Brand Spanking New Election Thread

[bleedorange]

I don't believe that there has been any ccooking of the books here, that was 2000 - 2002 or so. I think this has all been brought about by the republican party's second favorite topic - deregualtion. The breaking down of the barriers between the various financial institutions, the products that the business people were able to think up as a result of the deregulation etc... and remember a prime mover in this game was Phil Graham who championed the Enron law, which is creepinginto todays troubles. The same Phil Graham who will probably be McCains pick for Treasury. And to say Bush talked about reform while you keep blaming the democrats is disengenuous. If Bush thought it was a bad law, he could have vetoed it. They didn't have the 2/3 to override the veto. Nope at this point I would have thought that everyone would already know that what Bush say's and what he does are not necessarilly going to be the same thing.

 

 

So the actual people in charge since 1991 -- James Johnson, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick -- who are Democrats that have served in Democratic administrations and have paid themselves millions of dollars for heading these companies are not to blame?

 

And it was LBJ who privatized these companies to get them off the books. Yet they were still tax exempt, backed by the government, and never had to report anything to the public while racking up $5 trillion in debt.

 

But McCain and other Republicans who tried to introduce legislation for reform and oversight of these companies are to blame?

 

That doesn't make sense to me.

[kwall]

That doesn't make sense to me.

you're thinking too much.

[Doug C]

you're thinking too much.

[Central Scrutinizer]

jesus teaches us to take care of the poor. he does not teach us to establish a form of government that will confiscate other people's wealth and take care of the poor for us.

Yeah, because we like to be in the picture, shaking hands and handing over the check for our tax deduction ... err ... donation ... before we hop in the Escalade and get the hell outta whatever God forsaken place we had to go for our photo op.

[fatheadfred]

read again. he says he wouldn't raise taxes if we were in a recession, tacitly admitting that raising taxes hurts the economy.

My bad. So he would, temporarily leave the wealthy tax cuts in place. That makes sense. If we are in a recession the folks w/ money in stocks probably feel the brunt. They can still eat out and stuff though. I can't. Looks like I'll have to start making my own booze again. My thirst for the drink is recession proof.

[austrya]

I don't even own stocks besides my 403(b ) and I'm eating out tonight! Yay me! Oh, and I don't even have a job! Better yet!

[Guest Jules]

I am Jack Welch.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

He has been published...wait so is Jesus. Shit. He has pictures, wait, Jesus was in a Cheeto. Shit. I guess you're right.

 

Everybody know that Jesus just left Chicago and he's bound for New Orleans.

[John Smith]

read again. he says he wouldn't raise taxes if we were in a recession, tacitly admitting that raising taxes hurts the economy.

 

I think he is tacitly admitting that prior to an election it is not a good thing to suggest raising taxes, especially when the economy is in the shitter.

 

So the actual people in charge since 1991 -- James Johnson, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick -- who are Democrats that have served in Democratic administrations and have paid themselves millions of dollars for heading these companies are not to blame?

 

And it was LBJ who privatized these companies to get them off the books. Yet they were still tax exempt, backed by the government, and never had to report anything to the public while racking up $5 trillion in debt.

 

But McCain and other Republicans who tried to introduce legislation for reform and oversight of these companies are to blame?

 

That doesn't make sense to me.

 

I guess you are correct, a crisis originating during an era of republican control of all three branchhes of government under regulations pushed through during that time period has to be the fault of democrats, not the regulations passed. But ok Bush controlled the white house correct? Republicans controlled both houses of congress correct? And frommt he tone of the article it seemed like republicans were on board with this correct? And during that period Bush was able to get whhatever he wanted out of congress, so what happenned to the reform? What happened to this proposed bill? Oh wait I know, the powerless democrats pretty much screwed it up. Gotcha.

