Obama: McConnell’s Arguments on Financial Regulation ‘Cynical and Deceptive’

“it is a bill that actually guarantees future bailouts of Wall Street banks,” McConnell
When is the media going to quit mindless parroting talking points and both to point out THE ACTUAL FACTS? Jake, are you repeating lies out of ignorance or laziness?

Who believes what O’Bama says these days?
Noz | Apr 17, 2010 8:25:13 AM
Belief is not required. The bill has been publicly available for a while now. You don’t have to believe anyone, ask them to back up their claims by citing the black and white (excruciating detailed down to the last definition, as laws usually are) text.
McConnell can’t. He’s lying. And the media is too lazy to call him on it. It’s like I claim the Bible says God wants everyone to have a new car every three years, a ministers waves the bible and say’s I’m lying, and the media throws up their hands and say “No way to tell whose being honest, so lets just report both equally!”

McConnell like most in the GOP have never met a big Banker or Corporate CEO that they didn’t love. Hopefully most Americans are waking up to the fact that the GOP is NOT the friend of the middle class.

Anything Obama supports involves a big government power grab. This is no different.
He uses every Alinsky tactic in the book to lie, distort, smear, marginalize opposition, abuse the language, etc. The man is a menace.

Anytime Washington wants to “reform” anything, it is best to lock up anything valuable. We already have evidence that health care “reform” is anything but reform. It is, however, a shining example of why to not allow Washington to have anything to do with regulation concerning our finances. For example, Obama says the health care bill will reduce the deficit and the CBO, using Obama’s assumptions, say he’s right. The first assumption fell yesterday when congress reversed the 21% reduction in Medicare payments (and thank you for that). So now the health care house of cards is starting to fall. If history has shown us anything it is this: you don’t let the people who caused the problem try and fix the problem because every time they do, the make the problem worse. Whatever the bill will actually do, we can rest assured that it will increase the cost of living for all Americans and allow whichever party is in power to spend our money for more votes.

Read the legislation you lazy republicans. Your elected officials lie to you and you just suck it up. Why wouldn’t you do the research?
The proposed bill ELIMINATES taxpayer bailouts of big banks. If you don’t like that idea, fine. But if you say that it ensures future bailouts by taxpayers you’re either misinformed or lying. Either way, the party of Hell No looks bad.

If Obama was serious about anything he would find some way to get the line item veto back and then things would start to happen rather than his hollow made for TV and worthless efforts thus far.

Under this bill as I understand it, the government will assess a new fee to the banks to fund an account to be used to backstop any big bank should they have another solvency issue in the future. This fee will be passed along (obviously) to the banks customers. I think it is misleading to say “taxpayers” will finance future bank bailouts, because only taxpayers who engage in banking of some sort (checking and saving accounts, borrowers, etc) will pay for future bank bailouts, not all taxpayers. In terms of Republicans being the party of wall street, why don’t you look at what wall street donated to Obama vs. McCain (hint: If you believe the common myth of a certain party being the party of wall street you’ll be embarassed). And while you’re at it, why don’t you see who the biggest contributer of all was, and who they gave to (hint: their name rhymes with Boldman Hacks and they gave it to the “candidate for change”).

Dear “Shepard153″ and “Marxmywords,”
For better or worse, the American people have elected Obama to be our president. Right now an awful lot of Americans are suffering. Dont you think that we should regulate the banks who got us into this awful financial mess? Why are the republicans opposed to this? Could it be that they represent the big corporations of America more than people like you and me?

Proud to be with the party of NO!
No one loves WallStreet more than Obama.
They are some of his biggest campaign donors.
Obama shows his fake outrage at fatcat bankers in front of the cameras then goes golfing with them.
But the MSM only shows the “fake” outrage.
America is on to Obama’s hat tricks.
We’re saying No Thanks.

If only Obama had any credibility left.
Just keep giving handouts and he’ll keep getting votes.
But it isn’t because Obama has credibility with the majority of Americans.

For better or worse, the American people have elected Obama to be our president.
The government makes political decisions, not economic ones. For the common good, of course. When the government makes political decisions in lieu of ecomomic ones, the result is economic dislocations and bubbles.
How do you explain (1) the CRA (2) Hud (3) Fannie and Freddie and (4) artifically low interest rates pushed by the Fed?
Are these the same types of regulations that are going to save us from Wall Street? Obama is a statist and any legistlation he pushes is to advance his statist agenda, period. The talking point is “this bill will eliminate bailouts” but like everything statists push, the devil is in the details. It’s a nice bumper sticker, but it’s a lie.

It’s hard to say which is the more annoying: Republican policies or Republican spammers trolling comments boards?
You can’t makes lies true by repeating them over and over. You can’t blame the President for the Wall Street disaster or the Recession that eight years of Bush gave us.

If only Obama had any credibility left.
Just keep giving handouts and he’ll keep getting votes.
But it isn’t because Obama has credibility with the majority of Americans.
Posted by: fran | Apr 17, 2010 10:15:53 AM
Fran why is it so difficult for you and every other wingnut to understand the the President is doing the things he promised to do when he ran for office.

At this point believing Obama is like trying to believe a crackhead. He knows full well that bailouts will be built into the system permanently. First, the bill contains a $50 billion fund for resolution of systemically risky institutions. The bill allows a 2/3 vote of the Financial Stability Oversight Council to deem any firm (financial or non-financial) as coming under its rubric and then authorizes the FDIC and Treasury Secretary to treat each of the firm’s shareholders and creditors as they choose, without regard to bankruptcy law.
Second, the bill gives the Treasury and the FDIC authority to grant an unlimited number of loan guarantees to systemically risky institutions. No congressional authorization or appropriation is required.
Third, the bill gives the Fed the authority to fund any ‘program’ to assist these institutions accepting as collateral anything it deems appropriate. So perhaps too big to fail is dead. How could any firm actually fail when all of its debt could be guaranteed by the Treasury, the Fed could print money to assist it, and just in case, there was $50 billion sitting around to reassure nervous creditors that they would be repaid regardless what contract or bankruptcy law said?”

