The reality behind the often reported story of an ACORN member who is part of the San Francisco Occupy movement is far more complex than the mainstream press has told the public. Donna Vieira, a frequent spokesman for the 99% who tells the heartrending tale of having her home foreclosed on, is actually referring to a second home in another state that she and her husband paid nearly $750,000 for. It’s an example of how the press has been negligent in doing even basic checks to get to the reality behind the media myths of the Occupy movement and how a disparate group of people with their own agendas have glommed onto the Movement.
While researching the recent Occupy/Union/ACORN shut down of Wells Fargo and Bank of America in San Francisco’s financial district, I noticed that two different newspaper articles quoted the same woman: Donna Vieira.
The San Francisco Examiner identified her as a member of the renamed ACORN group ACCE:
But Donna Vieira, 42, a member of the statewide Association of Californians for Community Empowerment, welcomed some of the more provocative tactics, barring violence.
“I was sitting on the floor chained up with two teachers,” said Vieira, who spent Friday morning occupying Wells Fargo’s headquarters. “When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.”
And Reuters reported:
Donna Vieira, 42, a real estate appraiser, said she was protesting because the bank had “unfairly” foreclosed on her home in Reno, Nevada, last year.
“Nobody is going after the big banks. And loss and pain and suffering doesn’t matter to the regulators,” Vieira said.
My first thought was probably about the same as many people reading those articles – here’s a middle-aged woman taking desperate measures against big banks that got bailouts while her home was foreclosed on. I noticed that the home was in Reno, Nevada and wondered for a moment if she might’ve been reduced to homelessness on the streets of San Francisco, hundreds of miles away; a victim of the cold injustice of capitalism.
But my second thought occurred about five seconds later. What I’ve learned in the past few years is that you can’t take stories like this at face value. It didn’t take more than about 30 seconds of research using publicly available, free Internet search tools to discover just how many “facts” have been neglected in the story about this activist/spokesman for the 99%.
According to this story entitled “Faces of Foreclosure: Family Won’t Give Up,” the home was foreclosed on in Reno was not the Vieira family’s place of residence. It was, in fact, a second home of the family, who actually live in San Leandro, a medium-size residential community just across the bay from San Francisco.
The reason that Wells Fargo foreclosed? Apparently it wasn’t hardship on the part of the Vieiras family. They simply stopped making payments to Wells Fargo because they felt that an appraisal conducted by an independent firm was “fraudulent.”
The case is still stuck in Nevada’s court system. In the meantime, Wells Fargo foreclosed on the family’s Reno home for nonpayment.
“Knowing the mortgage was fraudulent, we just couldn’t keep on paying,” Nuno (Donna’s husband) said, adding that they stopped making mortgage payments in September of 2009.
The family still resides at their house in San Leandro, which they bought in 1997, but the foreclosure on the Reno property has made it harder to refinance and get a better mortgage interest rate on their current home.
“Despite the foreclosure, both of us still maintain near perfect credit scores,” Vieira said, “but due to something that is completely not our fault, we can’t take advantage of the low mortgage rates now and switch to a 30-year fixed. It just creates so much uncertainty in our life.”
While boasting about the couple’s “near perfect credit score,” the article also reveals the fact that the family sends their son to private school, despite the good public schools in the area.
“We can’t send Leo [to the public school], because I don’t have the time to help him with his homework or to track his progress in school,” she said.
Thankfully, Mrs. Vieira has put up a website at WellsFargoMortagoFraud.com that provides a number of legal papers that shed even more light on the story.
The heart of the Vieiras’ complaint is about an appraisal that they claim was fraudulent. The District Court points out in this 2009 Motion of Summary Judgment that both Donna Vieira and her husband are–wait for it–licensed real estate appraisers. The court also points out that the contested appraisal was performed four months after the Vieira family had already entered into a contract to buy the home. Both the Vieiras also testified that they did not rely on the appraisal when they agreed to buy the house for $715,000 because they had experience in valuing real estate and believed the asking amount was fair. They never even inquired about the results of the appraisal in question until a year after escrow closed on the house.
