BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform

Subject: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Amos
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 11:07 AM

Here's a foreshadowing of the BS ahead as the need for financial reform gets resisted by the party of Neigh:

"...Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, promptly had "Little Punk Staffer" buttons made up and distributed to Congressional aides.

But Mr. Boehner isn't the problem: Mr. Frank has already shepherded fairly strong financial reform through the House. Instead, the question is what will happen in the Senate.

In the Senate, the legislation on the table was crafted by Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut. It's significantly weaker than the Frank bill, and needs to be made stronger, a topic I'll discuss in future columns. But no bill will become law if Senate Republicans stand in the way of reform.

But won't opponents of reform fear being cast as allies of the bad guys (which they are)? Maybe not. Back in January, Frank Luntz, the G.O.P. strategist, circulated a memo on how to oppose financial reform. His key idea was that Republicans should claim that up is down — that reform legislation is a "big bank bailout bill," rather than a set of restrictions on the banks.

Sure enough, a few days ago Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, in a letter attacking the Dodd bill, claimed that an essential part of reform — tougher oversight of large, systemically important financial companies — is actually a bailout, because "The market will view these firms as being 'too big to fail' and implicitly backed by the government." Um, senator, the market already views those firms as having implicit government backing, because they do: whatever people like Mr. Shelby may say now, in any future crisis those firms will be rescued, whichever party is in power.

The only question is whether we're going to regulate bankers so that they don't abuse the privilege of government backing. And it's that regulation — not future bailouts — that reform opponents are trying to block.

So it's the punks versus the plutocrats — those who want to rein in runaway banks, and bankers who want the freedom to put the economy at risk, freedom enhanced by the knowledge that taxpayers will bail them out in a crisis. Whatever they say, the fact is that people like Mr. Shelby are on the side of the plutocrats; the American people should be on the side of the punks, who are trying to protect their interests. " NYT

---

As they fought reforming our national health care system, the Reactionary forces of no-progress will do all they can to prevent necessary change, using Black PR, PR-Distortion-by-Redefinition, ad-hoc diatribes, and all the rest of their tired, toxic arsenal of mugwumpery.

Do let's watch.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 11:15 AM

When posting cutting and pasting opinion would you please provide more information than the name of the media outlet? The date and the name of the columnist would be nice.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Rapparee
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 11:16 AM

Cui bono? Always ask that -- "Who benefits"?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Amos
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 11:29 AM

Jack:

Mea culpa. The excerpt is from an editorial column in the NYT today, by Paul Krugman.




A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 11:30 AM

Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 12:28 PM

I worry about real financial reform. And I wonder about the Tea Party, If they are really for their stated goals. Why aren't they pushing for stricter laws, especially about bailouts?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Amos
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 01:05 PM

When they saw how much the Feds made selling their shares in Citibank they stopped dead in their tracks to start looking for an angle on all that profit.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Mar 10 - 01:25 PM

I just joined the Tea Party and asked the same question in a Forum. No reply so far.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Apr 10 - 07:09 PM

who Obama will benefit...

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Apr 10 - 07:45 PM

Well, unless the feds are prepared to unravel the very complex "dirivatives" market then any legislation will be a failure... I have heard some very astounding numbers about that market... Like $450T!!! That's trillion!!!! That ain't chump change!!!

I guess the thing that bother me most is that if the fat cats have corraled anywhere near taht amount of cash then it certainly makes sense why there isn't much cash left for the working class...

I mean, lets get real here... We just had a health care reform bill that will insure upwards of 35 million people and it's cots is a tad less than just one of those trillions for ten years???

Somethin' very screwed up here when so few have so much...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 20 Apr 10 - 08:58 PM

Derivatives include futures contracts and options; i. e. financial instruments derived from other forms of assets.

The G-20, to pare down risk taking, has recommended higher capitalization, stronger standards on risk management, international cooperation on oversight of financial firms operations, and rules on capital flow.
These are not the most transparent of objectives, but the feeling that control is necessary is getting stronger.

That '450 trillion is a world figure. Controls, if they do come, must be global if they are to be effective. No country can go it alone and remain a player in the world markets.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Apr 10 - 09:54 PM

The problem with dirivatives is that when the day is done, they porduce absolutely nothing for mankind... The argument that if the US regulates them that nothing will change is bogus... Lots of stuff will change here in the US...