Bank bail of $700B was initiated by George W. Bush. He gave $350B to Henry Paulson with no accounting whatsoever. The balance $350B was given to the Obama Administration. They conducted a stress test of the banks balance sheet and found those banks that were at risk. Thebanks got the money on strick conditions for repayment. Many of them have paid off the treasury with interest. Others who got the money like AIG and GM are paying back little at a time. The first half of the $700B given to Paulson by Bush has so far not been accounted for- ITS HAS BEEN swallowed and gone forever. The TEA PARTY and idiotic Republicans, Rush Limbo, Sarah Palin are not asking questions. Obama has done a good job righting the sunken economy that he inerited. The Republicans can not lie their way back to POWER- shame on you SENATOR Mitch LIAR of Kentuckey

Another point for idiots who fail to understand the true cost of the bailouts. It is not just 700 billion for TARP. The total cost of bailouts between 2008 and 2010 – 7 trillion dollars.

One of the more recent so called financial regulation bills actually stated that congress doesn’t even want to take the time to debate whether bailouts are a good idea. They actually put a clause to limit debate when the next financial crisis hits . Now they are even too lazy to make up stories about how a big corporation or bank failing will ‘devastate’ the economy before they stick their hand in your pocket.

What needs to be investigated is who wins with the proposed regulation! There will be losers and winners and it is not always the obvious which needs investigation.

The Glass-Steagall Act was repealed during Clinton’s time thru Alan Greenspan’s behest. Yet, we have financial crises and no one seems to be even bringing up this fact or the need to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act. That makes me believe that the bankers will put forth a phoney reform bill to again put the taxpayers on the hook once another crises happens. Enough is enough. We do not need more rules or laws. Just reinstate the Glass-Steagall so that the bankers who are gaming the system cannot do so! Or are all our politicians in their payroll?

Let’s be clear. Wall Street and bankers put 60 million dollars in contributions to The Annoited One campaign. is anyone stupid enough to believe he will not bail then out again ??Bill Clinton was slick , this guys is deceiving.

The GOP is very clever- but the people are becoming used to McConnell who has done everything in his political career to protect corporations and banks
With the SEC accusing Goldman of Fraud- it seems futile to say Obama is a ‘friend’ of the banks.
__________
Exactly, and Concerned makes a similar point:
“Let’s assume that’s true. Having accepted huge contributions from GS, one might expect Obama to craft legislation to favor them. And he isn’t. He’s trying to protect the American people. That says very good things about his integrity. But not so much for McConnell. He looks like a GS lackey.”
Washington Monthly’s Political Animal notes:
“In a thorough report yesterday, McClatchy noted, “Leaders of both parties had vowed for months that consideration of financial regulatory changes wouldn’t mirror the angry, partisan debates over health care and stimulating the economy. Everyone agreed that voters want tough new restrictions on Wall Street, and the legislation that the Senate is to take up later this month is full of bipartisan ideas.”
So, what happened? Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) decided this week to throw “a rhetorical stick of dynamite into what had been a collegial debate.” He did so by lying about the substance of the proposal, and raising bogus complaints about the process.
That McConnell is obviously, shamelessly doing Wall Street’s bidding doesn’t seem to faze him. ”
I’m glad the President was fairly direct in calling out McConnell.

Why can’t republicans stop making up stuff, and then rag on the left when they fight it?

agreed. Steagall is a great place to start- With this bill banks would still be issuing loans, insuring them and then packaging them as dervities…where is it in their interest to regulate themselves if they can profit threefold on one loan and pass on this ‘tax’ to the people. If your really upset with the status quo educate on the facts- its the only place to start.

AJ, you missed one important point. The money does NOT come from the FED – our taxes. It comes from the banks themselves who must post bonds to cover future problems. Our tax dollars are not involved.

Obama:“Opposing reform will leave taxpayers on the hook if a crisis like this ever happens again,” he added, no doubt sending a message to the Capitol Hill as senators prepare to consider the bill as soon as next week on the Senate floor.
======
Not really.
First of all, this crisis was pretty rare. Who knows if it or something like it would “ever happen again”?
Second, it was a choice to bail out companies. We are only on the hook if Congress votes to put us on the hook again.
Robert Rubin begged President Bush to put taxpayers ‘on the hook’ to bail out Enron. It, too, was too big to fail. But fail it was allowed to do, and we did recover from it.
Finally, we can’t ignore the Fannies, Freddies, GMs, and Chryslers. We are still “on the hook” with them, and there’s nothing stopping another similar bailout from being foist upon us.
It is folly for the President to argue Republicans are being dishonest about what will happen with this legislation because they foresee an outcome different from what his *intentions* are.
Two years ago, he could have called Republicans “cynical and deceptive” if they’d said we were going to end up completely on the hook for Fannie, Freddie, and GM. But look at us.

Is the proposed bill posted somewhere? Seems like if it were it would be easier to shut up the wingnuts?
rlcamp | Apr 17, 2010 11:53:42 AM
The summary, section by section overview, and full text is publicly available on the Congress’s website. But it doesn’t matter – Republicans aren’t citing any particular part or referring to anything it does, they are fabricating complete lies. And it’s infuriating that the media is mindlessly repeating them like they are legitimate arguments.

Obama should know what “cynical and deceptive” is since that has been his attitude from day one. That is why his job approval rating has unprecedentedly plunged since the first of the year.

Obama,
When you point your finger at someone, three fingers are pointing back at you.
In the case with your health care bill, 55% of American fingers are pointing back at you after backroom dealing, buying votes with taxpayers’ $, abortion stlll in the bill, all against the majority’s will.

quote: Obama sure loves using the words ‘cynical and deceptive’ at every briefing
————————————–
If the shoe fit!

Laws are not “intentions” they are black and white, written in detail, with extensive definition and citation. This is kinda what ALL OF MODERN CIVILIZATION IS BASED UPON. Some refer to it as the “rule of law.”
=========
First, there is no law yet.
Laws are not black and white, they are open to being poorly written and creative interpretations. Not to mention loopholes and further, future clarifications.
Even the newly passed health care reform act is bumping up against these very things.
You know that. It has nothing to do with hating Obama or the Democrats, but about the reality of legislation, regulation, and those on the creating and receiving end of both.

First, there is no law yet.
Laws are not black and white, they are open to being poorly written and creative interpretations. Not to mention loopholes and further, future clarifications.
MayBee | Apr 17, 2010 12:29:19 PM
Their is a bill written and published, ready for debate. Yet Republicans are promising to block even debating and amending it on the Senate floor (they want another six months behind closed doors to kill it in committee). What happened to wanting to debate in front of the cameras? That is the express purpose of the Senate floor debate!
Either you can CITE THE PORTION OF THE WRITTEN AND PUBLISHED BILL you disagree with, or you are simply arguing “I hate Obama so it must be bad.”