The “Faces of Foreclosure” article puts the value of the house at $565,000, but the district court documents says that the Vieiras agreed to pay $715,000. As this chart shows, they bought the home at the very height of the housing bubble, when many people thought the value of homes would continue going up.
In other words, it seems that the Vieiras made a bad investment on a second home and now would like to be bailed out for it.
There are many people who have been affected by the bad economy. With their near perfect credit score, their son in private school, and apparently ample time to protest, the Vieras do not appear at first glance to be one of them. It’s also questionable whether not being able to do a refi on your house because you intentionally stopped making payments to the bank on your second home qualifies somebody as a prime example of the 99%.
However, people glancing at the newspaper over their breakfast will learn none of this. They will only pick up the snippets that the mainstream media spoonfeeds to them in order to create a picture of hard times and economic injustice sufficient to possibly justify rioting in the streets and the violent shut-down of private businesses.







Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
179 Comments
Good work, Lee.
Can you help the rest of us understand why other reporters don't do this?
This woman and her husband should be prosecuted for fraud. They freely entered into a mortgage without intending to make payment. Jail them both.
Gotta' hand it to you, Lee. You're a darn good snoop! And not in a bad way!
Would that a Repub read the story here and bring it up on this 1000th day of no budget. (Yeah, I know they are not related stories but, I can dream can't I?)
I seriously doubt we will find this mentioned even in the Penny Saver of San Fran!
She is the 1%. Why is OWS always led and represented by personally wealthy individuals? Look up the term Nomenclatura.
You need help, Rob?
The fact that she is an Acorn member who is part of the San Fran OWS crowd actually makes her being booted out of her house a subject of amusement to me to be truly honest. Now if only she was found to owe 200k in back taxes that she's being prosecuted over I would call it justice for her support of fascism and large scale institutionalized thievery.
'Cuz it doesn't fit their perfectly crafted narrative, you silly peasant……
Ummm, you won't find it, Oregon
I just thought you might want to hear this from a friendly voice before the spellnazi trolls pile on.
Great investigative reporting! I'm seeing stories like this woman's all over Facebook (I have a lot of asshat friends, what can I say) and they just fall for it. I doubt reading Lee's story would even give them pause. It's all about feelings with them, facts be damned.
Thanx, thought is looked a bit off. Damn, best of intentions.
She represents me as much as the activist Barry H. Obama does, and people wonder of the cause of oppositional defiant antiauthoritarianism.
Yeah. Why is that, MBP?
Is that like, "Scratch an OWSer and you'll find a millionaire residing within!" ?
Something tells me her and her husband's skills as appraisers might be looked upon with a wary eye these days, no?
Maybe she's destined to be a "99%er" in the not too distant future unless they have other marketable abilities.
Why do I think they don't?
Journalism 101: Just the facts Mam! Check the facts… then and only then report the story.
Heck, I could teach a Journalism class and maybe just maybe the ignorant masses will take their collective heads out of…… the sand!
Stupid people with DOT BOMB get rich quick schemes in California created the housing bubble….. oooops… the bubble burst. Live with it! Two homes over $1million in assets…. hum…. is she really a 99%er?
Sure are hard on simple spelling errors here.
The msm are a lazy bunch and mindless in their bias.
That's why O'Keefe is so effective and needed in his efforts to expose them.
Wow another sniveling, whining, lying leftist blaming anyone but themselves for their problems. I know I'm shocked.
Good detective work, Lee. But I think you fail to understand that Occupy is not a movement of those who are poor or suffering. The poor are included but we are people with jobs, professions, businesses and vocations. There are no rules that say you can't be well off to be a part of it. Injustice is distasteful to many who have plenty.
I don't see this woman claiming to be a "prime example" of anything.
In my county, there will be a protest on Friday regarding unfair appraisals. The County Assessor has been called to task and may be forced to resign. I don't know exactly what he is accused of but I do know that property owners are outraged at recent assessments. They are being assessed for things they don't have. It's a travesty.