[IRememberDBoon]

I agree with John McCain.LIEberal do-gooder programs like Social Security should be opened up to the wonder of our perfect free-market system! Why, just gaze with awe at the wonderful job that our perfect free market does administering quality health care to all Americans, and you'll see that the LIEberals are full of it. Tax relief for wealthy Americans and huge multinational corporations is the only way to achieve prosperity for all! All you need to do is look at the poverty numbers, which are rising, and average wages, which are falling, and you'll see the wonderful effects of John McCain and Our Great President's tax cuts for the wealthy!

[austrya]

I am Jack Welch.

 

Hey, I'm Christy Welch. It's nice to meet you. Maybe we're related!

[kwall]

I think he is tacitly admitting that prior to an election it is not a good thing to suggest raising taxes, especially when the economy is in the shitter.

yes, that would be too honest.

 

that's not change.

[bleedorange]

I guess you are correct, a crisis originating during an era of republican control of all three branchhes of government under regulations pushed through during that time period has to be the fault of democrats, not the regulations passed. But ok Bush controlled the white house correct? Republicans controlled both houses of congress correct? And frommt he tone of the article it seemed like republicans were on board with this correct? And during that period Bush was able to get whhatever he wanted out of congress, so what happenned to the reform? What happened to this proposed bill? Oh wait I know, the powerless democrats pretty much screwed it up. Gotcha.

 

 

When did this crisis originate? Was its genesis in 1968 when LBJ privatized it? Was it during the late '90s and early '00s when James Johnson and Franklin Raines were in charge?

 

Of course there was a lack of oversight and that falls on both parties, but everything I have seen from you and people on this board is how the Republicans are to blame for everything. I certainly don't think you can absolve Republicans of this and I'm not trying to defend Bush. Hell, I never even voted for the guy. But Democrats have been in charge since the early '90s and have found plenty of ways to vote against reform of these companies.

 

And when you look at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, I see Chris Dodd as the biggest benefactor of campaign contributions from these two companies. (Obama is second, but they are largely individual contributions due to his practically unprecedented fundraising abilities the last two years.) And PAC money is split fairly evenly with a majority going to Democratic candidates.

 

Also, slight majorities in Congress doesn't mean that anything and everything gets passed. There isn't just blind partisan support for bills and proposed legislation. With a lot of Republicans receiving money from these companies, it only takes a few to kill legislation.

 

But since this is the election thread, I look at John McCain who was calling for reform of these GSEs back in 2005 and always has been. Was it too late then? Probably. But it is something that was noticed by a few people and was unable to get accomplished. I trust McCain to be able to do these things once elected.

 

I agree with John McCain.LIEberal do-gooder programs like Social Security should be opened up to the wonder of our perfect free-market system! Why, just gaze with awe at the wonderful job that our perfect free market does administering quality health care to all Americans, and you'll see that the LIEberals are full of it. Tax relief for wealthy Americans and huge multinational corporations is the only way to achieve prosperity for all! All you need to do is look at the poverty numbers, which are rising, and average wages, which are falling, and you'll see the wonderful effects of John McCain and Our Great President's tax cuts for the wealthy!

 

 

It would be nice if we actually had a free market.

[John Smith]

When did this crisis originate?

 

Also, slight majorities in Congress doesn't mean that anything and everything gets passed. There isn't just blind partisan support for bills and proposed legislation. With a lot of Republicans receiving money from these companies, it only takes a few to kill legislation.

 

 

Well we know that whatever the origins it is ultimately Clintons fault democrats fault FDR whomever you choose, anyone but the people in charge.

 

Slight majorities in congress when congress and the president are on the same page mean legislation gets passed, even bad legislation. Since you obviously don't know the history of this proposed bill, I'll go look it up and get back to you. BTW my cynical view on this bill is that the small government republicans sought to create a new agency in order to step over and put Clinton era appointees under republican control. That was the true purpose.

[MrRain422]

Just look at McCain's current proposal. He wants to set up a commission to look at the problem. What kind of leadership is that in a financial crisis? He wants to take a look at it and get back to us on it in maybe a year and a half or two.