Either you can CITE THE PORTION OF THE WRITTEN AND PUBLISHED BILL you disagree with, or you are simply arguing “I hate Obama so it must be bad.”
========
You are arguing with points I’m not making.
I’m discussing Obama’s speech today, and the flaws in his rhetoric and the points he’s trying to make/score.

Why can’t our President stop calling Republicans names and just explain the darn bill?? —you know what, it’s hard to understand and it’s up to YOU to learn abougt it and YOU to look up the terms, or call a CPA and understand it YOURSELF!! I agree he should try to be more specific, but can you at least understand that this president was smart enough to thwart another great depressoin while you have Greenspan say he is ‘dismayed” that self regulations doesn’t work! Who do you trust, eh??? You want to understand hte bill, I have one easy suggestion. LISTEN TO NPR. they explain these things in deep deep detail. If you listen to FOx news and expect any REAL explainantion you are high as a kite. Rupert Murdoch own Fox, as pays Hannity and pays Rush and pays Beck along with about 200 conservative newspapers and HE doesn’t want any regulatoins. HE isnot affected by this recession, he makes money off it. Folks flocking to fox and listening to Rush, angry at their hard times. You are making his richer by being bad off. If you were well off you may not listen to him, right? Nothing to be angry about, right? It is in his best interest to KEEP you angry and poor, you fool!!!!!!! Not to mention Murdock doesn’t want YOU getting a tax cut, HE wants the tax cuts. Obama just gave YOU a tax cut and may raise taxes on the murdoch’s of the world. GROW UP!!! Listen to NPR. They will explain the bill in detail.

Not surprising Investor Business Daily has put out a dishonest hit piece on this bill. Beyond being flaks for the status quo, lets all remember how they attacked the health insurance reform bill:
“People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn’t have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless.” IBD editorial, Aug 1 2009
They later recanted when it was pointed out Dr Hawking lived his entire life in the UK and credited the care of the NHS for his not only surviving but thriving. And that was pretty much the final straw for their already-dubious credibility with anyone not already in the Republican choir.

(As a sidenote, of course Stephen Hawkings is alive, 68 years old, and living in the UK. Re-reading my post, it looks like I whipped it out in an inappropriate tense when discussing him.)

I see no flaws in rhetoric. He’s finally fighting back—- in fact, it’s whimpy. Let’s just say the truth shall we? Republicans are lying. Period. For 60 years we were protected, Grahm repealed GlassStegal and it all started up immediately. Republican economic theory is for self regulatoin. Greenspan just said so in the hearings. REpulicans DO NOT LEARN from their mistakes. They hold on to their theories not matter how much proof, over how many decades, proves they are WRONG. Republicans say this sets up taxpayers for more bailouts. ???? That is a LIE!!! No other way to put it, it’s a lie. there is NOTHING that says tax payers will pay one tiny cent for anything, ever. WHERE did that come from?????? He pulled it out of his Lying arse, just like Saddam was responsible for 9/11 and obama has death panels and Obama is a muslim. How many times would you allow a person, a single person, to lie to you before you just branded them a liar and stopped believing anythign they say????? Well, at what point does this happen to cons about their beloved politicans, huh??? you know they’re never going to stop lying to you until you reject their lies. Are you forever going to be their doormat? You know if you support democrats the economy will do better. You know that. GDP is growing, the debt will begin to be paid off next year. Are you kdiding you that you would even consider ruining the recovery by supporting these liars?????

For all of you “believers” in Obama.—people are not ‘believers in Obama’ —-we simply read the legislation and judge the policies. Maybe cons support republicans for who they are, not what they do, but not dems. We READ THE STUFF and understand how it works nad THAT is why we support it. I dont ‘believe’ in Obama, I read thestuff he puts up, I read about his work inside the banks, what he had done, what is legislation will do and I support the IDEAS not the man. maybe this is a difference between republicans and democrats. YOU take this all too personal. I am not supporting this legislation because of anyone supporting it. I looked it up, i know what is says ,what the theory is, and I think it’s a good idea. Period. You should start actually trying to UNDERSTAND what is going on, instead of playing the personality game. this isn’t high school. This is about ideas. What ideas do you think oworks best. If you want to be aware of what is inside the bill, listen to NPR. Fox WILL NOT TELL Fox tries VERY hard to make it personal, about personalities, rather than facts and ideas. works much better with the small minded ignorant who dont know how things work. I dont think you have to be that type of person. Listen to NPR in addition to fox news for a week. Listen to both sides, then decide. I’m think youre intelligent enough to do that.

Seriously….are you serious? You think Phil Grahm repealed the Glass-Steagal Act of 1932??? Seriouly??? since when does a Senator have the authority or power to repeal ANY law or act? The act was repealed by none other that President Clinton, with massive bipartisan support….90-8 in the Senate and a similar “landslide” by the house. Here is the story of the repeal…you can look up the passage of the original Glass Steagal act yourself if you care to. But here is the process of the repeal:
The bill that ultimately repealed the Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. The bills were passed by a Republican majority, basically following party lines by a 54–44 vote in the Senate[12] and by a bi-partisan 343–86 vote in the House of Representatives.[13] After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90–8 (one not voting) and in the House: 362–57 (15 not voting). The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.[14]
You went on to say, “…”Grahm repealed GlassStegal and it all started up immediately” “all started up immediately”. I suppose you meant the economic decline? All “started up immediately” by a law repealed not by Grahm, but by Democratic President Bill Clinton. Now, WHO did you say was responsible for the economic distress????

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, (Pub.L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted November 12, 1999) is an act of the 106th United States Congress (1999-2001) which repealed part of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, opening up the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies. The Glass-Steagall Act prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company

In the age of soft money no politician has ever raised more money from one company for one election than Barry did with Goldman Sachs in 2008.

simple facts – republicans are denying they pushed to repeal Glass Stegal then why are republicans, again, getting in the way of putting regulation back on wallstreet???? McConnell is a lying piece of poop. We all know banking regulations work. He can say he’s against them, he’s for self regulation , just be honest about it (if he can, he is after all, a republican) but to say it wont work or will lead to more bailouts….???? hello???? Do you imagine we’re all idiots like you and your followers? we all know banking regulations work. How do you keep a straight face when you talk like that.

