« The Knucklehead of the Day award | Main | Ike the Magnifier »

The Plot Sickens

Wow, just as soon as I put together 1500 words giving the grand conspiracy theory on how at least a significant portion of our current financial mess can be blamed on the Democrats, begging folks to debunk at least a part of it, folks go and find even more evidence that if anything, I understated it.

From Jeff Goldstein, we have word that the infamous 1997 Clinton shakeup of the Community Reinvestment act was based on bad math -- the analysis that seemed to show that wealthier minorities were denied loans that whites of similar wealth were granted was wrong. The actual difference, if any, was negligible. So there was no "pattern of discrimination" that needed fixing.

From Mike of Mike's Noise, we find out that there were some in the Senate who saw the problem coming, and tried to do something about it. Mike cites Richard Shelby, Chuck Hagel, Elizabeth Dole, and my own senator, John Sununu, as four of those who tried to head off this problem. They were opposed by some names you might find familiar -- John Kerry, Chris Dodd, Hillary Clinton, and some guy named "Obama." (I wonder what became of that last guy...)

The current meme being passed around (likely talking points from the DNC) are to ask what the hell the Bush administration did to stop this, and pointing out that the Democrats have only held congressional leadership since 2006. Since the Republicans held power before then, then it's obviously their fault, right?

This is akin to the "wifebeater" excuse. "Look what you made me do!"

No, that's not fair. It's closer to the "busted teenager" defense. "Why didn't you try harder to stop me?" The Democrats' fingerprints are all over this one, from Jimmy Carter to Bill Clinton to Barney Frank to Chris Dodd to Hillary Clinton to John Kerry to Barack Obama to James Johnson to Franklin Raines to Jamie Gorelick to... the list goes on and on and on.

Yes, there are plenty of Republicans to blame, too, but so far the vast majority of them commited "sins of omission" -- they failed to heed the warnings, failed to try to stop the looming disaster. They didn't do much actively, they just stood around and pretended that the train was not about to go flying off the tracks.

I strongly doubt that Barack Obama had very much to do with the current mess. Most of the groundwork took place while he was still in Illinois. But he is the titular head of his party, he is the one who brought two former Fannie Mae CEOs into his campaign as high-ranking advisers, and he is the one who -- in theory -- can bring his party's miscreants to heel.

Obama has made a huge point out of boasting of his "bipartisanship," of his willingness to ignore party lines, of bringing around "new" politics, of being the candidate of "hope and change." Let's see him do what John McCain and Sarah Palin have done, time and again -- stand up to the powerful and corrupt within his own party and clean his own house.

Sadly, I don't think he will. That would be risky, and he's never been the one to stray from the safe path. In this case, it's easier to point the finger at the Republicans for letting the car drive off the bridge and into the pond, and not mention just who was behind the wheel at the time -- with the American people in the back seat, just waiting to be abandoned to drown.

For all I've said, I don't see this as a strictly partisan problem. While I think the lion's share of the responsibility falls on top Democrats, simply blaming them won't fix a goddamned thing. No, we need to clean up this Augean stable of a mess, getting rid of the swine who both encouraged this to happen and tolerated it happening -- Democrats and Republicans both.

Fortunately, we have a ticket that features two candidates with a track record of putting principle above party when the chips are down. And here's a hint: it ain't the guy who raked in over $126,000 from Fannie Mae in four short years and his running mate, the senator with a lobbyist for a son.

I'm not saying that simply electing McCain and Palin will fix anything. But with them, you at least can Hope that things will Change -- instead of Hoping that the candidates themselves will Change after being elected and then Hoping that they'll Change the system.

The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong -- but that's the way to bet if you have to wager.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/31676.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Plot Sickens:

» Mike's Noise linked with Fannie Mae - whose fault is it anyway?

Comments (78)

There are some top notch po... (Below threshold)
Baron Von Ottomatic:

There are some top notch political ads to be made from this fiasco, I hope McCain and the RNC have the wits and balls to hit them hard.

Baron Von Ottomatic, I agre... (Below threshold)
Chip:

Baron Von Ottomatic, I agree and I surely hope to see some of those ads very quickly, the RNC and McCain can't let this buck get passed so easly.

Jay, You're doing a great job even though you've admitted to not understanding this issue much, keep on top of this. I also agree with you that there is enough blame to go around for both sides of the aisle. It's just not going to come out that way in the media.

