Liberal Dose Of Irony

It was reported by CNN on January 5, 2010 that Congress was going to investigate the Bernard Madoff ponzi scheme.

NEW YORK ( — Lawmakers took a hard look Monday at the alleged $50 billion investment scam engineered by Bernard Madoff that has sent shock waves across the nation’s already fragile financial system.

At a hearing held by a House Financial Services subcommittee, lawmakers largely focused on how Madoff managed to evade detection for so long and whether gaps in regulation allowed him to carry out his alleged multi-billion Ponzi scheme.

“Before we act we need to understand how Mr. Madoff organized his many business operations and how he perpetrated his alleged fraudulent acts,” said Paul Kanjorski, D-Penn, the chairman of the subcommittee.

The irony of this should not be lost on the American people. The man who made $50 billion disappear is now being investigated by the people who have made over $750 billion disappear so far!

Of course the current Liberal regime may be just looking for clues on how Madoff did it so that they can use those methods themselves. After all, ObamaCare is going to need of the “creative” funding help it can get or fabricate. 😉

Tags: | | | | | | | | | |

25 Responses to “Liberal Dose Of Irony”

  1. zhann Says:

    Madoff … my hero. I only wish I couldn’t pull off a scheme like that 😉

    Regardless, your article reminds of a great quote I read the other day:

    The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too.
    — Oscar Levant

    Lets be honest, in degrees of corruption, pointing fingers is meaningless. The Republicans made so much money on the Iraq/Afghanistan war effort, the Democrats are just trying to get a piece for themselves now too.

    … as for $750 Billion, what about the other $7 Trillion already spent?

  2. Elric66 Says:

    Who made money off the war effort?

    We know libse are raking in the dough on the global warming scam.

  3. zhann Says:

    Elric, are you serious? It is difficult to take your sincerity seriously seriously if you aren’t even aware of how money is made on War, the Iraq war especially. I can see that you have no love for liberals, which is more than understandable. However, if you don’t see the starking similarities between Democrats and Republicans, at least with respect to corruption, then your opinion can be viewed as merely one of hate with no real background knowledge.

  4. Elric66 Says:

    Couldnt name one? I didnt think so.

  5. zhann Says:

    One? … ok, Cheney

  6. Elric66 Says:

    He did? How so?

  7. jonolan Says:


    Cheney was CEO of Halliburton for 5 years prior to being Vice President. If his compensation package was at all normal, he left them with a large bundle of stock in the company.

    Since Halliburton, in the form of their subsidiary KBR, Inc. made literally 10s of billions of dollars rebuilding Iraq and its oil refineries, it stands to reason that Cheney too made a tidy profit from his stock holdings.

    I see little or nothing wrong with that, but it does answer your question.

  8. Elric66 Says:

    Even if its true, it pales in comparison to this global warming scam. And of course was laughable that Zhann justified this global warming scam because Cheney made some money of Halliburton. Truly insane.

  9. jonolan Says:

    Actually, very little money has been made by Democrat / Liberal / Warmist / Socialist politicians in America off the Warmists’ scam as of yet.

    True, Pelosi stands to possible make a mint off her wind farm stocks if enough grants and such are given. But that largely hasn’t happened yet.

    Right now the AGW scare isn’t making anyone in America any significant money.

  10. zhann Says:

    Elric, there is much more to the war effort’s corruption than Cheney’s end. The Bush family made billions (theoretically) off the oil spike which resulted from the war. Ridiculous amounts of money was funneled into Iraq, for the sole purpose of paying off Iraqi officials, in cash … I remember The Daily Show doing a piece on this where they showed the pallets of money being loaded on planes, with absolutely no oversight as to where the money went. Can you imagine pallets of hundred dollar bills being flown into Iraq with no oversight?

    My point is simple, it is very easy to point at the Democrats saying that they are corrupt. However, it is equally easy to do the same to the Republicans, the Independents or to any other political party. Nobody spends hundreds of millions of dollars to become president, only for a $400k/year salary, and likewise nobody spends tens of millions to become a senator for the $200k/year salary. Corruption is understood, it is simply ignored by the people because they aren’t directly affected by it.

  11. Elric66 Says:

    Ah ohhh he brought up theories, the debate is over.

  12. jonolan Says:

    zhann’s “theory” and point are sound, Elric66. Politicians in America are largely, if not universally corrupt. That holds true for all parties.