And who was responisble for the “predatorial lending” that you are railing about? How about Dodd? How about good ol’ Barney Franks?? And, hey, how about that super Obama Supporter, Goldman Sachs??? You know, the ones that are now accused of designing loans designed to fail? The ones that donated mega millions to get Obama elected? And have you looked to see who TRIED to get Glass Steagal re-signed into law? Hint…he’s a Republican Senator from Arizona…but his bipartisan bill was sort of ignored by obama and the democratic congress earlier this year.

In the age of soft money no politician has ever raised more money from one company for one election than Barry did with Goldman Sachs in 2008.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | Apr 17, 2010 1:24:37 PM
Thank you, John Boehner, but you sound rather silly, don’t ya think? … while there’s no point at all in denying that the financial services industry in general and Goldman Sachs employees in particular contributed money to Barack Obama’s campaign, its also true that Obama and his admin have spoken out against the financial services industry AND that Goldman stands accused of fraud by the SEC– uh, Obama’s admin. So, it makes it rather commendable that Obama wasn’t bought off, imho.
Moreover, Goldman Sachs OPPOSES the reform that Obama is pushing. Truth be told, the positions of Boehner and McConnell and all the rest of the crappy Republicans in Congress are the positions in line with Goldman Sachs.
Heck, you can read HuffPost and know full well that Democrats are deeply in hock to Wall Street– that’s not a news flash. But those on the Right are protesting Big Government and giving High Finance a total pass. Its stupid and short-sighted.
As Bill Moyers writes: “Bottom line: “The Wall Street banks are the new American oligarchy — a group that gains political power because of its economic power, and then uses that political power for its own benefit.” So write Simon Johnson, former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund; and James Kwak, former management consultant and software entrepreneur, in their important new book, 13 Bankers: The Wall Street Takeover and the Next Financial Meltdown. Their words of warning and the past year and a half make you realize that as usual, Thomas Jefferson, whose birthday we celebrate this week, had it right. Back in 1816, he wrote, “I sincerely believe… that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.” (Crocodile Tears on Wall Street, Bill Moyers, Huff Po)

Moreover, Goldman Sachs OPPOSES the reform that Obama is pushing.
Posted by: progressive mama |
Citation please.

Moreover, Goldman Sachs OPPOSES the reform that Obama is pushing. Truth be told, the positions of Boehner and McConnell and all the rest of the crappy Republicans in Congress are the positions in line with Goldman Sachs.
Heck, you can read HuffPost and know full well that Democrats are deeply in hock to Wall Street– that’s not a news flash. But those on the Right are protesting Big Government and giving High Finance a total pass. Its stupid and short-sighted.
As Bill Moyers writes: “Bottom line: “The Wall Street banks are the new American oligarchy — a group that gains political power because of its economic power, and then uses that political power for its own benefit.” So write Simon Johnson, former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund; and James Kwak, former management consultant and software entrepreneur, in their important new book, 13 Bankers: The Wall Street Takeover and the Next Financial Meltdown. Their words of warning and the past year and a half make you realize that as usual, Thomas Jefferson, whose birthday we celebrate this week, had it right. Back in 1816, he wrote, “I sincerely believe… that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.” (Crocodile Tears on Wall Street, Bill Moyers, Huff Po)
Posted by: progressive mama |
Stand by your man…
The same folks that see conspiracies everywhere two or more Republicans gather can’t find Democratic corruption with both hands.
Obama would have you believe that the Goldman Sachs boys have spent millions of dollars on Democrats in the last few years and still ended up with a bill that they oppose because it’s too hard on them.
progressives never look more foolish that when they attempt to defend the corruption of the Social Democrats. And for some reason, they always defend it.

As it happens there still those of us who support this president and believe in him. I don’t agree 100% with each and every choice he makes, but I know he has difficult choices and people advising him who are more knowledgable than I. I do not and will never believe he is a liar, a traitor, a Marxist, a socialist, or any of the vicious things the Republicans and Tea Partiers say about him every day. I wish the Gallup Poll would poll me for a change, and I suspect there are enough people like me to start to fight back from the right wing fringe that is trying to dominate the agenda in this country.

tierra, your comment, “nonsense”, is nonsense. The first six years of the bush presidency were fine. And it did take just 2 years of dme meddling to bring it down like a house of cards. It amazes me that you seem to think that the dems can continuously wash their hands of any culpability in our economic bad times, then try to claim credit of the good things. and by the way, this whole thing proves that McCain was correct when he stated that our economy was fundamentally sound. Regardless of obama’s fumbling around with cash for clunkers, stimulus, and other failed attempts, the economy will recover as will the stock market.

I do not and will never believe he is a liar, a traitor, a Marxist, a socialist, or any of the vicious things the Republicans and Tea Partiers say about him every day.
Posted by: Phoenix lady | Apr 17, 2010 1:55:07 PM
_________________________________
Sadly the smear and fear campaign is all the Republicans pursue – the Republicans certainly wouldn’t want to run on their record during the Bush administration; and they really have a paucity of policies.
And even more sadly, the smear and fear campaign lowers the quality of thought and civility in the country.
With the Republicans, its Party First, County Second.

ierra, your comment, “nonsense”, is nonsense. The first six years of the bush presidency were fine. And it did take just 2 years of dme meddling to bring it down like a house of cards.
_____________________________________
Nonsense, the ‘strong’, ‘stable’ economy the Republican built was a sham, ready to collapse. Six years of mismanagement, overinflated housing, overinflated phony loan packages . .. it was a house of cards.
Nice to see the stock market WAY up since the Democrats took office. Same with GDP. Jobs are next.

So Mitch McConnell would rather just let those big banks go belly up than pass regulations or bring back Glass-Stegal. Let’s dissect this calamity. Wall street used some questionable practices to throw the whole country into a recession and many huge banks that got suckered in lost money. The government gave them loans to keep them operating and they’ve paid most of it back. So is the problem shady practices on Wall street or the government helping businesses get back on their feet? Even the auto companies will eventually pay all the money back. Letting all these big banks and auto companies go under would have cost even millions of more jobs lost and a domino collapse of other industries they would have been effected. I’m sure that Mitch McConnell and the republicans would be campaigning on that blunder if it had happened. I believe we have to keep things in perspective and not get fooled by the double talk that politicians have practiced forever and deliver with a straight face. These are liars just like the robber barons of Wall street that put their fortunes first and Americans second.