First and formost, bankers and investors will have to do what the3y used to do and that is roll up their sleeeves and get a little dirty using money that would be kept out of the economy and, ahhhhhhh, actually lending it to small businesses that need it... But Wall Street has gotten very lazy... They don't wnat to earn money the "old fashioned way"... They want to take this pool of money and play games with it...

If we think about it this way it might make a little more sense... It's like Wall Street has corraled this biass chunk of change and so what they are doing with it is holin' up in some hotel and you have 5 guys sittin' around the poker table playing poker with it and a bunch of other people standing arounb betting on who is going to win the hand or lose the hand??? That's a little simplistic but that, in essence is what we have...

Now here's where it doesn't work for the country... This poker game produced "zero jobs"... It produced "Zero" infastructure... It produced absolutely nothing!!! That's right.... Absolutely nothing!!!
It's nothing but a "ballgame" to keep the upper 5% rich and everyone else scratchin'... It is tieing up valuable capital that could be used to build factories... Or schools... Or even taking a loss to get our steel industry back from Japan??? But no, we have the same rich people playing pea-under-the-shell with the government and the American people...

That's the real deal...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 20 Apr 10 - 10:15 PM

Bobert hit it. We need that money flowing around and it's hung up with the über-rich in klugey investment schemes that don't help anybody but the über-rich. They suck money out of the general economy into their special pile where it sits. Eventually maybe the people will see that they are the real enemy, not the unled Democrazy Party.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Apr 10 - 10:35 PM

Geeze, mouse... I am scared 'cause it sounds like the Repubs are talkin' about cooperatin' on this legislation.... That's a bad thing... They are in bed with the bad-guys so if they are cooperatin' than any bill that comes outta Congress will be junk...

Right now, I'm smellin' one shit-load of $$$$s promised to one shit-load of Congressmen over this...

And for the thousanth time, regulating Wall Street isn't a "bailout"??? I don't know hwere the current crop of Repubs came up with that but I think they need to collectively "pee in the cup"...

b~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: Sawzaw
Date: 20 Apr 10 - 11:41 PM

I agree with Bobert that these derivatives are of no benefit except to the investors or maybe their creators. They produce nothing.

I feel the same way about commodities traders. What do they do besides drive prices up and create bubbles? Just more middlemen that contribute nothing to the economy other than their own profits which they avoid taxes on. There should be a rule that they must take delivery of whatever they buy like an airline buying fuel and not some weaselly bastard buying it and flipping it to an airline after it goes up and the airline is in a jam.

These people have no feelings for the people on the end of all that wheeling and dealing. The people who must bear the brunt of their money making schemes. They have no comprehension of what it's like. It is like trying to imagine what it is like to be blind. It's like "I'm not blind so what am I supposed to do abut it?"

Then the politicians are paid off by these people. That's right, PAID OFF in the form of campaign contributions so they have to make it look like they are doing something.

On CNN I heard them discussing the Blob. That is a group of lobbyists and staffers discussing and writing the bill. What? I thought lobbyists weren't going to run things any more.

From NPR:An obvious example: both liberals and conservatives are finding a lot of flaws with the financial legislation.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and FInancial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 01:04 AM

Gotta agree with Sawz on this one.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: kendall
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 08:24 PM

I plan to vote against ALL politicians who have been in office more than one term.

What's wrong with an investigation? What are the right wingers afraid of? If you drag a snake out into the sunlight it will die.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 09:10 PM

Anyone who thinks the US can go it alone on reforming derivatives (includes the whole futures market) is living on cloud 8 and three quarters.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Arkie
Date: 21 Apr 10 - 11:30 PM

This is a world wide issue but there has to be a start in fixing things. Here is what one person in the field of investments has to say about reform.


Motley Fool

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Sawzaw
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 12:25 AM

Hey Mouse, liftoff.

Looky here at what Obama said before he was elected:

"I don't take a dime of their [lobbyist] money, and when I am president, they won't find a job in my White House."

Now be adivsed that Goldman Sachs donated $994,795 to Obama's 2008 presidential campaign.