Good to read you JT. This ... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Good to read you JT. This is my first opportunity to access the internet since Hurricane Ike came through Houston. My family and I are safe but without power. Just checking in on my Wizbang family makes me feel things are returning to "normal". ww

You may want to say a praye... (Below threshold)
Dave:

You may want to say a prayer. Your ship is starting to sink!

Most recent polling numbers:
Gallup Tracking: Obama +2
Rasmussen Tracking: McCain +1
Hotline/FD Tracking: Obama +3
Reuters/Zogby: Obama +2

I doubt we'll ever get to t... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

I doubt we'll ever get to the bottom of this without a special prosecutor. Good enough for Scooter Libby, good enough for FredMac and his sister I say.

Just got off the horn with my senators and congresswoman asking how Dodd could impartially lead an investigation when he's the #1 recepient of campaign donations from these two entities. I'd ask you conatct yours as well.

WW....glad you and yours are OK, and sorry for any loss you've sustained. Maybe your new name could be WWW ((Wet & WildWillie)...heheh, hope a little levity puts a grin on your mug). ODA

You want to talk about <a h... (Below threshold)
Dave:

You want to talk about sick. The GOP is trying to deny the right to vote to be who have lost there homes in foreclosure!

Luckily, Dave, ACORN is sta... (Below threshold)

Luckily, Dave, ACORN is standing by to make sure they can vote at least three or four times!

...and could you BE any more desperately transparent to change the subject? Jesus Christ, even by our recent standards you're pathetic.

J.

The GOP is trying ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
The GOP is trying to deny the right to vote to be who have lost there homes in foreclosure

Small potatoes, Dave. Did you see the new that Obama is going to continue the Bush policies in Iraq? Obama is even lying to the left. You should be outraged that voting for Obama is voting for four more years of Bush foreign policy.

Luckily, Dave, ACORN is ... (Below threshold)
Dave:

Luckily, Dave, ACORN is standing by to make sure they can vote at least three or four times!

Jay, so what you think there is some scheme going on where people let banks foreclose on their house just so they can vote twice?

If somebody had the misfortune of having their home foreclosed, in all probility they are not intending to commit any type of voter fraud. The GOP does not care about these people who have lost there homes.

Mac Lorry - "Small pota... (Below threshold)
marc:

Mac Lorry - "Small potatoes, Dave.

That's gonna sting ML, well... on second thought, let me rephrase that.

It would sting if dave had any fully functioning brain cells, although help is available.

But I feel relatively certain he would claim to lack adequate health care under the "evil" ChimpyMcBushCo and is part of the "47 million" his lover ObamaMessiah talks about and will coverage when elected. (including the illegal immigrant portion of that 47 mil)

Pssst dave... isn't that one of "ObamaMessiah's "lies?"

dave, you wanna talk sick?<... (Below threshold)
Chip:

dave, you wanna talk sick?

How about these peoples right to vote?

Warning... It is disturbing, but VERY true and is REALLY
happening!
There are no graphic images in this clip, it is the testimony of a
nurse.......but be warned, it is very disturbing.

Sorry Jay, Should ha... (Below threshold)
Chip:

Sorry Jay,
Should have stayed on topic. Shouldn't have fed the troll.

Final warning, Dave. Discus... (Below threshold)

Final warning, Dave. Discuss the topic at hand, or face Olaf The Troll God's Hammer.

J.

Chip, even trolls deserve t... (Below threshold)
marc:

Chip, even trolls deserve to be fed.

Metaphorically speaking of course.

Mac Lorry - "Small... (Below threshold)
Dave:
Mac Lorry - "Small potatoes, Dave.

That's gonna sting ML, well... on second thought, let me rephrase that.

It would sting if dave had any fully functioning brain cells, although help is available.

Excuse me for taking the right to vote seriously. The GOP historically does not as they have history of coming up with schemes to disenfranchise voters.

Disenfranchisement's threat to democracy

Excuse me for taking the... (Below threshold)
Clay:

Excuse me for taking the right to vote seriously.

Hey dumbass. What does this have to do with Jay's topic?

BTW, great job, Jay. I think this is a big issue and we're only seeing the tip. The Dems feet need to be held to the fire, although Pelosi et al will continue to attempt to deflect.

Time for the hamma' Jay.</p... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

Time for the hamma' Jay.

dave - "The GOP histori... (Below threshold)
marc:

dave - "The GOP historically does not as they have history of coming up with schemes to disenfranchise voters."

And the dems don't? Surely you jest, or are you just so isolated within your liberal cocoon as to be non-functional?

