Rewriting History

There was an amusing incident at work.

I'm doing QA. I filed a bug report. Someone fixed the bug. Then, someone complained that my bug report was invalid, because the code was right now! The code is on the server, so I have no proof that it ever was wrong!

I told the story to my parents. My mother's reaction was amusing. She said "How do you know it really was a bug?" She assumed, by default, that my bug report was wrong and the parasitic programmer was right.

If I were the owner of the business, this would be a firing offense. It's one thing to make a bug. It's another to lie about it and cover it up.

For some things I'm QAing, the answers are all NULL or all zero, which is obviously a wrong result. Their test data is lousy/wrong. I asked for better test scenarios, but they haven't created them for me.

I'm getting better at reading body language know. The body language of the developers is "I know this project is a disaster. I'm trying to cover it up." Of course, someone unethical like that is more likely to be involved in a project that's a huge disaster!

My direct coworkers are also doing QA. They are not the developers. They also have complaints about the quality of the code and output. I shouldn't be at any personal risk. However, it's always risky to be near a disaster.

State vs. Takeru Kobayashi

This story was interesting. Takeru Kobayashi is the hot dog eating champion.

He did not participate in this year's contest at Nathan's in Coney Island. He crashed the event and got himself arrested. Most news coverage of this incident didn't mention the real issue.

Takeru Kobayashi refused to sign a contract with "Major League Eating". As terms of the contract, he would be barred from participating in other events. He makes a lot of money from other events, so he refused to sign the contract. Therefore, he was barred from the Nathan's event.

This is an example of State restriction of the market. Such a clause is obviously unfair. Major League Eating may demand such a clause. State restriction of the market gives employers unfair leverage over employees.

Still, Takeru Kobayashi took the wrong approach. Instead of crashing Nathan's event, he should have organized his own competing event. By going to the event and getting himself arrested, he added a sense of legitimacy to Nathan's event.

David Axelrod, State Psychopath

David Axelrod gave an interview on the Daily Show. (part 1, part 2, part 3) David Axelrod is one of President Obama's top political advisers.

The interview was hilarious, in a way Jon Stewart and David Axelrod didn't intend. David Axelrod's psychopathic speaking style was very interesting.

The interview was also very tragic. David Axelrod is one of President Obama's top political advisers. He's an obvious psychopath. My reaction was "Who does David Axelrod think he's fooling? Does that actually work?"

David Axelrod's speaking style is one I've identified as psychopathic. Occasionally, I see a guest on the Communism Channel that has a similar psychopathic speaking style. David Axelrod gets into full psychopath mode starting around 3:00 in part 1. David Axelrod is a highly-skilled high-ranking State psychopath.

This is a good exercise for my readers. You can test your progress in cracking your pro-State brainwashing. Before reading the rest of this post, watch the above linked videos, and see if you can notice that David Axelrod is a psychopath.

CAN YOU NOTICE ANYTHING UNUSUAL ABOUT THE WAY DAVID AXELROD TALKS?

SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE
SPOILER SPACE

Were you able to notice it? David Axelrod doesn't get into full psychopath speaking mode until around 3:00 of part one. Here are the two key points:

1. David Axelrod says "uh..." every few words.
2. David Axelrod speaks almost exclusively in political slogans/cliches, separated by "uh...".

Translating to FSK terms, "uh..." translates literally as "Fnord!"

Did anybody besides me notice that David Axelrod is a highly skilled psychopath?

I was mildly disappointed that Jon Stewart didn't say anything. He probably was excited to get such a "hot" guest. David Axelrod got 2 interview segments; most guests get only 1. It's unsurprising that Jon Stewart didn't object, because he's insane like everyone else. (I sometimes wonder if any Daily Show writers read my blog.) Other State parasites don't object to David Axelrod, because he thinks the way they do. He's affirming their pro-State brainwashing.

It was amusing to watch the next day's episode (June 29). Fox News was criticizing David Axelrod for blaming Bush for the country's current problems, and Jon Stewart was criticizing Fox News. I was disappointed that nobody pointed out "Hey! David Axelrod is a psychopath!"