Goldman Sachs

Goldman Sachs, one of Wall Street's most prestigious investment banks, was also among the many banks in 2008 and 2009 to receive billions of dollars in taxpayer money to help it stay afloat. Like others in the securities industry, Goldman Sachs advises and invests in nearly every industry affected by federal legislation. The firm closely monitors issues including economic policy, trade and nearly all legislation that governs the financial sector. It has been a major proponent of privatizing Social Security as well as legislation that would essentially deregulate the investment banking/securities industry. The firm tends to give most of its money to Democrats. A number of high-ranking government officials in recent years have spent part of their careers at Goldman Sachs.

Chris Dodd 2010 Campaign contributions:
Industry....................Total......Indivs......PACs
Securities & Investment..$1,568,048..$1,204,848..$363,200
Lawyers/Law Firms..........$873,976....$701,920..$172,056
Insurance..................$804,450....$311,650..$492,800
Real Estate................$618,331....$387,955..$230,376
Commercial Banks...........$373,650....$244,150..$129,500

More here

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: kendall
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 06:38 AM

And how much did they contribute to McCain's campaign?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 08:10 AM

Whereas, yeah, the reality that to get elected one must raise a bundle of cash I don't get the impression that Obama has any sympathies for the Wall Street fat cats... Seems they have gone out of their way (think big bonuses) to poke Obama (and the American working class) in the side every chance they get...

No, me thinks that theie is sufficient anger in the country for Obama (and Congress) to play hardball...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 08:56 AM

One thing the Republicans complain about is that the Democrats won't include FREDDY & FANNY in their reform measures. If that's true, why won't they?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 09:35 AM

As I posted NUMEROUS TIMES during the 'election', both sides are immensely corrupt, and bought off, by the corporatist mega rich. If this hasn't become plainly obvious to you, by now, maybe you ought to spend a few months trying to figure out the 'secret chord progression' of Neil Young!

Both Sides!!!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 01:02 PM

Try a song that ain't in G for a change, GfS... Yer startin' to sound like the political equivalent of every crummy bluegrass band you've ever heard... lol...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Amos
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 01:22 PM

Rig:

Do you have any real data on this idea? First I haveheard of it; obviously I should spend more time listening to whinging on the right.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 01:38 PM

In trying to keep their investors of all stripes happy, many major corporations donate to both major political parties and top candidates.

As kendall implied (I think), McCain probably received a similar amount. In the primary and caucus stage, check the sums received by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and McCain and his major competitors.

Today, Obama addressed 'Wall Street' in an attempt to sell controls- if successful, in part anyway, complaints reaching Congressmen will be muted and there may be a chance of getting a helpful bill passed.

Some contributors here seem to think that major financial institutions do not represent their investors, who happen to include pension funds, life insurance funds, banks, union funds, etc. The bottom line is that most of us have some stake in their continued solvency.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 01:59 PM

Rings..., What reforms do you propose for Fmae and Fmac? Other than legislating that no mortgages are given by banks etc. to those with marginal abilities to pay them off? Or institutions can loan only with high interest rates to block those with little collateral?

To do this, refuse to buy mortgages except those given to people or institutions who don't really need them in the first place?

Eliminate one of them?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 09:21 PM

Bobert: "Try a song that ain't in G for a change, GfS... "

Don't B flat, B sharp, but B natural!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 09:27 PM

"What reforms do you propose for Fmae and Fmac?"

            Quit paying the idiots who run them outrageous salaries, and make them examine the paper they buy, for a couple of things.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 09:33 PM

LOL...GfS....

Actually, I can't think of anything I do that is in B??? B7th??? Yeah, but just one... Guess that there ain't alot of B in blues... lol... Maybe they should call it "lues"???

Poor W.C. Handy turnin' in his grave... Not so funny, W.C....

As fir finacial reform, looks as if the Dems learned their lesson from health care reform and ain't gonna take no "death squad" crap this time around... Good!!!