I asked this in another thr... (Below threshold)
Sawb_23:

I asked this in another thread, but didn't get a response....

Does anyone have the House or Senate bills involving the 2002 review of the CRA? Just curious who voted for it and who didn't.

Thanks

"Time for the hamma' Ja... (Below threshold)
marc:

"Time for the hamma' Jay."

I'd agree, if for no other reason than he has the unmitigated audacity (where have I heard the word before?) to link the the DUmmies.

Excuse me for taking the... (Below threshold)

Excuse me for taking the right to vote seriously.

I'll be glad to excuse you.

You're excused.

See ya.

SPLAT. SPLAT.

(Pardon the mess, folks. He was using 2 different IPs.)

J.

bye-bye <a href="http://www... (Below threshold)
marc:

bye-bye dave!

Yaaayyyyy, Olaf!!!... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

Yaaayyyyy, Olaf!!!

It's a good day...... (Below threshold)
Clay:

It's a good day...

I asked this in another ... (Below threshold)
Clay:

I asked this in another thread, but didn't get a response....

Because your research interns don't work here. You obviously have a computer, and I'll bet you can type g-o-o-g-l-e.

But, I'm also betting you've already done that, haven't you? One thing I can't stand is someone thinking they're being sneaky...

Looks like JT isn't going t... (Below threshold)
epador:

Looks like JT isn't going to be opening the pod bay door again...

JT... back on topic...... (Below threshold)
marc:

JT... back on topic...

you may want to track down what's included in this comment. Redlining, ACORN and ObamaMessiah are all present.

Clay, Wasn't tryin... (Below threshold)
Sawb_23:

Clay,

Wasn't trying to be sneaky. I just didn't know if anyone had a link to it.

Here it is for those who are interested...

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll547.xml

Obummer is fanny deep in th... (Below threshold)
RFA:

Obummer is fanny deep in this banking scandal and he wants me to turn him loose as the leader of this country. HaHaHaHaHa! Damn, now I gotta go pee.

His sidekick Smilin Joe is nothing more than a source for gaffe lines. His lobbyist son has some `splainin to do as well.

getting rid of the swine who both encouraged this to happen and tolerated it happening -- Democrats and Republicans both.


I second that motion!

Jay:It woul... (Below threshold)
Larry:


Jay:

It would appear that:

http://www.ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306370789279709

Investors Business Daily Agrees with you.

How do you make those links?

Jay,Funny enough b... (Below threshold)
Paul Duffau:

Jay,

Funny enough but that McCain was out in front of this. Try this link or this one http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/17/mccains-attempt-to-fix-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-in-2005/.

Also, McCain took a sixth of the Fanie Mae/Freddie Mac money that Obama did. To Obama's credit, he can really shake them down. He scored $126,349 in his very short but profitable tenure.

Dave's gone?"Blood... (Below threshold)
Son Of The Godfather:

Dave's gone?

"Blood for Odin!!!"

Sawb_23,That link ... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

Sawb_23,

That link is to a House bill in 2005.

I thought you were asking about a bill from 2002.

-syb

<a href="http://www.govtrac... (Below threshold)
Buddy:

Here is a link to McCain's position speech on the legislation (2005):

"For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay."

Funny enough but that Mc... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Funny enough but that McCain was out in front of this. Try this link or this one

Except that two years later, McCain said:

But I don't know of hardly anybody, with the exception of a handful, that said 'wait a minute, this thing is getting completely out of hand and is overheating.'

"So, I'd like to tell you that I did anticipate it, but I have to give you straight talk, I did not."

What was he respondi... (Below threshold)
Larry:


What was he responding to Brian? And nobody, but nobody that I have seen actually predicted the full extent of today's debacle worldwide.

And Brian, hold the finger you are pointing just a bit. Now, go back and read what Clinton did to Carter's bill. Tell me what you think about THAT instead of attempting to deflect, please.

Brian,Once again y... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

Brian,

Once again you demonstrate that reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is an area you have no ability in whatsoever.

In 2005, McCain recognized that something was seriously wrong with Fannie/Freddie and that reform/more oversight was needed before something went really wrong. That does not mean that he foresaw the precise nature or exact cause of the failure that actually did occur. He saw the storm brewing. He did not know whether it was a tornado, a hurricane, or just a thunderstorm.

