Pfizer wants a government bailout

With the lose of patent protection on Lipitor, Pfizer has announced it will seek bailout funds to make up for the devastating loss of revenue and profits.

FNN financial reporter Cash Kruggerand filed this report.

Pfizer reports that the loss of patent protection on Lipitor has had a stunning effect on the corporation's bottom line. A press release said in part, "The loss of revenue affects our ability to ability to research and develop new drugs.  Without new drugs in our development pipeline Pfizer will go into a death spiral."  The press release went on to say, "While the economic climate isn't conducive to corporate bailouts, an election year is coming up.  Every seat in the House and a third of the Senate seats are up for election.  This provides us with an opportunity to hire lobbyists and contact politicians.  They'll need money and we need a bailout.  It'll be a win-win for everyone.  Pfizer gets bailout money, politicians get cash that is vital to get reelected and in the years to come the voters have new drugs to help them live longer if they have enough money to buy our new drugs."

Pfizer stock rose 10 percent yesterday on news of the bold bailout bid.  A Wall Street analyst put it this way; "This shows that American ingenuity isn't dead.  This is a creative way to make up a serious revenue gap.  This is in the tradition started by the banks and other financial firms a few years ago: use other people's money."

Kruggerand points out that Pfizer has allocated 500 million dollars to this project and that greatly exceeds the going rate to buy the vote everyone currently in Congress.  Consequently, there is a good chance Congress will vote to give the bailout funds to the drug company

Kruggerand will stay with the story and provide more details about this brazen plan to fleece the public.

Faux News Network: Republican Demands More Regulation

Stacy Conundrum, FNN political reporter, talked exclusively to Dr. Phillip Pompous, an economist and CEO of a conservative think-tank who advises the Republicans on regulatory manners.

SC: why do the Republicans aver that the financial industry doesn't require additional regulation to keep them from perpetrating another disaster like the one we still haven't recovered from?

PP:  Like most liberal media types, you have no idea about what caused the meltdown and you blame the easiest target available.  The cause of the problem was the middle-class property owners who couldn't pay off their mortgages.   How dumb can these people be, taking on a mortgage that they can't pay off.  Didn't these people ever hear of working a second or third job to get the money to pay off the mortgage?  The financial industry was left on the hook because of these incompetent, lazy mortgage holders.

SC: isn't it true that the financial industry enticed the mortgage holders with misleading offers and half-truths?

PP: More liberal propaganda.  Blame the victims.  Without the stupendous efforts of the financial industry to repair the damage caused by the unprincipled mortgage holders, the country would have slipped into a full-blown depression.  Instead of praising the banks and other financial corporations for their heroic actions to staunch the monetary bleeding, the media blames the banks and spreads the lies put out by the government.

SC: Wait a minute.  The heroic efforts you just mentioned, wasn't it the taxes paid by the middle-class that bailed out the banks?

PP: The dishonest mortgage holders drove the banks to the brink of bankruptcy.  The use of the tax-payer bailout money was necessary and was the best use of taxes in the last several decades.  The government should set up a ongoing fund for corporations to tap when they need additional cash for some purpose. But without all the red tape and oversight of the last time.

SC: So your position and the position of the Republican Party is that the banks don't need more regulation and oversight. Is that correct?

PP: Of course it's correct.  The problem isn't the banks or the energy industry or other corporations, the problem is the middle-class and the poor.  They're the ones causing all the problems in the country.  Unions use negotiating tactics to drain profits from corporations, thus depriving stock holders of needed dividends.  People sue corporations to get compensation for accidents caused by their own stupidity.  We have to stop this guerilla warfare against corporate interests.

SC: So where do you stand on regulation?

PP: Actually, I am in favor of much more regulation and oversight, but not on corporations.  It is desperately required to be applied to the masses.  The government has completely missed the point of regulation.  It has to regulate the actions of the middle- and lower-classes.  The aim of the regulations will be to protect the corporations from these predatory cheaters and liars.  The regulations must make it a crime to walk away from a mortgage and cause a loss to the banks.  Consumers must be prohibited from suing corporations for any reason. Unemployment benefits must be cut.  There are plenty of jobs available. If an illegal alien can find a job, an unemployed can find the same job.  If a few million unemployed took the jobs from the illegals, we'd eradicate several of our nasty national problems.  That is the direction we must get the government to go in.

SC: That's it from FNN news. I'll interview more politicians after I recover from this one.  It may take a while.