I just hope that the Dems don't roll over here... Derivitives need to go... Take all that money that the Fat Cats are playin' poker with (for entertainment and a little "mad money") and put it into their subsidery banks and tell those banks to lend it the small businesses (mine included) so that we can keep movin' forward and keep handin' over pay checks to employeees every Friday afternoon... That is exactly what this is all about... No reason to complicate it...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Amos
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 09:46 PM

Those sound like real healthy propositions, Rig!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 10:59 PM

I wasn't expecting any sort of intelligent answer from Rigs... and I wasn't disappointed.

Many many thousands of mortgages come in the bundles to the FM's, or rather they come as lists with total costs from lending institutions across the country. The FM's would have to hire thousands to check item by item.
The costs would be prohibitive and the system would choke on the volume.
The government could cut down on the paper it buys, but then loans would be hard to get and business could be stifled.

Controls must be exerted on the lending institutions at the local level. Congress could do a lot by setting limits- but it is not the easiest thing to legislate. The government can, to some extent, control interest rates, and set up a climate that discourages poor loans; cyclic ups and downs could be dampened but never wholly controlled.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Apr 10 - 11:19 PM

Bobert: "Actually, I can't think of anything I do that is in B??? B7th??? Yeah, but just one... Guess that there ain't alot of B in blues... lol... Maybe they should call it "lues"???"

You will if you play with horns!!
(Not suggesting you should be horny, though.......)

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:01 AM

Too late to take up and more instruments, GfS... My head stays full trying to keep all my various stringed instruments straigh in terms of the multiple open tunings and believe you me, I gota wierd collection of stringed instruments... Google up "Lowebow" for one... Or "Back Porch Guitar"...

Don't think there's too many B's in either of them...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 09:53 AM

Two words: Glass-Steagall.

Needs to be re-instated & fast.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 10:32 AM

I just love the way that, whenever anybody tries to do something to improve matters, the likes of GfS appear, tell everybody that it's both sides, and nothing makes any difference.

Assuming it is both sides, which is by no means proven, I would tend to side with those who seek to change it, rather than listen to the whining no hopers who content themselves with bleating accusations that "It's not us, it's them", or "It's both of them, and you can't change it".

If the human race had been afflicted with more of them, the insects would be running this planet now.

Thank God the "no-hoper" gene is by its nature recessive, and you seem to have a President who doesn't have it.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 12:16 PM

I see a slightly different interpretation of what GfS asserts:
"...both sides are immensely corrupt, and bought off, by the corporatist mega rich.

What it 'feels' like is that, although many Democrats have taken too many contributions from corporate interests, and thus are compromised in what they can say, they have mostly done it as individuals, out of simple carelessness and/or rationalized expediency, the Republicans seem to do it as a general matter of principle and party policy in order to promote the financial/corporate lobby.

I 'think'...(I hope)... that if the rules were changed, many Democrats would be happy to get away from that awkward situation. I heard Chris Dodd the other night on the Senate floor, reading out the Republicans royally for their hypocritical stance on financial reform. Dodd HAS gotten $$$$ from dubious sources,(I have no idea if he kept track personally of where all the $$$ came from) but he sounds like a guy who wants to change the system, whereas Mitch McConnell sounds like he wants to set 'the old ways' in stone.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Sawzaw
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 12:28 PM

CNN JOHN KING show Aired April 20, 2010

....They don't have to enforce certain things. Is that what we're talking about here in all these back door regulations? They're going through changing one word at a time through what is hundreds of pages of legislation?

YELLIN: Absolutely. And one staff member on the Hill told me that they refer -- there's something called the blob. The blob is the combination of lobbyists and staffers working on the bill constantly talking and conferring on what should be in it. And it's such a prevalent part, it is just such an accepted part at how business is done, they name it.

KING: It is striking to me because one senator told me this and I went up to another senator who said they're trying to change shall to may. And I went up to another and said so when the Goldman lobbyists come to you and he said shall/may --....

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Sawzaw
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 12:58 PM

"And how much did they contribute to McCain's campaign? "

Goldman Sachs $230,095

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 01:01 PM

"Many many thousands of mortgages come in the bundles to the FM's, or rather they come as lists with total costs from lending institutions across the country. The FM's would have to hire thousands to check item by item..."

         They shouldn't be bundling them. That's what caused all the problems. If it makes mortgages harder to get, and the home buyer has to wait a little longer, that's probably a good thing.

