Outstanding Article

[apple0154]

Shouldn't matter.
If the Health Care Bill is as good as everone has promoted it as, then those in Congress and the Senate should be obligated to be signed up to use it.

So you're against employer benefits?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

the article is flawed....torture is not a core value of the right, the guy admits he never really belonged to the right....

you should be embarrassed for posting that mott....midcan posted it at another forum....think about it, you are just like midcan....

Oh I admit that some of his points are exagerations but he hits the nail right square in the head. The Republican party worked long and hard to alienate loyal members like myself. The ideological battles I could fight. I was determined to stay in the party and make my voice heard but when I got shouted down over the issue of an immoral war in Iraq, that violated one of my most fundamental and deeply cherished Christian beliefs. It came time to part ways.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Well a lot of people didn't think the financial crisis was coming. A lot of people thought there would be just a bump in the road and things would proceed as they had been.

In 2007 there was no way for the President and Congress to pass any sort of law telling Wall Street firms to deleverage themselves. And Congress already fought against reforms to Freddie and Fannie.

What's going to happen now is what's happened for decades. Congress will pass laws so that 'this crisis never happens again.' Well that's great. They'll be another bubble however as there always has been in the past and Congress will be late to the party.

Sorry Carwacko but that's just patent bullshit. There were ways for President and Congress to affect change in the laws governing Wall Street. If Bush had beat the drums, as Apple suggested, with the vigor and enthusiasm as he did for the lead up to the Iraq war and had used his position as President to lead from the bully pulpit by God change you would have seen. You're making excuses and the only person an excuse pleases is yourself. That's one item from the authors list that he failed to mention, the inability of ideological conservative Republican to hold them selfs accountable for their failures.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I wrote in msg 25, "A crisis that almost resulted in a major depression that would have, in turn, resulted in many deaths, illness, social unrest..." (Emphasis added) There isn't anything hyperbolic about it.

As for what laws there are or aren't Bush could have and should have made a case for change. A strong case. Furthermore, laws can be changed. For one to take the position nothing could have been done and just watch it unfold is absurd.

This all comes back to Obama and people objecting to government interference. Surely it's obvious the government needs to interfere. If the repeal of the Glass Steagle Act, signed by Clinton, wasn't working Bush should have told the general public, over and over and over just like he did to get the public on side for the Iraq war. That's my point.

The leader has an obligation to the people. The repercussions could have much more severe. To do little to avert such a calamity is incompetence on the part of a leader. How can anyone disagree with that?

You're singing to the Choir hear. I agree with you whole heartedly. I think your arguments are cogent and objective.

 

[cancel2 2022]

You're singing to the Choir hear. I agree with you whole heartedly. I think your arguments are cogent and objective.

I will pos rep you when I can.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Sorry Carwacko but that's just patent bullshit. There were ways for President and Congress to affect change in the laws governing Wall Street. If Bush had beat the drums, as Apple suggested, with the vigor and enthusiasm as he did for the lead up to the Iraq war and had used his position as President to lead from the bully pulpit by God change you would have seen. You're making excuses and the only person an excuse pleases is yourself. That's one item from the authors list that he failed to mention, the inability of ideological conservative Republican to hold them selfs accountable for their failures.

what exactly could bush have done? why am i not surprised you single out only bush and not the majority dems in both houses....

 

[cawacko]

Sorry Carwacko but that's just patent bullshit. There were ways for President and Congress to affect change in the laws governing Wall Street. If Bush had beat the drums, as Apple suggested, with the vigor and enthusiasm as he did for the lead up to the Iraq war and had used his position as President to lead from the bully pulpit by God change you would have seen. You're making excuses and the only person an excuse pleases is yourself. That's one item from the authors list that he failed to mention, the inability of ideological conservative Republican to hold them selfs accountable for their failures.

Ok, I see the Democrats have done what with three years in control of Congress towards Glass-Steagal? How many times has Obama mentioned it? Or are you proping apple to saying he's too busy and he can't do it because if he does the banks won't lend? I don't see you on his nuts for his excuses but a liberal making excuses in cool in your book right because you are one?

And don't tell me some people thinking the financial collapse either wouldn't happen or would just be a blip on the radar is bullshit because it's not. It's not that hard to go back and find what people said at the time and to now try and act like it was some consensus is what's bullshit.

 

[cawacko]

You're singing to the Choir hear. I agree with you whole heartedly. I think your arguments are cogent and objective.

How many people in 2005 were calling to have Glass-Steagal put back in place? Can you even one find one prominent person calling for it?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Ok, I see the Democrats have done what with three years in control of Congress towards Glass-Steagal? How many times has Obama mentioned it? Or are you proping apple to saying he's too busy and he can't do it because if he does the banks won't lend? I don't see you on his nuts for his excuses but a liberal making excuses in cool in your book right because you are one?

And don't tell me some people thinking the financial collapse either wouldn't happen or would just be a blip on the radar is bullshit because it's not. It's not that hard to go back and find what people said at the time and to now try and act like it was some consensus is what's bullshit.

^ awesome ^

 

[cawacko]

Mott, since I don't know your position on the Fed how much influence do you believe the Executive Branch should have over the Fed and interest rates?