To see David Axelrod's psychopathic behavior, write down what he's saying! I was able to do this analysis while watching the video. I decided to write this down. Was that a waste of time?

Notice that each bullet point is separated by "uh..." or another filler word.

• This could be the biggest recession since the Great Depression.
• We're going to lose X jobs.
• The financial system is locked up and could collapse.
• the budget picture
• stunning thing
• nobody fully anticipated
• the Washington culture
• problems that have been deferred for a very long time
• healthcare
• energy
• education
• scoring by the day
• how is this going to affect the President's reelection
• how is this going to affect Congress
• how is this going to affect daily polling
• scored as a game
• do things for the long term
• that's a struggle every day
• whole lot of people turn out to be wrong
• we had this deep and severe economic crisis
• we needed people with broad experience
• in the financial markets
• large and difficult economic issues
  
• there was some diversity to the team
• Christie Romert came out of academia
• Austin Goolsby
• the President got a variety of points of view
• the bottom line
• we were losing 750k jobs a month
• gaining jobs now
• economy shrinking by 6.4%
• economy growing now
• stewardship has been steady
• they disagree
• we thought we had a deal with healthcare
• problem for 100 years
• they thought it was ok
• we thought we had to deal with the energy crisis
• they thought it was ok
• we thought we needed wall street reform
• they thought it was working fine
  
• the evidence was pretty clear
• it wasn't working fine
• it wasn't surprising to me
• some of these big things
• they have opposed us
• on almost everything they have opposed us
• senator McConnell
• their leader in the Senate
• their strategy is to oppose us ("Oppose us" is mentioned 3 times. Some key phrases are repeated.)
  
• back in Chicago
• brick thrown through your own window
• my opponent is doing dastardly things
• the strategy of the Republican leadership
• deprive the President of bipartisan support
• he's not being bipartisan
• they're very committed to that
• such profound problems
• we're going to come through it
• sit on the sidelines
• having created the catastrophe
• sit on the sidelines
• root for failure
• the answer is not to abandon rules and oversight
• make it work better
• long legacy (of failure) there at MMS
• the previous administration wasn't interested in regulating
• no doubt that
• in retrospect
• would have liked to move faster on MMS
• we're also dealing with economic crisis
• wars
• whole range of issues
• that was a defect that we're correcting
• moving aggressively to correct
• the answer isn't to walk away
• tested the proposition of no regulation
• get the leak
• get the mine disaster
• get an economic crisis
• everyone recognizes that
• the government has to play a role
• it shouldn't be an oppressive role
• there has to be some firm oversight
• rules that people respond to
• the oil industry isn't going to regulate itself
• we have shown a baseline level of competence
• when you show a level of competence, it doesn't become a story
• it only becomes a story when there's a problem
• take H1-N1 flu for example
• we jumped on that quickly
• some people criticized us for being too aggressive
• we averted a larger public health disaster
• there are many examples like that

That part was hilarious. David Axelrod is taking credit for President Obama "solving" the "swine flu" problem. That was never a serious problem in the first place. The State propaganda engine fabricated the perception that there was a crisis.

• at the end of the Administration
• let's be clear about what he said he would do
• comprehensive health care reform
• he got that done
• end the war in Iraq
• reduced forces by 40k
• end of August combat troops out
• end of 2011 all troops out (It seems the deadline for "troops out" is always in the future. Wasn't the original deadline mid-2009, when Obama was first inaugurated? Republicans won't criticize Iraq/Afghanistan, because their guy started it. Democrats won't criticize Iraq/Afghanistan, because their guy is in charge now.)
  