It is because in communist countries the Nomenclatura has far more wealth and power than any member of the oligarchy living in a capitalist nation. These are greedy power hungry genocidal pigs. They need to be exposed and crushed. It is up to us to do it. Freedom is never free, neither is my labor.
You were deleted by the admin for a spelling error???!!!
Cry me a river, she thinks she got screwed on her $715,000 SECOND home? People like this are a large part of the problem, "I can afford to pay my mortgage, but I'm not going to, because my house isn't worth enough". Typical left wing whiner, I hope Wells Fargo goes after her primary residence, and dicks up her "Perfect" credit score.
What Lee says about the sad lack of even basic curiousity, fact-checking or investigation on the part of our local news reporters is true.
A local NY outlet reported a woman's story of why she supported the OWS movement. The story reported her name and not much else. A simple Google search revealed the woman to be a professional agitator and communist who had been active in such things for a long time, and NOT just an "average citizen". (It was Lee's article here http://biggovernment.com/lstranahan/2012/01/24/pr... that recalled that woman's name: Lisa Fithian)
Here's the sloppy, negligent NY1 article: http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stories/147351/soc...
I wrote a comment under the article online and also contacted the editor by email to castigate the sloppy job.
The news won't inform you of anything they don't want you to know or don't care about.
I have no sympathy for this woman.
I met this woman at a rally in SF.
I was there to fight for economic justice myself. You see, my Jaguar had developed engine trouble and the mechanic charged me 20% more than the original quote just because he found some "unauthorized" repairs I'd done that voided the warranty so I refused to pay him of course and when he put a totally unfair mechanic's lean on my baby I was unable to drive my daughter to Stanford where she is an Ethnic Studies major so of course we had to fly her there in the Gulfstream which has developed problems with the wine refrigerator so we didn't even have a decent chablis to enjoy on the way which was just so unfair…I'm sure you all have experienced the same sort of injustices in your own lives and that's why we 99%-ers need to stand in solidarity against the fat cats.
What injustice did this woman suffer, exactly?
OWS is a movement which EXPLOITS the poor in order to advance class envy which divides the less well-off from the more well-off and fractures society further than the constant race-baiting of the Obama administration has already done.
I live on LI (not by choice) where the Democrats have taxed us to bits and the cost of living is awful. I still realize I have it better than many others. I also know I am not as wealthy as many. Guess what? I DON'T CARE! I have what I've earned, and I have enough. I'm not staring greedily at my neighbors' things thinking "Oh I want that too!"
America grants us equal opportunity, not guaranteed outcomes. OWS needs to figure this out before they get their @sses handed to them by non-greedy Americans.
2 homes, check. works for acorn, or newly named entity, check. sends kids to private school, check. stopped paying monthly payment, check. part of the 99%, hell no!!
Wow, must be nice to have a SECOND mansion. I'll certainly never know what that's like.
The entire point of the article went over your head, way over your head, not even close…………..
They are in the entertainment business, not the news business. ….get the widow on the set….
At least I hope that is the case, the only other explanation is they are on drugs (Jayson Blair), deluded (Dan Rather) or they are activists and only masquerade as news reporters….
There you go misunderstanding again. Did I say she suffered injustice? Must she suffer to oppose injustice? I think not.
Why does this woman's story remind me of the joke about a "Lady who provides commercial affection" who didn't realize she had been raped until the check bounced?
Her story is being misrepresented.
I bet a lot of the stories we hear are.
That's wrong.
They're not going to get it, look at rosehips' post above. How she makes it through the day remains a mystery.
another poor sap who doesn't get it.
Get the hell off Long Island. What makes it so impossible to leave?
Stop forming your opinion of Occupy based on the media. I don't know anyone who wants what your neighbors have.
I get the point. It just misses it. Like you.
The reason that Wells Fargo foreclosed? Apparently it wasn’t hardship on the part of the Vieiras family. They simply stopped making payments to Wells Fargo because they felt that an appraisal conducted by an independent firm was “fraudulent.”