 

[apple0154]

Ok, I see the Democrats have done what with three years in control of Congress towards Glass-Steagal? How many times has Obama mentioned it? Or are you proping apple to saying he's too busy and he can't do it because if he does the banks won't lend? I don't see you on his nuts for his excuses but a liberal making excuses in cool in your book right because you are one?

And don't tell me some people thinking the financial collapse either wouldn't happen or would just be a blip on the radar is bullshit because it's not. It's not that hard to go back and find what people said at the time and to now try and act like it was some consensus is what's bullshit.

I think the point is being missed.

Sure, there wasn't a consensus concerning the financial problem just like there wasn't a consensus for the Iraq war. Bush had to make a decision in both cases so what did he do?

He championed the war which was a mistake and he didn't champion for change to the financial system which was a mistake.

Leaders are supposed to "pick a side". Make a decision. War and a financial crisis, especially the severity of this financial crisis, have vital implications to the nation.

As leader he chose wrong. Twice. Concerning two vital decisions. That is the point and that is incompetence.

 

[cawacko]

I think the point is being missed.

Sure, there wasn't a consensus concerning the financial problem just like there wasn't a consensus for the Iraq war. Bush had to make a decision in both cases so what did he do?

He championed the war which was a mistake and he didn't champion for change to the financial system which was a mistake.

Leaders are supposed to "pick a side". Make a decision. War and a financial crisis, especially the severity of this financial crisis, have vital implications to the nation.

As leader he chose wrong. Twice. Concerning two vital decisions. That is the point and that is incompetence.

No I get the point. Your point is a partisan one as evident by your lack of ability to address why these changes you believe Bush should have been made aren't being addressed now. Well two can play that game. I already said I didn't think Bush was a good leader. But this arm chair qb game you'vem mastered isn't all that impressive.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

what exactly could bush have done? why am i not surprised you single out only bush and not the majority dems in both houses....

Because Bush was head of State. Because Bush was the elected leader of this nation. Because Bush could use the Bullypulpit of the Presidency to inform the American public of the problem and possible solutions but he did nothing. I also reject Damo's comments. One is not a partisan because on recognizes Bush for what he was. A failed leader.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

No I get the point. Your point is a partisan one as evident by your lack of ability to address why these changes you believe Bush should have been made aren't being addressed now. Well two can play that game. I already said I didn't think Bush was a good leader. But this arm chair qb game you'vem mastered isn't all that impressive.

So were supposed to give Bush a pass? WTF!

 

[cawacko]

So were supposed to give Bush a pass? WTF!

No. I'm asking why if he is a failure because he didn't press for the return of Glass-Steagal why is cool we are not arguing for it now? Is it all of a sudden unimportant?

And no comment on the Fed and Executive Branch?

 

[apple0154]

No I get the point. Your point is a partisan one as evident by your lack of ability to address why these changes you believe Bush should have been made aren't being addressed now. Well two can play that game. I already said I didn't think Bush was a good leader. But this arm chair qb game you'vem mastered isn't all that impressive.

They are being addressed now.

Due to the damage both decisions caused correcting them is not easy. That's precisely why they are still being discussed. That's why people find them so serious. That's why it's difficult to understand people when they say Bush is gone so let's not keep blaming him.

We are still dealing with the repercussions. The blaming will stop as soon as the repercussions have stopped.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Because Bush was head of State. Because Bush was the elected leader of this nation. Because Bush could use the Bullypulpit of the Presidency to inform the American public of the problem and possible solutions but he did nothing. I also reject Damo's comments. One is not a partisan because on recognizes Bush for what he was. A failed leader.

so you actually have zero ideas on what bush could have actually done....got it

bush was not a failed leader....only partisan hacks like you make such a claim. he was not a great leader, but he was a leader....

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Mott, since I don't know your position on the Fed how much influence do you believe the Executive Branch should have over the Fed and interest rates?

bump

 

[cawacko]

They are being addressed now.

Due to the damage both decisions caused correcting them is not easy. That's precisely why they are still being discussed. That's why people find them so serious. That's why it's difficult to understand people when they say Bush is gone so let's not keep blaming him.

We are still dealing with the repercussions. The blaming will stop as soon as the repercussions have stopped.

Really, they're being discussed now? I'm not heard Pelosi, Reid or Obama mention Glass-Steagal once. Care to show me where they're being "worked on"?

And I agree people should be held accountable even once out of office because decisions they make in office for better or worse often don't show up right away in the results column. A perfect example of that is Glass-Steagal which you say lead to the meltdown was signed in '99 but its true effects weren't felt until later.

If you had any principle you would say Bush failed to put back Glass-Steagal in place as have the leaders of Congress over the past three years and our new President. Instead you pass off excuses for why our current leaders can't do anything about it.

 

[apple0154]

Really, they're being discussed now? I'm not heard Pelosi, Reid or Obama mention Glass-Steagal once. Care to show me where they're being "worked on"?

And I agree people should be held accountable even once out of office because decisions they make in office for better or worse often don't show up right away in the results column. A perfect example of that is Glass-Steagal which you say lead to the meltdown was signed in '99 but its true effects weren't felt until later.

If you had any principle you would say Bush failed to put back Glass-Steagal in place as have the leaders of Congress over the past three years and our new President. Instead you pass off excuses for why our current leaders can't do anything about it.

Obama has already warned the banks about restricted lending. The "bail-out" was to provide money for loans for small businesses and people of worthy credit.

It takes time to correct things.