• restore science to its rightful place
• stem cell research resume
• pass hate crimes laws
• end don't ask don't tell
• new energy policy
• doubled amount of renewable/alternative energy
• raised fuel efficiency standards by executive order
• first time in a couple of decades
• on our way to getting
• strong energy bill
• a lot of things
• pay equity law
• women are paid fairly in the workplace
• equal pay for equal work
• things he promised to do
• things he has followed through on
• we're going to stick to that
• obvious immediate payoff
• better stronger country
• will to follow through
• it's a great question
• that is the aspiration
• that should be the goal
• you need to create structures
• the goal of financial reform
• wall street reform
• create that nimble structure
• that doesn't serve your point (notice facial gesture here - left mouth turned - subtle reminder putting Jon Stewart in his place - psychopaths rely on emotional domination tactics to establish control)
  
• the law that was passed
• 2500 financial industry lobbyists
• haunting the halls of Congress
• trying very hard to derail this
• even at the end
  
• a person I really respect
• Elizabeth Warren
• most significant reform in 3 generations
• consumers in this country
• a group that will look after them
• advocate for them
• contracts in plain simple language
• they won't get screwed by credit card companies (WTF? We were talking about Wall Street reform.)
• she also said and she's right
• much more transparency
• backroom deals
• took the economy over the edge
• not be done in the shadows anymore
• as the system evolves
• we have to be nimble enough to evolve with it
• the President who banned torture
• on rendition
• there's a process in place now
• they won't be sent to countries that will torture
• the rule of law
• projecting any extraordinary power
• courts have the final say
• bagrim
• in the central theater of war
• different rules that apply
• courts will decide that issue as well
• we are light years ahead of the last administration
• there are things on which me might disagree
• national security
• the city of New York
• we still have active threats
• Times Square
• human rights are essential
• right to not be blown up
• 2001 WTC
• 3000 lost their lives (There are approximately 3000 criminal tax evasion prosecutions by the IRS each year.)
  
• President has to meet those responsibilities
  
• we knew
• the problems
• economic problems
• knew they would be bad
• nobody knew they would be this bad
• we knew it would challenging
• we knew it would be tough
• that's what we signed up for
• nobody's complaining about that
• we've been debating healthcare for 100 years
• we knew it would be hard
• I'll tell you this
• I have a child with mental illness (Note: David Axelrod is a psychopath. That means his daughter has the "abused productive" type. With a psychopathic father, that places her very much at risk.)
  
• I went though that ordeal of almost going broke.
• insurance company wouldn't cover it
• I was in tears when health care bill passes
• other families won't go through I went through
  
• so many things we've done
• banks out of student loan business
• take billions of dollars in unwarranted subsidies
• more middle class kids get an education
• makes a difference in people's lives
• there's so many different ways
• moved forward in past year
• not apparent to everyone
• a punch in the nose or a knee to the groin
• a very good point
• did we raise expectation too high
• over a period of decades
• people felt that government should provide things
• that shouldn't be paid for
• we've created a mentality
• you saw that in the Gulf
• when the leak happened
• too much government
• where's the government
• underscored the fact
• important functions that only the government can perform
• we need to do that well
• it doesn't feel that way in the White House
• we're doing it right now
• a whole new set of rules
• people can't rescind your healthcare if you get seriously ill
• child with preexisting conditions
• coming in line right now
• a whole series of things
• nobody should ever be satisfied
• we should always push and push
• in a tough environment
  
• we are making enormous progress
• things that have languished for decades
• I'm proud to work for a President
• determined to get things done
• determined to get things done (notice how some fnord phrases are repeated more than others)
  
• not thinking about polls
• not worried about reelection
• worried about making a difference
• country needs that kind of leadership
  

Was it worthwhile for me to write that down? Were you able to notice that David Axelrod spoke almost exclusively in political slogans, punctuated by "uh..."?

Due to pro-State brainwashing, your mind is conditioned to shut down when you hear State political slogans. David Axelrod delivers rapid-fire political slogans. This shuts down the listeners' brains. This creates the impression that David Axelrod is a super-genius, when he's really a psychopath.

When David Axelrod says "uh...", it's like the sound of a skipping record.