This makes no sense. They stopped making payments because they thought they were overcharged for the house? An appraisal is done so that the bank can get an idea if the property is worth what the bank loans out. In other words, the appraisal is done to minimize risk to the bank. It has nothing to do with whatever amount the purchaser agrees to pay for the house. That happens before the bank ever gets involved.
Here's what I think happened: The real estate crash caused their Reno house to go underwater on the mortgage. Instead of walking away (Is Nevada a non-recourse state? Someone help me here) and taking the lumps on their credit score, they're trying to claim fraud to have the whole purchase nullified.
“Despite the foreclosure, both of us still maintain near perfect credit scores,” Vieira said, “but due to something that is completely not our fault, we can’t take advantage of the low mortgage rates now and switch to a 30-year fixed. It just creates so much uncertainty in our life.”
Are these people complete idiots or do they think that everyone else is? You just stiffed the bank and claimed they cheated you (how?) and you can't understand why no one would want to loan you money again? Sheesh!
wow, I mean wow. Often times people don't have the ability to see their own failings, but this womans complete lack of introspection or ability to take accountability is shocking. It's over the top even for an OWSer.
Perhaps, but I think that is debatable. I don't see her being characterized as anything but disgruntled. Maybe she has good reason to feel she is being treated unfairly. Walking away from a house of that value certainly could cause stress and depression. I don't sympathize with her all that much but I don't necessarily see her being represented as something she is not. What exactly are they saying that isn't true?
“When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.” – Vieira the Occupier
…When a Marxist becomes President and leads an Army of Street Radicals, Resistance to Them is Survival…..
What I have learned is that the Left is so cynical, the truth actually does not matter to them.
It's all about getting their message out. They could care less if their lies are exposed…so long as they get their propaganda out to enough of their foot soldiers. By now, they know that the MSM will never scrutinize them…will always take their hard luck stories at face value.
Did you read the entire story, like the part where both she and her husband are appraisers and agreed to purchase the home at the asking price and then when the marked collapsed defaulted on the loan?
Since they are both certified appraisers, why did they not verify the appraisal on the property in question prior to purchase? If memory serves, an appraisal is part of the document package prior to signing. Sounds like two greedy folks were in a hurry to make a handsome profit but lost their investment instead due to shoddy homework.
So anyone who can afford to purchase a $700K second home is definitely what you would call the "1%". Why am I not surprised. Rich liberals who feel they should be bailed out so they can remain rich. 99% indeed.
Yes, I read it. I guess I'd need more information to make my opinion. They claim the appraisal was fraudulent. Perhaps it was.
Is the point now that these people are unethical for walking away from a bad investment? I thought it was about leaving pertinent information out of the story that would show the woman is misrepresenting herself.
Is she blaming the banks unjustly? I don't really know.
Good reporting but the attached pleading is an Order dismissing her claims. Not easy to get but indicative of the fact that she and her husband had no recognizable claims and were just seeing what they could shake out of Wells. In other words, a very weak case. I would also be interested to find out if the home was in Reno or nearby Lake Tahoe. Losing a ski condo doesn't carry quite the heft as losing ones home.
Seems to me that the bank is the one who got screwed here. After all, they loaned $715,000 on a home worth only $565,000.
The money loaned out has already been paid out to the seller. Now the bank is on the hook for the loss since this "deadbeat" lendee has refused to live up to her end of the contract.
Am I wrong here?
My guess is that it was an investment property. $717k is a LOT of money for Reno.
I didn't want to get deep in the legal weeds, but the court spanked them pretty hard — and she's STILL fighting it.
“I was sitting on the floor chained up with two teachers,” said Vieira, who spent Friday morning occupying Wells Fargo’s headquarters. “When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.”
A filthy Marxist has no business quoting Thomas Jefferson. Foreclosing on a mortgage has been a law for time immemorial. If you can't afford the house don't buy it; if you only find out later because of a loss of a job, etc., then sell it if you can, even on a short sale basis, or let it go. There is no injustice in that.