“Obama would have you believe” —This the problem with you people. Moderates and democrats dont ‘believe’ Obama. We read Forbes Magazine, Business Week Magazine, listen to NPR, listen to MarketPlace, and read THe Economist Magazine, we listen to the BBC, we dont look to Obama to give us news or information. We find out ourselves, we look at what his ideas are, and most of hte time, they are good ideas and his thinking makes sense. We are not the sheep. WE dont have talk shows, Fox news blaring propaganda at us, we dont ‘believe’ in anyone. We think. YOU follow. You are the sheep. we know history. We know republicans repealed GLass Stegal. We know it protected us from financial ruin for over 60 years, we know the financial derivates and stock swaps and short selling all happened while bush was in office and he did nothing to stop it, and now that it’s time to get some regulation back in place, gee whiz, who’s blocking it again????? republicans. typical. Party of no. no idea, no brains, no freakn clue how anything works, no clue how to solve problems.

I have to laugh BO is the biggest liar and defrauder of peoples rights who has ever occupied the WH and he has the nerve to say the Rep.are deceptive..Oh I forgot that is the socialist Saul Alinsky way…lie enough times and the people will believe it as the truth. BO is the most dangerous person who has ever been Prez.

The first six years of the bush presidency were fine—-LOL!!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!! When do you think all these mortages were made, there einstien?????? the predatorial mortages had a nice low interest rate for the first four years, THEN they skyrocketed, right around the time the deriviate bets were made to predict the loans would begin to fail. And I see you discount 9.11 were hit during his first term and he got us into two wars he bungles horrendously, “Mission accoplished” did you forget that fiasco??? hey ,I thought the Iraq war was Accomplished all the way backthen! What happened?? Or how about not having the ability to drop water on New orleans. Having americans die of thirst after a hurricane becase you’re off singing and having a grand old time while your countrymen are drowning in the worse hurricane this contitent has ever seen in over a 100 years. Oh yeah, that’s ‘just fine” huh? LOL!!!! These things GOldman did, when did they do them???????? DURING bush’s rein, my dear. Bush was the BIGGEST failure of a president we have ever had, including Hoover, becuase Hoover didn’t have Hoover as an exampel, so all the more shame on bush.

Private enterprise was the basis for the original colonies in America. However in the course of human events it became necessary to dissolve the political bands . . . in order to sustain certain unalienable rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. A constitution established to preserve these rights set up our three branches of government with a balance of power. Of the these branches the congress represented the people, especially the lower house of congress (the House of Representatives) which brought statesmen to Washington who represented the constituency in their respective districts.
The private enterprise basis for our origins permitted enterprise to succeed or fail on its own merits, individuals had the same right. But with time greed and politicians itching for power and control became progressive in politick and began establishment of a “big brother”, “nanny state”concept. The populace in ignorance or laziness began to select representation based upon how much federal “deep-pocket” money they could bring to their district. Some in the populace are still holding to this concept others are embracing the Taxed enough Already or TEA Party movement. Although the TEA partiers are being marginalized by the ignorant, the lazy and the greedy the debt situation as declared unsustainable by the head of the bi-partisan Congressional Budget Office supports the grave truth of the situation, the “deep pockets” are empty.
Meanwhile an out-of-step House of Representatives has forgotten that it represents a constituency in small districts back home in favor of representing the president and a political party instead. This leaves the “back home” folks without representation and until now with no choice other than choosing a lesser evil from one of the two (also out-of-step) political parties. However, “When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation,” thus the birth of the TEA Party and other synergistic movements to reclaim our nation and our freedom.

The private enterprise basis for our origins permitted enterprise to succeed or fail on its own merits—uh uh. ANd that’s why Glass Stegal was repealed and to say such thinking is niave is an understatement. I think stupid is more accurate since we have the experiene of history to show us that to not regulate is akin to saying that stealing and lying in business is legal. Thatis the case right now. You can make a fund with junk, tell your customer it’s investment grade, sellit as such, then as soon as you make your billions selling it, they can bet on your stock that it will fail, which they know it will, because they designed it to fail. Let’s bring this hometo you – you buy a house and the realtor and owners says it’s a sound house, new roof, new furnace, execellent condition. You buy it, and upon buying itk you realize whomever sold it you didn’t really own it and your laywer you hired to research the house was actually being paid bythe guy who sold it to you to lie to you, and when you go the authoriites he tells you this is all prefectly legal and you are at fault for not knowing that the guys knew eachother, that this was a scam and that they took your money and now get out of your house ,it’s not yours. YOu down with that???? YOu need to make lying and dishonesty and fraud actually legal. Goldman is being broughtup on some charges, but the laws are so weak now, that even giving AAA ratings to junk bonds and selling them as investment is NOT illegal. Did you know that? That’s perfectly legal, to blatantly lie to your clients and then take out bets on them that their stock portfolios will fail. You really dont want any laws to regulate this is illegal behavior?? yes insider trading is illegal and this is not??? how do you reconcile that?

“. I don’t know if Bush made any effort to regulate these toxic derivatives—derivates were even around when Clinton was president. You had 8 years of being in charge. Own that. This fraud happened in bush’s term, the bill to repeal Glass was written by republicans asking for a chance at thier ‘self regulation” theory. andhere you are, blaming democrats for no regulations while republicans RIGHT NOW are trying to block regulation again!Are you saying regulation is good?? then WHY are you a republican???? You cannot be arepublican AND think financial regulations are necessary. Dont you know that??? republican politicians will kick and scream to keep self-regulation no matter that it caused the great depression and caused this. Dont you even know what your own party does???????

Let me get this straight – Republicans want lower taxes, they want a better economy, and claim they want financial regulations. Obama lowered taxes on middle income folks, the GDP grew more this past quarter than in the past six years, and now he’s trying to put forth financial regulatiosn that republicans are once again blocking and he’s charging Goldman Sacs with fraud. excuse me, but isn’t Obama giving republicans everything they claim to want? What exactly is their problem now? The party of whiners, my God! Like a spoiled child.