The "uh..." chant has another effect. The State fnord phrase beats the listener's mind into submission. David Axelrod chants "uh..." in tune with the listener's mind, as you react to his State fnord phrases. The "uh..." chant is actually an important part of the brainwashing ritual. David Axelrod then says another State fnord phrase before your mind can recover from the first one.

It's like David Axelrod says "Stop thinking! You aren't thinking right now. Stop thinking! You aren't thinking right now. (repeat for entire interview)" The fnord phrase makes the listener's mind stop thinking. Then, David Axelrod chants "uh..." in tune with the listener's mind.

David Axelrod says "uh..." exactly when your mind is going "uh...", in response to the State fnord phrase. This creates positive reinforcement that David Axelrod is a genius.

When you hear David Axelrod chant "uh...", you're literally hearing the heartbeat of the Matrix.

Is David Axelrod consciously aware of what he's doing? As a practical matter, I don't care. It makes no difference if you're evil on purpose, or you're so stupid that you don't know what you're doing. David Axelrod is such a skilled psychopath, that he has to be doing it on purpose. Psychopaths think about emotional manipulation as well as I can think about Mathematics and computers. For a psychopath, emotional manipulation is the active part of his brain.

David Axelrod's job is "Invent new fnord phrases." In that sense, his mastery of State propaganda means that he's doing his job well.

Government does not have free market competition. It makes no difference whether government insiders do a great job, or are incompetent. "Create good propaganda!" is more important than "Really do a good job."

Such fnord phrases are also common in the private sector. "You're not a team player!" is an example of a commonly-cited evil fnord. Most corporations receive State subsidies, making them like a branch of the government.

State insiders say "David Axelrod is such a genius!" This causes other people to try and emulate David Axelrod's behavior!

I can talk like David Axelrod, if I wanted to. "Taxation is theft! uh... The Federal Reserve is one huge price-fixing cartel! uh... BP Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill uh... Liability caps encourage negligent behavior! uh... Oil Pollution Act $75M damage cap! uh... The Supreme Court limited punitive damages for the Exxon Valdez spill! uh... The people injured by the oil spill weren't BP's customers. uh... Limited liability incorporation lets you declare bankruptcy to dodge your liability! uh... Captured regulators problem!" That isn't really accurate. I'm trying to make people think, instead of trying to prevent them from thinking.

Many State insiders are also psychopaths. The non-psychopaths aren't the type who say "This is wrong!", because they'd be weeded out of a career in politics in the first place. If every State employee were a psychopath, the State wouldn't work! To accomplish great evil, a carefully calibrated mixture of psychopaths and intelligent-but-duped people are needed.

Most politicians read from a teleprompter. President Obama knows what questions he's likely to be asked, and has a pre-prepared response for each of them. David Axelrod was not reading pre-prepared remarks from a teleprompter, so you got to see how he's actually thinking.

Does David Axelrod's mind really work like that? He just goes from one political slogan to the next?

David Axelrod is a high-ranking State insider. He knows that, if he says the wrong thing, his career will be over. All it takes is one slip and you're history. The "uh..." also occurs when David Axelrod moves from one safe State-sanctioned phrase to another.

In that interview, David Axelrod is failing a Turing Test. He failed to convince me that he's really an intelligent lifeform. He's just reciting State fnord phrases.

Another interesting bit is David Axelrod's baldness pattern. You can't tell with many State insiders, because they get "hair loss replacement surgery". David Axelrod is missing hair on the front half of his head, but not the back half. That's an indication of "parasite, but also very intelligent". You can tell someone's personality type by looking at their hair loss pattern!

I was surprised that David Axelrod has Secret Service protection. That is odd, since he has no formal role in the government. Why should I pay the cost, via higher taxes, of David Axelrod's bodyguards?

President Obama has the "abused productive" personality type, and David Axelrod is a psychopath. Maybe I should refer to him as "President Axelrod"? As a psychopath, David Axelrod can psychologically dominate the President. It's very easy for David Axelrod to get the President to do whatever he wants. David Axelrod also works as a highly-paid lobbyist. This leads to the obvious corruption.