    The only difference between them is what part of America are they willing to sell out, for how much, and to who.

    Of course, no other Congress has managed to “disappear” so much money in so short of a time with so few seeming to benefit from it, either through titular effect or corruption.

  13. Elric66 Says:

    Also conservatives hold their politicians accountable, the libs reward them with life terms.

  14. zhann Says:

    Elric, putting conservatives on a pedestal isn’t healthy. It is one thing to despise the liberals, but it is quite another to canonize the conservatives. In the end, the differences between the two are matter of minor details … important details, but minor none the less.

  15. Elric66 Says:

    Im not putting them on a pedestal. Im saying that conservatives wouldnt reward scumbags like Rangel, Reid, Dodd, Ted Kennedy, Cold Cash Jefferson etc with reelection after reelection. Thats the difference between conservatives and liberals. A poll was done recently and asked what they looked for in a candidate. For a conservative it was someone who reflected their values, for a lib, it was somebody who could win.

  16. John Nolan Says:


    It should be noted – or, at least I hope it’s worthy of note since the alternative is unpleasant – that Elric66 has spoken in Liberal v. Conservative terms, not GOP v. Dems.

  17. zhann Says:

    I am not sure I agree, how is it that Bush was reelected? This is a man who, from day one, cared only about his own personal goals. Liberals saw through Bush, yet the conservatives couldn’t. It could be argued that conservatives are war hungry, and seeing as how Bush’s policies were driven in that direction his conservative base reelected him.

    Why do you feel that conservatives weed out corrupt politicians while liberals don’t? I am sure that for every corrupt liberal you name, I will find a corrupt conservative.

  18. Elric66 Says:

    “This is a man who, from day one, cared only about his own personal goals.”


    “Liberals saw through Bush, yet the conservatives couldn’t.”

    Same liberals that elected al-Thuggy?

    “It could be argued that conservatives are war hungry, and seeing as how Bush’s policies were driven in that direction his conservative base reelected him.”

    You got us, we are warmongers bent on taking over the world.

    “Why do you feel that conservatives weed out corrupt politicians while liberals don’t?”

    Because we do

  19. jonolan Says:


    “Why do you feel that conservatives weed out corrupt politicians while liberals don’t?”

    Because we do

    That’s not much of an argument or defense. I believe that you’ve set yourself to get your own words, or a paraphrasing of them, thrown into your teeth – “Couldn’t name one? I didn’t think so.”

  20. Elric66 Says:

    You know we do. What do you think the Tea Party Movement is for? Besides, can you name any Republican on the scales of Dodd, Reid, Ted Kennedy, al-Thuggy, Reid, Pelosi? Please. The one reason Demomarxists took back the House and Senate was because Conservatives stayed home. Hell, the Demomarxist nominate a tax cheat to head the IRS. You think conservatives would put up with that? The Dems have a habitual tax cheat head of the Ways and Means Committee.

    Anything else?

  21. in2thefray Says:

    of some note the pallets of money were actually Iraqi funds. Yes they were US Benjamins but the money was released Iraqi oil money,property sales cash and remains of oil for food funds.
    As for corruption,it is truly universal.
    As for there being some right left divide on Iraq/Afghanistan war profiteering. People are not being honest here. Both parties have people invested in the companies that benefit from war. I’m curious though. How far are the thread folks going in the assertion that the wars were started for that reason?

  22. jonolan Says:

    For myself, I don’t believe that the Iraq war was started with a profit-based motive at all. I’ve always thought of it as being started for the combination of reasons consisting of:

    1 – Fear resulting from not having responded to intel prior to 9/11
    2 – Finishing what we started with Gulf 1
    3 – Saddam “green lighted” President Bush Sr.

    I believe that any profiteering was a later addition that was done in the hopes of defraying the perceived costs of the war – i.e., getting something tangible for America out of it.

  23. zhann Says:

    This may be my anarchist side showing, but I think that before any war profit is always considered. Those in command of the war ensure that they profit.

    If there is no money to be made in the war, I think it is ignored. Africa comes to mind.

  24. Elric66 Says:

    All I can say is if Martha Coakley were a Republican no conservative would pull the lever for that vile woman. But she is a demomarxist and she can still win with all her bagage.

  25. Liberal Dose Of Irony | Mizozo Says:

    […] Reflections From a Murky Pond […]

Leave a Reply