I will make unemployment the #1 priority of 2010—the GDP grew by 5.7%, biggest growth in 6 years. He passed the stimulus bill before he went after heatlhcare and job situation went from LOSING over 600.000 jobs PERMONTH when he walked into office to job GROWTH of 140,000+ Jobs last quarter. HeDID make the economy his first priority as evidenced by it turning around COMPLETELY in just one year!

Senator McConnell should take that as a compliment, coming as it does from a man who knows so much about being cynical and deceptive.

Lets not forget under Bush —the predatorial lending was going on hog wild. wallstreet created derivates and were betting against banks. The economy was a bubble. A Huge mirage of lies. A bubble, and when it went pop. when Obmaa walked in the door, we had OVER 600.000 layoffs PER MONTH unemployment going up a percent PER MONTH!!!! Proof isin the pudding. 600.000 layoffs PER MONTH and unemployment gong up a percent PER MONTH!!!! THAT is the culminatoin of Bush’s terms. PLUS his tax cuts for the rich sent hundreds of thousands of jobs overseas as there were, of course, no regulations on WHERE that money was invested, so it was invested OVERSEAS to create offshore companies to move out manufacturing to up profit for CEO’s. Obama tax cuts are for doing something that results in job CREATION> Bush’s tax cuts were for nothing, no strings attached, again, republican theory of no strings, no regulatiosn on business. WHY would businesses invest in themselves here??? WHY??? China is growing at 11%? Our GDP was shrinking. WHY put up a factory here when you can pay someone .50 cents a week in china??? WHY???? answer – you wouldn’t. If you get a tax cut with no strings you WOULD invest it in china, and they did, hand over fist, during bush’s term. Agains BAD IDEAS = republican economic theory. Obama’s tax cuts are for doing something that CREATES a job or is linked to creating a job HERE. THAT is why the GDP HERE grew by 5.7% last quarter, because those are GOOD ideas. Cons should be saying THANK YOU to obama!

tierra: NO! Wrong!!!! The Obama and Bush had and have the same financial advisors! “Dr” Bernanke, Paulson, Geithner and Barney Frank (all former Goldman Sachs or with close relationships to Goldman) and it was THEIR idea and still their idea to make secret deals and throw all this money around via the Fed. Nothing collapsed! It was a sham! Obama was just fine with bailouts of AIG, GM, Bank of America etc. These huge banks and companies (who own more assets, loans and property) than anyone else in the WORLD saw GWB give us all a stimulus check April 2008 (remember he said go shopping) and the banks and car companies realized they could hide their OWN money cry broke and our govermnment would break open the piggy bank and give them money too. Meanwhile you have people like Barney Frank (in charge of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac) bundling the bad mortgages they wrote (like the person who makes $30,000 who bought a $6 million dollar house) into these MBS (mortgage backed securities) so that their pals at Goldman Sachs- could play the suckers who bought MBS against the people on the stock market who bet on them to fail! Goldman’s chief lobbyist even worked for Barney Frank!

Bush’s fault, Bush’s fault.
Oh how we forget it was the policies of Obama and Barney Frank who cause the finacial melt down to begin with. AKA, Insisiting that people who could not afford homes get government insured loans.

The chosen one thinks he can pass anything now since he took over healthcare.
LOL, I read an article where people were asking about their “free” healthcare. Bwahahahahahahaha

Just because someone didnt get caught with their hand in the cookie jar (yet)! Doesnt mean they didnt do anything wrong. Anyone who thinks banks and car companies needed money (when they fleeced us all and our parents for loans, mortgages and payments for decades) ought to have their head examined. Face it – they were all in on it – all those in Washington – regardless of party republican or democrat.

… Today, Obama countered, “We’re going to put in place new rules so that big banks and financial institutions will pay for the bad decisions they make …
—
No, the laws are being written to give regulators authority to stop risk. But regulators are subject to the whims of their bosses, and can be discouraged and fooled. We need real laws, like Glass-Steagall, not the jokes that congress is making.

Tierra: Again with the walk and chew gum thing – we have had 8 to 10% unemployment for the last 14 months – the flavor of that gum is long gone- its time to buy a new pack of gum. Thats not growth, its not a recovery, its just BS on the part of the Obama administration – all but the looniest of lefties know its just not true- especially if they have no job and cant find one!

Rob: I am a Boomer too, at 61, and I don’t really care to be written off as a worthless wastrel, or part of a no-good selfish generation. I own and operate a small business. I have raised a family of step children and put most of them through college. I still have my parents, thankfully, and I don’t plan on squandering any money I inherit from them on toys, fancy houses or other “excesses”. The Boomers were a very large generation, and totally diverse. Hence you have folks like me who grew up with grandparents who loved and revered Franklin Roosevelt and believed he had helped them survive the Depression and WWII. Then are the Tea Party folks. They obviously grew up with different values and ideals. I truly resent the implication that I am now on the trash heap of life, when I still employ 10 people full time and do my level best to a contributing member of society.

superminority | Apr 17, 2010 3:10:08 PM
GWB inherited a budget surplus, turned it into a 1,3 Trillion deficit. Took over a 4,8% unemployment rate, left at 10.1% before the 1st Obama budget. The crisis started in 2007 under Bush, peaked late 2009, now receding. The question here is : Should you believe Mitch McConnell and his bank friends as to how to prevent a future meltdown? Paulson believed the “Big 13 Banks” in 2005 when regulating the very same “derivatives” that brought the system down was discussed, and then weren’t…

The_Mick apparently never heard of the London Company,the shareholder entity that set up Jamestown.It was as communist as the Wall Street Journal.Where is the evidence for your statement?The religious colonies may have had some cooperative aspects, but most of the early colonists tended to be of the English middle class or second sons of the wealthy who would not inherit estates.Required food sharing only came after famine and starvation-it was John Smith’s “work or don’t eat” edict that helped save Jamestown.Colonists came to America to make money-aside from the religious refugees most assumed that they could strike it rich and go back to England.It was precisely to furnish the workers that you mentioned that voluntary servitude became an option.The only agreement those individuals made was to be servants for usually 7 years.Aside from Jamestown,what public enterprise established a colony in British America?