[kwall]

Just look at McCain's current proposal. He wants to set up a commission to look at the problem. What kind of leadership is that in a financial crisis? He wants to take a look at it and get back to us on it in maybe a year and a half or two.

what is obama's proposal?

[mfwahl]

yes, that would be too honest.

 

that's not change.

That's more of the same.

[fatheadfred]

I agree with John McCain.LIEberal do-gooder programs like Social Security should be opened up to the wonder of our perfect free-market system! Why, just gaze with awe at the wonderful job that our perfect free market does administering quality health care to all Americans, and you'll see that the LIEberals are full of it. Tax relief for wealthy Americans and huge multinational corporations is the only way to achieve prosperity for all! All you need to do is look at the poverty numbers, which are rising, and average wages, which are falling, and you'll see the wonderful effects of John McCain and Our Great President's tax cuts for the wealthy!

 

Yeah it might have to be opened up to free market since the idgit Retardicans gutted it to pay for miniature dirt wars, you ants. Trickle down on this, biatches.

[Sir Stewart]

what is obama's proposal?

 

As part of his proposal to get out of the economic crisis, Obama said he is proposing a $50 billion Emergency Economic Plan to "jump-start job creation." Obama said the plan would save 1 million jobs by rebuilding infrastructure and repairing schools, among other things.

 

The senator from Illinois said the country also must continue to address the housing crisis and build a "21st-century regulatory framework." Obama vowed to "get serious" about regulatory oversight. "If you're a financial institution that can borrow from the government, you should be subject to government oversight and supervision," he said.

 

Obama said the United States needs leadership to get the country out of its financial problems.

 

"I'll provide it, John McCain won't, and that's the choice for the American people in this election," he said.

 

But Jeffrey Sachs, a renowned economist and special adviser to the U.N. secretary-general, said neither candidate will be able to stop continued financial woes in the near future.

 

"I think right now that this is a recession that's going to happen," he said."I don't see anybody being able to stop that giant wave. The question is how we get out if it."

 

Sachs said he thinks Obama's plan is "closer" to being on target, with his calls for regulation. McCain also has started talking about increased regulation, but Sachs said McCain has "reinvented himself in the last 24 hours" with such talk.

[bleedorange]

Text of S. 190

 

Actions on bill: Essentially died in Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

[fatheadfred]

My buddy Sal said commissions were only effective with the mafia. I respectfully disagree as I found this today while doing some research:

 

On April 14, 1982, President Reagan established the Presidential Commission Against Drunk Driving (PCDD). This commission established 39 recommendations to curb what was perceived to be a drunken driving epidemic. Taken together, the 39 recommendations were intended to be comprehensive approach with a goal of reducing the number of alcohol-related deaths on the nation

[kwall]

The senator from Illinois said the country also must continue to address the housing crisis and build a "21st-century regulatory framework." Obama vowed to "get serious" about regulatory oversight. "If you're a financial institution that can borrow from the government, you should be subject to government oversight and supervision," he said.

sounds virtually identical to mccain's response. but i guess obama will make it happen instantaneously.

 

But Jeffrey Sachs, a renowned economist and special adviser to the U.N. secretary-general, said neither candidate will be able to stop continued financial woes in the near future.

he obviously doesn't fully comprehend the power of obama.

 

McCain also has started talking about increased regulation . . .

i hadn't heard mccain talk about increased regulation. i thought i heard him talk about reforming the currently ineffective regulation.

[Gobias Industries]

i hadn't heard mccain talk about increased regulation. i thought i heard him talk about reforming the currently ineffective regulation.

 

Hence, increased regulation. Ineffective regulation is no regulation. Reforming the regulation so it works is effectively increasing regulation.

[kwall]

Hence, increased regulation. Ineffective regulation is no regulation. Reforming the regulation so it works is effectively increasing regulation.

yes, i suppose so. i guess i interpreted it as additional regulation.

[Doug C]

Hence, increased regulation. Ineffective regulation is no regulation. Reforming the regulation so it works is effectively increasing regulation.