I think you're right — look at the chart I linked to. They bought at the EXACT wrong time.
Now that would be justice!
Do you think that licensed real estate appraisers know just a little about the industry? My BS detector is going off at full volume when I read that TWO people who are appraisers agree to purchase a second home at the peak of the market and then a year after the escrow account closes and the market collapses they DEFAULT on the loan. They don't have to default to be able to claim that the loan was fraudulent, if the claim had any merit they would win and get all of their money back. They quit making payments because they knew that they made a bad investment.
"The court also points out that the contested appraisal was performed four months after the Vieira family had already entered into a contract to buy the home. Both the Vieiras also testified that they did not rely on the appraisal when they agreed to buy the house for $715,000 because they had experience in valuing real estate and believed the asking amount was fair. They never even inquired about the results of the appraisal in question until a year after escrow closed on the house."
In the old days, when I was still a moderate liberal/swing voter, I would have fallen for most of this crap because I didn't take the time to do what Lee does (and what I do now and so do many of you). Now everytime I hear a sob story, I'm skeptical. I hate to be that way because I think pretty much every American has good heart and hates to see people struggle and suffer and they want to help. But we also don't like being taken for a ride.
Speaking of good people – I was at the Post Office yesterday standing in a long line. I had to call my cell phone company to make sure they had received my payment and to double check the due date of my next payment because I had gotten behind. I was on the phone in line and talking as quietly as possible. Well, an elderly lady in front of me must have heard the conversation. As she was called up to take care of her business, she turned to me and handed me a $20 bill and said "This should help you out a bit, dear." I refused, but she went up to the counter. I followed her as quietly as possible and said to her that I could not take her money, that I was fine and certainly there were others who needed more help than I did (I'm struggling but I have a roof over my head, some income and a retired mom who helps me out watching my kids so I can work). I told her "God Bless you". She returned the words and we hugged.
Things like that restore my faith in America and humanity.
Rosehips is just being deliberately obtuse. He/She can't stand the fact that he/she might be wrong.
We have formed our opinion by looking at OWS ACTIONS.
"I don't know anyone who wants what your neighbors have."
Of course you don't.
It's totally above his/her pay grade. Either that or he/she is being deliberately obtuse.
Same with that stupid kid that was video taped screaming in the streets about the injustice his parents were experiencing because their house was being foreclosed upon. He's a student at GWU which costs $70,000 a year and when someone took the time to get a comment from his mother, we find out that they aren't being foreclosed on. They're putting their house up for a short sale.
If it doesn't fit the narrative, they don't report it. That simple.
You're not wrong if Nevada is a non-recourse state.
In a non-recourse state, the mortgage is secured solely by the value of the house. In a foreclosure sale, if the bank can't get back what they loaned out, too bad. In a recourse state, like New York, the bank can still come after you for any shortfall from the foreclosure sale.
Being used to the OWS and MSM crowd she didn't expect us to rely on facts.
"deliberately obtuse" – EXACTLY the words that were running thru my head as i each post…
and playing that coy game lefties love- repeatedly telling others that we're the ones who simply don't understand, while refusing to be specific about exactly what point(s) we're missing, and changing the subject when pressed.
Okay, maybe they are just sour that they lost money on the investment and decided to bail or maybe the appraisal was wrong and, being appraisers, they smelled a rat. I really don't know.
Doesn't exclude the woman from protesting injustice. Banks got bailed out. We got sold out.
Here's a different story: I had neighbor-friends that bought their house at the height of the market. I'm talking a 1500 square foot detached condo, same plan as mine. They paid DOUBLE what I paid back in 2002. Employment was not working out for them here in CA and he had a job offer back East. They tried to do a short sale with the bank and the bank refused (I don't understand that at all – I mean, if the person can't afford the mortgage and needs to move, why not do a short sale instead of the hassle of a foreclosure?). So they just picked up and left, understanding that it would be foreclosed upon and it would ding their credit.
Do you suppose their lawsuit was calculated to delay loss of possession, so they could rent it out for a few more months?