Posted by: SocialstsNeverProsper | Apr 17, 2010 3:15:49 PM: Just want to comment on your NAME: Let’s see who are the highest ranking countries on the Human development Index, taking into account: Income, health, education, safety, social peace…. In order; Norway, Australia, Iceland, Canada, Ireland, Netherlands, Sweden, France,
Switzerland, Japan, Luxembourg, Finland
United States. Yup, them socialists really suffering here…

GWB also inherited 911/IKE/KATRINA as well as a dis-mantled CIA that was responsible for mis-information on Iraq.
The Clinton Administration ignored the terrorist threats and actually declared Osama(not Obama) to “not be a threat to the US”.
Not to mention the Economy didn’t crash until the Dems took back Congress in 2006.
THEY spend the money…NOT the President!

A “government-take over” health care?—when it became a requirement to have autoinsurance I dont recall the calls of socialism then. Do tell me the difference? slackers have been passing on their medical bills ot all of us who have healthinsurance so that’s going to stop and save hospitals a bundle in unpaid bills they keep passing onto us who have insurnace as well as our businesses that offer our plans. This a good thing for business. This is exactly like auto insurance. The doctors, hospitals, insruance ocmpanies are all privately owned. the only government owned healthcare is the VA and never have I heard a single con say that vets should have privatized healthcare. why not? If it’s some holy grail of the anitchrist, why is it good enough for our soldiers? oh, and they happento like it. But to our helathcare system, it’s 100% private. only the slackers now have to get insurnace instead of being freeloadrs because the honor system of pyaing your own bills broke down just as it did with car insurance where we all have to get it now, so stop your drama.

Obama frames EVERYTHING he does as a HUGE CRISIS. We are in such a DIRE situation that we must immediately pass HIS ideas right now with no time to fine-tune the legislation and get it right (which would mean time to weed out his pork & other special favors). Pass it RIGHT NOW, or else you’re an obstructionist and a “cynic.” Just hearing his voice makes me want to projectile vomit!

And if anyone knows cynical and deceptive, it’s Barack Obama.

Apparently he’s not smart enough to “see” this Nov. or 2012 coming!

Obama has mastered the art of cynical
and deceptive tactics. That is the pot
calling the kettle black.

In his address, President Obama said he hopes to leave the politics aside so that Democrats and Republicans can work together. But he also indicated that he would move forward without Republicans support, if need be.
———-
I just love how President Obama encourages bi-partisanship. “Do it my way or else.”
Just like the health insurance reform mess. Let’s hope this time someone will read the darn thing!

This president attacks anyone who disagrees with him. His attacks are childish and un-presidential.
___________________________________
Hah. What a joke. The Republican right attacks the President and the Democrats for EVERYTHING they do!
Talk about disagreeable, childish and unfitting for government.

So let’s see. The banks and the Republicans are against President Obama’s financial reform plan because they have the best interest of the nation at heart?
For anyone who believes that, I own a lovely, only slightly used bridge. It connects Manhattan and Brooklyn. I have the deed and everything. Really, trust me.

Obama has been the most partisan president ever. He gives lip service to bi-partisanship only. His idea of a compromise is to agree with him 100% This is not what he promised to the public. Government is growing at an ever faster rate with the only growth area in jobs coming to public not private sector jobs. At this stage we would be better off if congress took a one year recess, at least less harm would be done.

We MUST do this NOW!!
It’s a crisis.
Just like ObamaCare had to be passed NOW because people are dying.
But they won’t get the full benefits for 4 years.
Just like the stimulus had to be passed right away–even though most of it still hasn’t been spent.
This is why Obama has no credibility.
He has cried wolf too many times.

This administration is intent on quashing any deviation from their message, any opposition to their actions or any reflection on the results. They expect everyone to adhere to the narrow and partisan leftist agenda. Like it or not, despite this administrations co-opting of the media, we still have the freedom to express our doubts and publicly oppose the actions taken by an administration that seem far more intent in bouying up the political aspirations for a few conniving politicians over the general welfare of the MAJORITY of the population. I can’t wait until November. Remember in November.

McConell’s a doufus.

Tell that to the parents who lost their children to the war in Iraq, only to hear Bush joke about how maybe the weapons of mass destruction were actually hidden under his desk . . .
_________________________________
The ‘presidential’ nature of Republicans . . .

Why set aside $50B if we’re not going to bail out anyone? Why not articulate McConnell’s concerns and lay out why he thinks the legislation would enable bailouts? The people running the financial mess when it crashed under Bush are running the current system. Why? Gheitner was head of the NY Fed and did nothing while all this happened right under his nose. The derivatives weren’t a secret and Gheitner, Moody’s, SEC, S&P and others did nothing. What is in this legislation that is different than already exists. You can’t say they will have better visibility because they can already see anything they want. Pretty simple questions that go unanswered and Obama’s sheep go “bah, bah, bah…” and the press continues to see Obama through rose colored glasses.

For those of you that that Bush thought lives being lost in Iraq was a joke, get beyond the Michael Moore bull. You may not like his politics but he was a very sincere president that deeply cares for his country.

Why would Senator McConnell meet with top Wallstreet executive first? Doesn’t that tell you something? The Republicans wants to sabotage this reform by meeting with those that are against the reform in the first place. Republicans are not representing the majority of americans. They are against hard working americans who tried to save money for their retirement. They only represent the corrupt wallstreet executives.

This is only the beginning. There is more to come. President Obama has just begun to fight. As soon as wall street reforms are set in place. Then President Obama will go after the Bush Crime Family.

The era of blaming Bush is over.
————-
Its a mistake not to learn from history, and repeat the same mistakes over and over again.

Progressive, in your world we will become more like France with traditionally high unemployment and a larger divide between the haves and the have nots. The middle class will suffer and the American Dream will die. You need to learn from history. The progressive path is a slow path towards socialism and loss of individual freedoms.

Another load of crapola from the comedian-in-chief. Ironic that the golden boy himself should claim someone else is being “cynical and deceptive” when he himself as taken those traits to astronomical new heights.

