short selling does, potential buyers lose a sense of what the market value will be tomorrow, or even this afternoon. This powerfully discourages investment; precisely what we are now seeing. On the kind of scale we have seen, markets have a tendency to simply grind to a halt.

But I am sure people like Soros do not only sell short. It’s just that certain people specialize in destroying asset values, and Soros is probably the foremost among them.
His massive financial support of Obama and the organizations that supported Obama, combined with financial chaos which Soros specializes in creating and without which Obama probably would not have won, is sufficiently suggestive to raise suspicion. I did not say Soros created chaos in the financial markets solely to get Obama elected. Nor did I say he got Obama elected solely to make money. Soros is also a left wing ideologue, or at least claims to be, and Obama would have been his ideal candidate for reasons other than being able to make even more money off the financial carnage he has helped create.

What are you saying Cheney did that was immoral; in the financial world? Maybe he did, but I don’t know about it. Perhaps you could tell us what it was.

A stock being worth “Five years PE” does not even make sense. PE is a ratio that’s knowable only if the price is already known. The PE of a stock varies from day to day, minute to minute, and can vary greatly among very similar stocks. It has absolutely nothing to do with determining prices in the first place.

In any event, the context of your comment suggests that you’re thinking of EPS, not PE.

No, if you will research it, you will find that many stocks undergo attacks by short sellers. The purpose is usually to drive the price of the stock down by overwhelming buyers, and most particularly the market makers. The idea is, then, to buy at an artificially lowered price, having sold stock they do not actually own, at a higher price. It adds absolutely nothing to the economy, and is a pure speculation. But it is a speculation with a difference; the difference being that you’re trying to change the perception of owners and potential buyers, trying to make them think the stock has less value than they thought, for reasons they do not then know. If you have been paying any attention to financial stocks in the U.S., you know for a fact that manipulation is going on. You can actually watch it happen.

There is no conceptual difference between credit default swaps and, e.g., VA or FHA guarantees, or PMI or FDIC insurance for that matter. They might not be prudent when the value of the underlying assets is misperceived, or when someone is waiting in the wings to change the perception of their value.

Short selling of any financial asset, if done massively enough and unexpectedly, creates confusion in markets. When the price of financial assets swings wildly, which massive short selling does, potential buyers lose a sense of what the market value will be tomorrow, or even this afternoon. This powerfully discourages investment; precisely what we are now seeing. On the kind of scale we have seen, markets have a tendency to simply grind to a halt.

But I am sure people like Soros do not only sell short. It’s just that certain people specialize in destroying asset values, and Soros is probably the foremost among them.
His massive financial support of Obama and the organizations that supported Obama, combined with financial chaos which Soros specializes in creating and without which Obama probably would not have won, is sufficiently suggestive to raise suspicion. I did not say Soros created chaos in the financial markets solely to get Obama elected. Nor did I say he got Obama elected solely to make money. Soros is also a left wing ideologue, or at least claims to be, and Obama would have been his ideal candidate for reasons other than being able to make even more money off the financial carnage he has helped create.

What are you saying Cheney did that was immoral; in the financial world? Maybe he did, but I don’t know about it. Perhaps you could tell us what it was.

Let me be more clear since the company is under the fear of facing losses a good price is what you think the companies total profits will be over the next 5 years. thus the Price is best evaluated at the sum of the next 5 years Earnings.

No, if you will research it, you will find that many stocks undergo attacks by short sellers. The purpose is usually to drive the price of the stock down by overwhelming buyers, and most particularly the market makers. The idea is, then, to buy at an artificially lowered price, having sold stock they do not actually own, at a higher price. It adds absolutely nothing to the economy, and is a pure speculation. But it is a speculation with a difference; the difference being that you’re trying to change the perception of owners and potential buyers, trying to make them think the stock has less value than they thought, for reasons they do not then know. If you have been paying any attention to financial stocks in the U.S., you know for a fact that manipulation is going on. You can actually watch it happen.

So all you have to do is buy, buy while they drive the price down and you are a winner so win. What is the problem?

Look I spent 10 minutes on your USB and in ten minutes I found their officers have been selling off massive amounts of stock. Boy are they dumb selling stock, oh wait are they your short sellers? Does Soros own them? Is officers selling stock your personal definition of short sellers?

Let sees the bank system froze up and is in big trouble, the officers are selling, the company is awarding new stock. This equals short selling(?) and thus must be Soros fault?

There is no conceptual difference between credit default swaps and, e.g., VA or FHA guarantees, or PMI or FDIC insurance for that matter. They might not be prudent when the value of the underlying assets is misperceived, or when someone is waiting in the wings to change the perception of their value.

Really A guy biulds a derivative and sells it, knowing it is probably bad, so he builds a credit swap and sells it against the derivative. If the derivative fails buyer 1 losses money, if that is the umpteenth failure the credit swap taker is broke so buyer 2 ends up lossing money. And that is the same as government backed insurance? Well not to me it is not

Short selling of any financial asset, if done massively enough and unexpectedly, creates confusion in markets. When the price of financial assets swings wildly, which massive short selling does, potential buyers lose a sense of what the market value will be tomorrow, or even this afternoon. This powerfully discourages investment; precisely what we are now seeing. On the kind of scale we have seen, markets have a tendency to simply grind to a halt.