If someone told President Obama "Your top adviser, David Axelrod, is a psychopath.", he would not believe you. Psychopaths are great at convincing their victims that their services are needed. David Axelrod probably farms out all the real work to an assistant with the "abused productive" personality type, with David Axelrod taking all the credit.

As a psychopathic top adviser, David Axelrod probably has more political influence than the President! That is the problem of the State. Even if the President has good intentions, his top advisers are invariably psychopaths. The State has a monopoly. This makes it hard for a psychopath-free organization to compete. Because everyone is insane, any large group of people inevitably contains psychopaths. (I predict that, if I start a business and hire no psychopaths or parasites, I'd run rings around my competition, even for an on-the-books business.)

Allegedly, David Axelrod is one of the State's best political minds. That is evidence that the current system is broken. It's time to try something else.

David Axelrod's psychopathic behavior was obvious to me. I've mostly cracked my pro-State brainwashing. It was very scary, when I first started noticing people like David Axelrod speaking as psychopaths on TV. Occasionally, a highly skilled psychopath is a guest on the Communism Channel, and has a similar speaking style.

Was this post useful? Other freedom-oriented websites focus more exclusively on "Taxation is theft!" There's a lot more to the State than "Taxation is theft!" Because everyone is insane, psychopaths like David Axelrod can create the false impression that they're super-geniuses.

Rick Barber for Congress!

This YouTube video was interesting. Rick Barber is running for Congress in Alabama. He's almost calling for an open revolt against the Federal government, primarily against the IRS.

It's interesting to notice the widespread criticism of Rick Barber. Instead of saying "Rick Barber is right! The Federal government's authority isn't legitimate! The IRS really is an out of control terrorist organization!", most people are denouncing Rick Barber.

I also liked the bit about "malicious IRS prosecutions". The tax code is really complicated. The IRS can crack down on any small business owner and send them to jail. This allows for politically-motivated prosecutions.

I doubt that Rick Barber will win. It's interesting. It's nice to see more anti-State tendencies.

It also is promising that Rick Barber can air an advertisement like that, without going to jail for treason. That's probably more important than whether he gets elected or not.

Internet Kill Switch

Joe Lieberman and President Obama are now lobbying for an "Internet Kill Switch". The President should have the power to shut down the Internet, for whatever reason he chooses.

Some people are outraged by this. Think about it for a minute. Suppose the President really did have an "Internet Kill Switch".

THERE IS NO WAY THAT THE PRESIDENT COULD SHUT DOWN THE INTERNET, WITHOUT GETTING NEARLY EVERYONE IN THE COUNTRY ANGRY AT HIM!!

The fact that Lieberman and Obama ask for such a thing, shows how out of touch with reality they are. A minority of people are using the Internet to discover the truth, such as "Taxation is theft!" and "The USA has a corrupt monetary system." Most people use the Internet for FaceBook and Twitter and lolcats. You can't shut down the freedom bloggers without also shutting down the other stuff.

If the President shut down the Internet, businesses like Google and Amazon would be very angry. They would lobby against such a shutdown. Software engineers need the Internet to do their job. I frequently use Microsoft's online SQL server help.

Without the Internet, the stock market probably wouldn't be able to open. High-frequency trading is done on dedicated lines, but most retail customers place their orders via the Internet. My employer offers web-based services to customers. Financial institutions exchange end-of-day summay information via ftp and email. The Internet is too integrated into the economy for the President to shut it down for longer than an hour.

What about "Malicious hackers may shut down the Internet!"? There already are procedures for dealing with a worm/virus. Those would be activated before the President would notice.

The State economy is under continuous "Grow or die!" pressure. The Internet is a great productivity tool, so State parasites weren't initially threatened by it. If State parasites wanted to kill the Internet, they had to do it when only a handful of military researchers used it.

State parasites are threatened by the Internet, because it threatens their information monopoly. It's too late for them to do anything about it. There's a valid reason to be hopeful about the future, because the Internet is helping the slaves discover the truth.