         If it means builders won't be hiring as many illegal aliens from Central America to roof houses, that's definately a good thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 06:00 PM

Rigs, do you know how many mortgages are issued each year? There were 79 million home equity loans extant in 2006. Who will pay for the thousands of new Federal government workers to check applications, and to verify the credit status of each applicant, all of which is done locally by the lending institutions and the credit check companies licensed in the State?

Would you move all of this to a federal venue far from where the mortgage is applied? Would federal employees take over enforcing local inspection rules which must be satisfied as part of the mortgage application? Would Federal employees know local situations?

A slow down in the home equity market would put construction workers, building component factory and sales personnel, developers, etc. ot of work- probably cutting a million workers or more in many fields.

What nonsense!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 07:34 PM

Q - Your support of the Reagan concept of ever expanding markets, requiring ever expanding populations demonstrates your inability to grasp realities.

                            I would agree that the lending agencies should check on the validity of the applicants, but they don't, and haven't.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:12 PM

Wow what a non sequitur.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 08:29 PM

Cost of Rigs... program?

Good thing that it would never fly.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 09:44 PM

Yeah, same old arguments... We can't possibly afford to pay people to regulate so lets just let the various segments of the economy regulate themselves...

This is exactly what the right is pushin' here... But the right has turned out to be the fat cats and anyone with an I.Q. on the downwind side of a hundred that the fat cats can maipulate (think Tea Party folks here)...

The problem is that these industries have now had 30 years of having it their way and in the words of Dr. Phil, "How's it workin' for you?"...

It bothers me that in the midst of all this and Obama going to New York to have a little talk with Wall St. that, if I am not mistaken, the stock markets ended the day on the plus side...

Is the fix in??? Maybe??? I hope not, but maybe...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Riginslinger
Date: 23 Apr 10 - 10:13 PM

Bobert, I agree that it makes sense to regulate these markets. I don't see that it would cost nearly as much money to pay regulators as it does to bail out banks.

             That having been said, my original post was in the form of a question--this isn't something I know very much about, so I'm curious--why does the administation leave Feddy and Fanny out of the equation?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 12:07 AM

Quick review in case anyone missed it...

Goldman Sachs donated $994,795 to Obama's 2008 presidential campaign.

and...

Goldman Sachs donated $230,095 to McCain's 2008 presidential campaign.

And here's a chart of all their political contributions (bribes):

Goldman Sachs money....where it went in 2008 election year

To point this out, and to point out that BOTH sides of the partisan divide are deeply corrupt and have been bought out by major financial interests is NOT to say that "nothing makes any difference"....it is to offer ordinary people a chance to finally wake UP and take on the real enemy somehow instead of remaining hypnotized by the eternal politically partisan left/right dichotomy that is there mainly just to keep them distracted with fighting each other, and make them NOT look at or go after the real enemy, which is the corrupt big money financial entities who fund the political campaigns...and they fund BOTH sides!

There isn't one party that's good in this corrupt system and another that's evil. There is a vast system of institutionalized graft already in place which choreographs and manipulates both sides no matter which one wins. How many individual politicians have the guts to fight that? A very tiny handful of them. Those are the people who need your help, no matter which party they are in. You have to see beyond old partisan habits and develop independent and truly revolutionary thinking to change what is going on. Old-style party line stuff is just more smoke and mirrors and it will not end the graft in Washington (and elsewhere).

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 03:58 AM

""I see a slightly different interpretation of what GfS asserts:
"...both sides are immensely corrupt, and bought off, by the corporatist mega rich.""

Maybe so Bill, but it's the defeatism of the response which infuriates me.

Obama looks to be trying to do something about it (he appears to have honest intentions), so instead of pissing and moaning, why not get behind him and prove that you can change things.

Take a look at human history, and see how many times this situation has pertained, in one form or another, and good, honest, men have made a difference, and things have changed.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama Admin and Financial Reform
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Apr 10 - 08:01 AM

Good point, Don... I think that the progressives have been beaten down so badly by the right over the last 30 years that they instictually expect for things to not turn out well... It's mindset that the right does not have... The right just keep plugging away toward their narrow minded, intolerant society that they see as their utopia...

The left??? No so...

B~