As an analogy, I can tell you that driving 100mph through a school zone will likely lead to something really bad happening. However, I cannot tell you the magnitude or the precise nature of what that "really bad" thing is.

grrrrr. How come my strike... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

grrrrr. How come my strike through tag disappeared?

Except that two ye... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
Except that two years later, McCain said:

Nice job of cutting something out of context, Brian.

So what's McCain specifically referring to as "this thing" and "it"?

One way to know is to look at the question and what McCain said at the start of his answer.

Q: "Is this bigger than that?"

McCain: "I don't know the dimensions of this. It's hard to know what the dimensions are. As I say, I never thought I'd pick up the paper and see a city in Norway is somehow dramatically impacted by it."

McCain is talking about the size and scope, not the fact or cause of the problem. And it's still true to this day that no one really knows the full size and scope of the problem and that's what's making the financial markets nervous.

Brian, unfortunately, as Mc... (Below threshold)

Brian, unfortunately, as McCain was cut short abruptly on that clip at the very end, no one has any way of knowing what else he may have said on the issue. Dontcha just love it when people do that to Obama? I didn't think so.

Well, neither do we.

Given that he did state, emphatically in 2005, his concern about the "enormous risk" and named Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac specifically, I'd guess there was just a bit more to his Q&A session there that may have clarified things.

Sheik, the only types of ht... (Below threshold)

Sheik, the only types of html tags that Wizbang accepts in comments are for italics, bold, links and blockquotes. And even those are quirky if you do a paragraph break.

They can't be lettin' rubes like us mess with their page formatting if we forget to close a tag :)

What was he responding t... (Below threshold)
Brian:

What was he responding to Brian?

Per the article, "the subprime mortgage crisis".

And Brian, hold the finger you are pointing just a bit. Now, go back and read what Clinton did to Carter's bill. Tell me what you think about THAT instead of attempting to deflect, please.

Wow, talk about attempting to deflect! I was responding on point to a previous comment. I'd say yours was out of left field, but that would imply it was actually somewhere on the field.

That does not mean that ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

That does not mean that he foresaw the precise nature or exact cause of the failure that actually did occur.

Nor did anyone suggest he would.

He saw the storm brewing. He did not know whether it was a tornado, a hurricane, or just a thunderstorm.

So he "saw the storm brewing", but he didn't anticipate (to paraphrase) "this thing would get completely out of hand and overheat". What does one typically anticipate is the bad result of a storm brewing? Sunshine?

You have a really nice revision of what you wished he said, all tied up in a pretty little bow. But it's not what he said.

Again, Brain. We'll never ... (Below threshold)

Again, Brain. We'll never know if or what he may have said after the tape was cut so abruptly. That's usually an indication that the individual is about to turn someone's notions upside down.

You're being entirely too disingenuous on this one.

Luckily, for you, an even rough transcript of that interview is nowhere to be found.

Continue to enjoy yourself.

McCain is talking about ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

McCain is talking about the size and scope, not the fact or cause of the problem.

Nonsense. The question was "is this bigger than that". The "this" is the crisis, and the question was about the relative size of it. McCain addresses the size in two sentences, but that doesn't redefine what "this" is for the rest of his answer.

And the setup was, "Well the dimension of this problem may be surprising to a lot of people, BUT to many people, to many others there were feelings that there was something amiss, something was going too fast, something was a little too hot."

Everything after the BUT refers to the crisis itself, not the size.

Brian - "You have a rea... (Below threshold)
marc:

Brian - "You have a really nice revision of what you wished he said, all tied up in a pretty little bow. But it's not what he said."

for the sake of debate, lets concede your point.

Now, what is your thoughts on all the Dems, and reps to be fair, that have blocked reform at every attempt that may, I repeat, may have averted or lessens this current situation.

You're being entirely to... (Below threshold)
Brian:

You're being entirely too disingenuous on this one.

Oh yeah, I'm going to take seriously charges of being disingenuous from someone who dismisses a 6 1/2 minute recorded interview because maybe, perhaps, if we wish hard enough and clap our hands, it's possible that if it just went on another 10 seconds he might have said something that completely turns what he previously said upside down.

If they were Republicans th... (Below threshold)
Baron Von Ottomatic:

If they were Republicans the names of Jim Johnson, Harold Raines, and Jamie Gorelick would be as ubiquitous today as Ken Lay was during the Enron meltdown.

Except Enron didn't end up directly costing tax payers a couple of trillion dollars...