I’m sure you know what you are talking about here but I don’t. It’s sounds to me like you have bought in to the mythical Obama strawman that doesn’t want anything in their life to change but I know you aren’t that gullible. Surely there is more going on here than just wanting to feel morally superior to another group of people.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | Apr 17, 2010 2:30:01 PM
Lets review.
I’m for financial reform.
I’m not beholden to the Dems but I think the Republican party is void of credibility and good ideas so in national elections I tend to vote Democrat.
I think Congress in general– both parties– are beholden to special interests, and I work to find candidates who aren’t in that vein.
In my humble opinion, of the choices during both the Dem primary and general election, Obama had the least experience, and the fewest long term ties with special interests.
I also like him as a person– but I liked the Bushes–W and Laura and their kids– too despite being horrified by Bush’s policies, politics and lack of finesse on the world stage, and protesting his wars.
I say, in a nutshell, that I’m glad financial reform is moving forward despite Obama’s contributions from Goldman Sachs and the financial industry and the fact that Dems are in hock to Wall Street. They’re obviously not courting Wall Street in lockstep as the Republicans appear to be doing at the moment.
I suggest your logic is as goofy as John Boehner’s.
You say, stand by your man despite his being “corrupt” and suggest you’d rather have nothing done because of past contributions.
Sounds to me like you’re representing for the status quo and being against just to be against or be partisan– which is easier than actually being for something and pushing for it.
And you offer nothing besides contributions to back up an accusation of corruption– contributions from folks AGAINST the financial reform Obama is pushing.
And you’re right, there’s no need to project the wanting to feel morally superior to me. If I wanted to be sanctimonious, I’d use a different approach but, truth be told, I find self-righteousness pretty darned boring.
I just don’t want the country to slip backwards again– and I do think the GOP is backwards-thinking (and that financial reform is important, even though it won’t be everything I’d want it to be.)

“The GDP grew more this past quarter than in 6 years”. The Pelosi/Reid?Obama regime has cut the legs out of small and mid-size business to the point that there was no where to go but up. Unemployment is soaring as a result of a failed “stimulus” bill that stimulated nothing except for the pocket books of the friends of the democratic party. The economy will rebound somewhat in spite of the failed policies, but the crushing debt spells trouble for the future i.e. in 2 to 4 years. Obama never had to balance a budget for even a small business and therein lies the problem.

n your world, why aren’t the Democrats reinstating Glass Steagall?
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | Apr 17, 2010 1:36:39 PM
Good question. The Volcker rule (called Glass Steagall in spirit, updated for the present market) would ban trading not done on behalf of a commercial bank’s customers, and that is something the President supports. I’m glad the President said, “I will veto legislation that does not bring the derivatives market under control in some sort of regulatory framework that assures that we don’t have the same kind of crisis that we have seen in the past.”

I have to laugh when I hear the right wing cult say Obama can now longer blame Bush. 10 years later they are still blaming clinton for stuff and I heard a guy on here the other day blaming Carter.

The $50 Billion “set aside” would be a pool paid into by banks that want to play. Not taxpayer cash… bank profits.
Ohh wait, you wanted to have something to scream at Obama for.. my bad, back to your faulty reasoning.

Common sense reforms? …..Here’s some analysis of the bill that the President is talking about………………”First, the bill contains a $50 billion fund for resolution of systemically risky institutions. The bill allows a 2/3 vote of the Financial Stability Oversight Council to deem any firm (financial or non-financial) as coming under its rubric and then authorizes the FDIC and Treasury Secretary to treat each of the firm’s shareholders and creditors as they choose, WITHOUT REGARD to bankruptcy LAW. Second, the bill gives the Treasury and the FDIC authority to grant an UNLIMITED number of LOAN guarantees to systemically risky institutions……….and here’s the kicker………….No Congressional authorization or appropriation is required. Third, the bill gives the Fed the authority to fund any “program” to assist these institutions accepting as collateral anything it deems appropriate.” WOW…..the plan is to bypass Congress and delegate authority to the Executive Branch to spend taxpayer money as they see fit!!!! Yeah, this is a great improvement. Now we won’t even see when they ROB US BLIND!!!

What? You mean Republicans are just playing politics because they’re power-mad? Never!

If the President says veggies are good for you, Republican idiots will say he is lying they are poison. All these policies are common sense. All the namecalling and rhetoric shows you got some issues about the Pres that go beyond just politics.

clr | Apr 17, 2010 8:30:51 PM: — Actually, Real Clear Politics has him at an average of +0.3 and even the conservative leaning Rasmussen has him at only -9 while CBS/NYTimes has him at +10. So exactly which polls are you citing?
And ABC, You’ve now taken this factual statement down twice. Would you please explain why citation supported facts are not allowed and random baseless claims are?

Obama calling others cynical ?! Talk about chutzpah !

his is GREAT ! Ok – Let’s let this reform bill go to Filibuster and put this on C-Span day and night for a month – Let’s make a NATIONAL SPORT out of watching the Republican Party defend Wall Street against financial reform !
Let it go on and on and on – deep into the August Heat !
Let’s do this ! NOW !

I love how it’s called attacking when the President finally begins to call some people on their rhetoric.

A common characteristic of a narcissist is failing to relate to others.

It is very obvious that Sen. McConnell is on the side of the banking industry and not on the taxpayer’s side. If he truly was objecting to the bill because of loopholes he would state the specific loopholes and suggest way to close them. Instead he just says no to the entire bill. That isn’t the way a true legislator works but it is the way a senator acts to block a bill.
McConnell is working directly to benefit Wall Street at the expense of taxpayers.

It’s sad but true, Republicans are more interested in getting tv shows and selling books.

I guess I should agree with Mr. Obama. If anyone know “Cynical”, Mr. Obama is the one…

I think the filibuster idea is great. Democrats think they can get over on lies and uninformed people.
We will inform the people of the truth.
“Too big to fail” is a euphemism for “too free to control by the government”.
It is a device for corrupting companies one by one.
Why would Obama need this if “happy days are here again”???? Look out folks, your freedom is about to take another hit!!!

frankspank, too big to fail means too big for taxpayers to bail out, plain and simple.
This isn’t about freedom, this is about protecting our economy and our taxpayer obligation from the greed of big banks.
There is no economic advantage to big banks for the taxpayer to have to risk such a big bailout. My small local bank and credit union gives better rates on loans, better c.d. rates, real personal service and doesn’t give out risky loans.

President Obama is exactly “right on the money” on this issue. I would just like to know if the Republicans knew the “Goldmann Sachs fraud scandal” was in the works before they made their “united negative, obstructionist” stand. If I were the administration…I would turn this right into them, because of their negative, obstructionism and their all out effort to “protect the wealthy”. Mr. Tapper’s censor…will you let this one post please even though you seem to not share my point of view???

Sounds good Mr. Prez…but where’s my check?