Comments on: Goldman Sachs: No Criticism By Bloggers Allowed

By: rubber_factory

rubber_factory — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:25:21 +0000

The individuals at Goldman Sachs have apparently never heard of the Barbara Streisand effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

By: mark mchugh

mark mchugh — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 02:30:19 +0000

Lori,

I’ve got Barack getting $945K from God-man

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638

By: mark mchugh

mark mchugh — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 02:20:51 +0000

Very funny, Eric!

Let the record show that this story was broken by a British publication. My only question is are American “journalists” too lazy or too scared to write something bad about Goldman.

I mean, who really cares about the first amendment anyway.

By: usphoenix

usphoenix — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 01:33:15 +0000

@FromLori: WOW. And why is this just coming out now?

By: FromLori

FromLori — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 01:19:17 +0000

I love it maybe the resident can help them out they paid plenty for his services…

Let’s start with the numbers. Why is a first term Senator pulling down almost $300,000 a year from Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, Countrywide Financial, and Washington Mutual? He has not even completed his fourth year in the Senate and received a total of $1,093,329.00 from these eight companies and their employees. (all data from OpenSecrets.org). John McCain’s numbers, according to OpenSecrets.org for the period 1990-2008 (i.e., 18 years worth of data) only collected $549,584.00. In other words, Barack is receiving $273,582.25 (and 2008 is not over) per year while McCain raised a paltry $30,532.44.

Want another shocker? Barack Obama has received more from one source–Goldman Sachs $542,252.00–than McCain has from all of the companies combined. Who the hell is more beholden to lobbyists? And why does a junior Senator from Illinois rate this kind of dough?

http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/09/21/baracks-wall-street-problem-is-now-americas/

By: gnomic2

gnomic2 — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 01:18:34 +0000

Actually, having read the complaint by Goldman Sachs, it alleges that the blog is using their trademark, not that the site name violates the trademark. All the guy needs to do is remove the trademark (if indeed he is linking to it) and send them a letter. Case closed.

By: JoWriter

JoWriter — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 23:13:22 +0000

@natoK – gun nuts live in family units or as the press describes it “compounds.” Hippies live in communes.

Let’s keep our terminology straight or we’ll end up insulting nuts of both the left and the right!

More distinctions to show how different these folks are: Gun nuts drink beer and wear camo. Hippies smoke dope and wear flowers in their hair.

By: JohnnyVee

JohnnyVee — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:12:56 +0000

Who needs pitchforks when cyber mobbing is much more dangerous. That’s right, you heard it here first–”cyber mobbing”. Who cares about life or limb when geeks or angry middle aged men begin attacking GS and its attorneys’ via the modem. look out, the first broken window, may be the reformatting of computer servers.

By: natoK

natoK — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 16:57:46 +0000

“It’s 1984 and Blankfein is Big Brother.”

And his other brothers run central banks around the world.

I have to think some of those wild conspiracies are bunk, but then the Bank of Canada ‘selects’ a GS alum to be its CEO. WTF is going on here?

If personal security stocks haven’t run up it may be time to buy.

On a similar note, I thought it was all those nuts in the communes of Idaho and MOntana buying guns that caused Smith and Wesson to soar. Turns out its all the i-bankers looking to protect themselves!

By: How the Common Man Sees It

How the Common Man Sees It — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 16:48:32 +0000

@Eric Davis Says: April 13th, 2009 at 7:26 am

Does Goldman actually hold the intellectual property rights on 666?

HA! Funny one Eric!