There already are procedures that State parasites can use to harass people, based on what they write on the Internet. For example, Google is records my IP address, and Verizon records what IP addresses are assigned to which customers. I suspect that many Tor nodes are run by the NSA.

On the Internet, you can get casual Anonymity but not perfect Anonymity. I'm more concerned that a wage slave employer would refuse to hire me based on my blog, than that a State thug would assault me. State thugs could try to silence me based on my blog, but if they tried that, there'd be too many people to silence.

The proposed "Internet Kill Switch" is a stupid law. There's no way the President could use it without crippling the economy and getting everyone angry at him. It's interesting that Lieberman and Obama ask for such a power. It shows that they're out of touch with reality.

I also laugh at the people angry at the "Internet Kill Switch" law. They don't realize that the President could not actually use such a power.

State parasites are threatened by the Internet, because it breaks their information monopoly. The Internet allows people to bypass State censorship and communicate directly. I notice much greater overall awareness of "Taxation is theft!" The Internet enables smart people to directly share information.

There's a limit to how much government abuse can occur, before there's a correction. At this point, the collapse of the State is a historic inevitability. Real reform is impossible. Too many people profit from the corrupt way things are now. Insiders will lobby to block real reform.

State insiders would love to kill/cripple the Internet. That isn't going to happen. The Internet is too useful of a productivity tool. The State economy has continual "Grow or die!" pressure. There's no way State bureaucrats could kill or cripple the Internet without getting nearly everyone angry at them.

Fantasy Supreme Court Nomination Hearing

I noticed a lot of websites obsessed about the Kagan Supreme Court nomination hearing. Essentially, her responses are "I've got the votes to get confirmed and we all know it! Hahahaha! As long as I give evasive non-answers, I'm getting confirmed!"

This question was really funny.

Coburn: If I wanted to sponsor a bill and it said Americans, you have to eat three vegetables and three fruits every day and I got it through Congress and that's now the law of the land, got to do it, does that violate the Commerce Clause?

Kagan: Sounds like a dumb law. But I think that the question of whether it's a dumb law is different from whether the question of whether it's constitutional, and I think that courts would be wrong to strike down laws that they think are senseless just because they're senseless.

This attitude illustrates the corruption of the legal system. A judge is not concerned with "What is right and what is wrong?" A judge is concerned with "What is legal?" If "What is legal?" has substantially diverged from "What makes moral sense?", that isn't the judge's problem.

The correct attitude towards the Supreme Court is "Who cares what those 9 pro-State trolls say?" The only reason it matters is that State thugs enforce their decisions without questioning it. Supreme Court judges are chosen by State insiders. They will tend to favor more State power ahead of individual freedom.

The Supreme Court confirmation hearings are one big evil fnord saying "These 9 idiots actually have legitimate authority!"

One of my ideas is "Promote agorism via standup comedy." What would a more honest confirmation hearing be like?

Q: Is the Federal Reserve Constitutional?
A: It's important for government insiders to be able to steal via inflation. It would be awful if non-insiders were able to accumulate capital.

Q: Are the IRS and income tax Constitutional?
A: The slaves have to pay their tribute to their masters. If they're paying that much, we must be doing a great job!

Q: How do you feel about no-knock military-style raids for nonviolent offenders?
A: You can't have a Police State without breaking any eggs! It's important for people to be continually scared. If they say or do the wrong thing, we'll assault/murder them!

Q: What's your stance on abortion?
A: It's an excellent issue for dividing and conquering the slaves. If you know someone's opinion on abortion, you don't need to ask them anything else!

Q: How do you feel about respecting precedent (stare decisis)?
A: Once the Supreme Court makes a decision that erodes individual freedom, it should be treated as absolute unbreakable precedent. In the past, the Supreme Court has made decisions that protected individual freedom. I'd overturn those.

Q: How do you feel about excessive use of plea-bargains by prosecutors?
A: It's great to send someone to jail without a trial. If someone gets 1 year via a plea-bargain, but 10+ years if they go to trial and lose, who wouldn't take the deal? The important point is "The prosecutor is always right."