Don't be bringing common sense into this discussion.
i love this place.
Exactly.
You look at you want to see. What part of "Banks got bailed out. We got sold out" don't you agree with?
Banking professionals and Wall St brokers figured out how to game the system and they are still getting away with it. Being considered "too big to fail" they were bailed out. Credit default swaps and other clever dodges allowed banks to make loans without risk. What part of that don't you want changed, ladykrstyna?
Yup, pretty much. That's all they know how to do when cornered. Well, that or rant and rave at you and call you names.
"…they're trying to claim fraud to have the whole purchase nullified." -i believe you nailed it.
Thanks Mr. Stranahan. There is a thing that economists call The Greater Fool Theory. It states that you can always find someone stupider than you who will buy something from you for more than what you paid. This is usually in play in any kind of asset bubble. Think house flippers.
There is something I call The Wrong End of the Greater Fool Theory: When there isn't anyone stupider than you. That's when asset bubbles pop.
"Banks got bailed out. We got sold out."
And who's fault was that? THE GOVERNMENT. Why? Because the gov't is TOO BIG and therefore is ripe for bribery and corruption. Limit the gov't to reasonable regulations about things they are supposed to be taking care of pursuant to the Constitution and you'll have less corruption and less bail outs for ANYBODY – individual or corporation or bank.
It's true. I don't know one person who would want to live on Long Island. I live in rural Washington State but am from NY originally. I was born in Queens. Believe me, NO ONE here wants that.
The appraisal was made 4 months AFTER they signed a contract and they TESTIFIED in COURT that,………… read it……"Both the Vieiras also testified that they did not rely on the appraisal when they agreed to buy the house for $715,000 because they had experience in valuing real estate and believed the asking amount was fair."
She is despicable and is using others to portray herself as a victim.
And who let that all happen. You told the banks to make risky loans or they would be punished?
THE GOVERNMENT. The overbloated, drunk on spending gov't. Limit the gov't to its constitutional powers, limit it to reasonable regulations and cut down on corruption, lobbying and "Crony Capitalism" (which is nothing more than proto-fascism).
The OWS do not want limited gov't. They want MORE gov't doing what they want gov't to do which is to give them "free stuff".
I'm against individual welfare and bail outs and I'm against corporate/bank welfare and bail outs. I'm for limited gov't and individual liberty.
What part of that don't you agree with, dear?
Wow, great non answer. I wasn't talking about your neighbors wanting to live on LI and neither was Don't Tread. We're talking about generalities – keeping up with the Joneses, wanting the material things your neighbors have or what wealthier people have.
That is where the trouble starts. That is why coveting is in the Ten Commandments and why envy is one of the 7 Deadly Sins.
I used to live in the great state of Washington back in the '70's, then the liberals moved in and f#cked it up.
God bless you….
Sorry– they could give a rip if you're entertained by their antics…
They have an Agenda. It's all the news that THEY feel is fit to present (and in their chosen perspective)– to push society towards their goals.
This has been shown time and again through surveys and interviews of students in Journalism School– they join predominately to "Make A Difference" and/or "Change the world" (which, ironically, is not the role of a journalist– it used to be reporting the facts of the day to day happenings in the world).
And you for the work you do. Keep plugging away and exposing the Truth. It will set us all free.
Now that's funny. I don't know any lefty that doesn't want everything their neighbors have.
Who would gain by having the house appraised at a LOWER value ($565k vs $715K)?
I'm against entitlements to those who don't need it. I'm against corporations owning our politicians. I'm against Corporations having the same rights as people. I want campaign reform, tax reform and more environmental protection.
I know plenty of people who want more materialistic things. I advocate for simplicity and less consumption. Our society has created a country of gimmee more. I loath the American way but resign myself to live in this world and change this mindset. lol So what am I doing here???
most Americans want more.
What does the bank being bailed out have to do with a couple of people signing on the dotted line – voluntarily – to buy a house they thought was priced fairly? At the time of signing, aren't the people who signed the contract bound to it? Why is the bank's fault? Is there no personal responsibility anymore? What's the injustice? That the bank wants their money and she won't pay it?