Look your USB has often traded 40 million shares a day 60 days so since the common bottom was $25 to get to $10 all we need is to sell 40,000,000 shares at least $10 below value for 60 days roughly $24,000,000,000 and in turn we can do what? buy shares for $15 a share. so what does that do for us? NOTHING ! Others buy this stock and the price goes back $25 and we lose. To short sell successfully you have to see a stock cannot pay the earning it price predicts. If USB is selling for $35 on Oct 08 while banks are in trouble you might say hey this stock simply will not produce the $1.75 per year need to hold the $35 current price. It probably will lose money next year! If this stock will be lucky to produce a $1.50 in the next 3 years combined then it is worth about $10, so lets short this stock.

But I am sure people like Soros do not only sell short. It’s just that certain people specialize in destroying asset values,

and Soros is probably the foremost among them.
His massive financial support of Obama and the organizations that supported Obama, combined with financial chaos which Soros specializes in creating and without which Obama probably would not have won, is sufficiently suggestive to raise suspicion. I did not say Soros created chaos in the financial markets solely to get Obama elected. Nor did I say he got Obama elected solely to make money. Soros is also a left wing ideologue, or at least claims to be, and Obama would have been his ideal candidate for reasons other than being able to make even more money off the financial carnage he has helped create.

What are you saying Cheney did that was immoral; in the financial world? Maybe he did, but I don’t know about it. Perhaps you could tell us what it was. I was not speaking of Chaney’s financies I know little to nothing of that, I was speaking about his coaching staff to suggest links between Iraq, and Al-Quad etc.,

so who has to kill who?

Most conservatives certainly agree with investing in the market. The free market is a good thing, which allows people to make money by investing in the country as a whole getting richer.
There is risk. There is possiblity of failure, and with that a possiblity to learn and self-correct based on those lessons. There is nothing dishonest about making money this way.
I would hope that most of us would not agree with ruthlessly manipulating the market with absolutely no regard for the welfare of others, such as Soros is doing, is somehow a capitalistic thing, a good thing… Such high intelligence in the service of parasitism is not what most conservatives praise when they praise the free markets. Such high intelligence in a sense puts him above the law, for lawmakers just are not at the level where they can formulate laws that will touch him. In terms of ethics though, there is little difference between a Soros and a Madoff. They are in the end both parasites. In terms of scale though, Soros is in a league of his own.

I guess to a Democrat, that one parasite supported Obama makes all the difference. It is not a question of principle anymore or making the greedy pay, but of closing rank around the party faithful.

If one thinks Soros actions and Madoff’s action are even similar I cannot help you

Milton Friedman has probably the best conservative answer to this.The role of government is absolutely necessary, but extending the role to areas where the government is not needed is where the problem lies.
It is not a question of who, but where. Dereliction of duty lies in not providing for adequate defense of country and borders, but even people on the conservative ticket such as Bush and McCain who run afoul of the conservative principles through extending government control and spending in areas where government ought not to go, are criticized very harshly by conservative commentators. MCCain-Feingold had conservtives steaming, and is a good example of this, as was Bush’s huge “compassionate conservative” spending platform.

I never read anything written by Friedman that indicated he would support such talk from this thread he all ways seem clear to me. His message was let the people and markets work it out

If it was a question of who,then conservatives, like leftists, would be supporting or opposing people like Soros according to party affiliation alone. That is just not the case though with conservatives…

…Is a little bit of projection going on here?

Soros follows conservative teachings, Bush an McCain did not, so you pick how you would like

Ten minutes might not have been enough. If you will look closely, you’ll see there were a significant number of short sales out there through February. Then they spiked in early March, which drove the stock significantly down. At that point, the shorts covered and the stock moved up significantly. It may be of interest to know that sales of 99 shares or less are not reported, and there were enormous numbers of 99 share shorts on the peak two days. You would have to know the activity on those days to know that. Also, if you will look again at the insider trading, you will see that insiders were net PURCHASERS during February and March and that insider trading of any kind was minuscule during that period. Insiders were net sellers during January but, considering the scale of insider ownership, it was of very little consequence. The “short attack” speculator activity that had nothing to do with insider trading or the inherent value of the stock. Finally, prior to the short attack, USB cut its dividend 90% because it decided to buy itself out of TARP during the window period. Notwithstanding that, the stock did not decline. The bank is well capitalized, profitable and owns essentially no derivatives. You really need to talk to a broker who specializes in banking if you are truly interested in understanding the speculator activity that has been wracking the banking world… I could point out other examples of the phenomenon; some even more dramatic, but if you are not able to see this one, it would serve little purpose for me to mention others.

This kind of activity is the result of predators like Soros. It causes uncertainty and the loss of asset values in peoples’ 401ks, pension funds, etc. People like Soros have been roiling the markets for nearly a year and enriching themselves at the expense of ordinary people who do not have the economic power to do the things the predators do, or the knowledge required to see what’s going on, get scared and sell to these wolves. I’m not saying the economy is not in a natural correction. It is. But the predators make it much worse than it has to be. You don’t have to defend Soros or his ilk just because he backed your man.

And suddenly I am having second thoughts…

Let the shark attack and dog piling upon me begin.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.