Q: What's your opinion on jury nullification?
A: If it were possible to completely eliminate it, I would. Anyone who publicly advocated for jury nullification should be arrested for treason. Any lawyer who makes such an argument should be stripped of his law license. Any sui juris defendant who mentions jury nullification should be jailed for "contempt of court".

Q: What's the proper role for the Supreme Court?
A: The Supreme Court's job is to make up plausible-sounding lies for restricting people's freedom. If you pass a law, I'll come up with an excuse for why it's Constitutional. I know where my bread is buttered. The "interstate commerce clause" can be used to justify practically anything! We've got to keep the slaves in their place, while providing the illusion that we're fair and protecting their interests.

It'd be nice if confirmation hearings reflected the true attitudes of the participants. Now that I have greater emotional awareness, the parasitic body language of politicians is very obvious.

Banking Anti-Reform Bill

As usual, the banking "reform" bill is more corporate welfare. The banksters spent a lot of money lobbying. They successfully killed almost every useful provision of the law. They also added some bits that will force smaller banks out of business due to increased regulation.

This article had a good explanation of one negative feature. The burden of regulation will force many smaller credit unions and small banks out of business. If you increase administrative overhead, then small businesses are less viable.

Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" proposal was gutted. It went from "Congress may have an ongoing audit of the Federal Reserve." to "Congress may do a one-time audit." to "Congress may do a one-time audit of certain things chosen by Ben Bernanke." Congressmen may now claim "We're auditing the Federal Reserve." when they're really doing nothing.

The "Volcker Rule" was also gutted. Banks are still allowed to speculate in the market for "legitimate hedging purposes" or "market making", which is vague enough to allow practically anything.

Banks are allowed to own a max of 3% in hedge funds they manage. Most big banks own less than 3% right now. The lucrative part is the 2/20 management fee. Some hedge fund investors want the bank to have "skin in the game", to ensure they aren't getting ripped off. Now, the bank can say "Sorry! A 3% investment is the legal maximum!" In effect, it's a State endorsement of their marketing practices.

There is no restriction on other ownership. The bank can own 3% of the hedge fund, and the CEO may purchase the remaining 97% of the shares.

If I tried to set up an investment fund, I'd have to borrow at high rates or not at all. The banksters can lend at preferred rates to their favored hedge funds. The bankster scam works really well when you can (1) borrow cheaply from the Federal Reserve and (2) gamble with other people's money, taking a cut of the profits when you're right and declaring bankruptcy/bailout when you're wrong.

Instead of "Bank borrows at the Fed Funds Rate (currently 0.25%) and buys stuff.", the profit formula is "Bank borrows from the Federal Reserve at 0.25%, lends to a preferred hedge fund at 0.5%, and the hedge fund buys stuff." The bank is still on the hook if the hedge fund defaults. There's just another layer of middlemen taking a cut of the profits.

There's also a "bailout fund" for "too big to fail" banks. That's like a formal endorsement of "If a bank is bigger than X, then the State explicitly backs their derivative contracts. If a bank is smaller than X, there is no such backing." In effect, only "too big to fail" banks may now sell derivatives.

The financial "reform" law is just smoke and mirrors. State politicians are publicly saying "We really stuck it to the bankers!" The bank CEOs are publicly saying "Waaah! Stop hurting me!" The new law does not prevent the banksters from stealing. The new law will not prevent another bubble/bust. Due to the Compound Interest Paradox, boom/bust cycles are an inevitable consequence of fiat debt-based money.

The "reform" law is one big evil fnord. The real issues are not discussed. The real issues are "Inflation is theft!", "Inflation concentrates economic power in people who print and spend new money, namely politicians and banksters", and "The Federal Reserve is one huge price-fixing cartel." Even if you don't understand the Compound Interest Paradox, "Inflation is theft!" and "The Federal Reserve is one huge price-fixing cartel!" are sufficient arguments against the Federal Reserve.