Amen, sister. These OWS rats aren't upset that banks were abiled out, they're mad that they didn't get the free lunch first.
No one got sold out. People entered into contracts, that's all. "Clever dodges allowed banks to make loans without risk", really? If their was no risk why did they need bailing out? Why was there a need at all to come up with these "clever dodges"? Could it be that the banks were forced to make high risk loans they would not have ever done willingly. Ever hear of a sub-prime loan? It wasn't the loan that was sub-prime it was the borrower. The banks would have preferred not to have made these loans at all. It's even possible that those banks could never get "to big to fail" without sub-prime loans. And how did they come to be in the first place? Start with the CRA and then to Acorn activists chaining themselves in bank lobbies (not today fool) years back.
But like you said "You look at you want to see."
lol, still plenty of conservatives in my neck of the woods. Cathy McMorris Rodgers is from here and she is the local darling in Congress. Whenever Boehner speaks you can bet you'll see her standing behind his left shoulder. Or is that his right?
I remember that. They're doing the same thing to some of the other states around there. Liberal Californians ARE a virus!
yeah, I know the stereotypical lib you are talking about. She wears birkenstocks and hemp clothing right?
lol, my pay grade? I'm not that type of liberal. No pay grades here.
Corporations have SIMILAR rights as individuals do because individuals do not lose their constitutional rights when they agree to associate as a group. If Corporations did not have similar rights, then, for instance, without the protection of the 4th Amendment, the gov't could come in and seize their inventory and documents without so much as a "how do you do?" let alone a warrant.
Why don't you RESEARCH why corporations have such rights before you just spout off Leftist talking points.
If you don't want corporations to "own" our politicians, then give them less reason to have lobbyists. At one time, Microsoft had ZERO lobbyists in D.C. Then D.C. decided it needed to get involved in Microsoft's business and now it has 300 lobbyists. Do some research on industries that are little regulated and then find out how many lobbyists they have in D.C. It might surprise you.
If you don't like the American way, then feel free to move to Europe where they have 6 week vacations and retire at 55. It's working so well for them, especially Greece.
The American Way, btw, does not mean we all want to be filthy rich and have stuff. The American Way is that I put in hard work and time and money and I make a little life for myself, whatever that is. I'm happy being a middle class woman with 2 kids. I'm not looking to work 60 hours a week so that I never see my children just so I can have a bigger house, a fancy car and go on fancy vacations. My father and mother were the same way. I wanted for no essentials in my youth and have nothing but great memories of simple inexpensive holidays.
But someone else might want more. Might want to build a company and make money and make stuff or provide services. They might want to have 3 houses and 10 cars. As long as they did it through the free market and it wasn't illegal, what the hell do I care?
This woman sounds like one of the striking football players in THE REPLACEMENTS
"Do you have any idea what insurance costs for a Ferrari?"
And so what if they want more – as long as they work for it and earn it themselves, what does it matter?
Too many Americans want more, but at the expense of others – like the so-called "rich". They don't want to work for it, study for it, earn it. They want it handed to them. That is much of what makes up the OWS – parasites.
you can stop using ambiguous labels on me. I am a girl.
Yes, we need to limit government and get corporations out of politics.
Anyone who thinks we don't need radical changes to the way corporations own our politicians and write our laws is not paying attention.
wrong
Your anger shopuld be focused on CONGRESS, who WRITES the laws that corporations must adhere to. Not corporations.
If you're upset about cronyism, help elect a better caliber of Congressman, as the TEA party is working towards.
Yes, I agree they should be good for their word and should honor the contract, unless there is provable fraud.
Many have been tricked into taking on loans they can't afford. There are a lot of dumb people in this country and there are a lot of greedy ones. People gamble all the time. I don't condone it or emulate it. I don't even own my home. I have no mortgage. I don't have any debt. When I lost my job, I had savings. I had assets. I only bought what I could afford. Most people don't live the way I do. It's a tragedy.
You must be logged in to post a comment.