Brian - "Oh yeah, I'm g... (Below threshold)
marc:

Brian - "Oh yeah, I'm going to take seriously charges of being disingenuous from someone who dismisses a 6 1/2 minute recorded interview"

And we are to take serious someone who wants to nitpick over what is demonstrably an ambiguous statement and clearly evidenced by the fervor shown in this thread from both sides?

A classic case of taking someones reality and substituting your own.

All this breathless keyboard pounding and nary a syllable from you on the substance or why so many fat cats in DC turned a blind eye.

If you want to assign blame... (Below threshold)
John S:

If you want to assign blame for the mortgage mess you have to back to Wilson, FDR, and LBJ. All Democrats, imagine that.

Brian, while you joyously m... (Below threshold)

Brian, while you joyously mischaracterize what I said as some fantasy Disney video, you know damn good and well it's a long-time and well known tactic to cut off the beginning or ending of someone's commentary to paint an entirely different picture. Keep playing your stupid little game. Because frankly, I've have enough of your substance-free bullshit.

A classic case of taking... (Below threshold)
Brian:

A classic case of taking someones reality and substituting your own.

I have video. Whaddya you got?

All this breathless keyboard pounding and nary a syllable from you on the substance or why so many fat cats in DC turned a blind eye.

Oh, sorry if I'm ignoring your attempts to distract.

you know damn good and w... (Below threshold)
Brian:

you know damn good and well it's a long-time and well known tactic to cut off the beginning or ending of someone's commentary to paint an entirely different picture.

Sure is. But you are characterizing an extended video interview as some partisan smear tactic by a southwestern NH local newspaper editor who apparently had prognostic abilities, knew there'd be a subprime crisis, and figured he could help ABC News catch McCain in a contradiction two years later by ending the interview after 6 1/2 minutes.

I've have enough of your substance-free bullshit.

Right, why should you pay attention to "substance-free" video when you can rely on baseless supposition instead?

Brain - "Oh, sorry if I... (Below threshold)
marc:

Brain - "Oh, sorry if I'm ignoring your attempts to distract."

Remind me again... wasn't this post about fan/may and mac, about AIG, about Lehmann bros and the current bailouts and how they have related to what and when various dems and reps tried to either avert the collapse or tried to stop any reform whatsoever?

Was that it, or was it about parsing the meaning of a single partys statement on the above?

Now, an honest individual might answer the former, what you would answer is highly speculative and I won't go there.

Oh what the hell... why not!!

You'd answer... LOOK Palin bought a shinny new disco ball with taxpayers money!!!!!!

And her husband parked his snow machine in a gov owned parking lot!!!


And .... and ... you're and asshat.

Remind me again... wasn'... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Remind me again... wasn't this post about fan/may and mac, about AIG, about Lehmann bros and the current bailouts and how they have related to what and when various dems and reps tried to either avert the collapse or tried to stop any reform whatsoever?

I was responding to this comment. Write yourself a note so I won't have to remind you again.

"But you are characteriz... (Below threshold)

"But you are characterizing an extended video interview as some partisan smear tactic by a southwestern NH local newspaper editor who apparently had prognostic abilities, knew there'd be a subprime crisis, and figured he could help ABC News catch McCain in a contradiction two years later by ending the interview after 6 1/2 minutes."

That's a crock, Brian. I'm not characterizing it as anything other than laying out the possibility (and a valid one) that they cut the video at what looks like wasn't even a pause waiting for the next question.

"You're" characterizing this as the interview being over. They didn't cut the interview short. They cut the video short.

Try another one. I've got time.

brian - "I was respondi... (Below threshold)
marc:

brian - "I was responding to this comment. Write yourself a note so I won't have to remind you again."

And so you did, but I knew that. Surprising, I also know you may feel I would be.

But that changes nothing, you made your point long ago and have drug it out far longer than it deserves, and it fails to directly comment on the overall topic, it singles out one small parsed sentence. That's all.

But you know that as well, and by... what's that word you used?

Wasn't it, diverting?

Your long winded defense of the trivial diverts from the topic at hand and just as obviously has allowed you the "luxury" of not being critical of both parties when they certainly warrant it.

But thanks for reaffirming that your agenda, your sole agenda, is to paint any and everything remotely wrong as being all the Reps fault.

On second thought, Brian, n... (Below threshold)

On second thought, Brian, never mind. I'm going to bed. I've got a lot to do tomorrow and this flyweight sparring with you is boring.

Good ol' cherry picker Bria... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

Good ol' cherry picker Brian. Responds to comment 31 but ignores the link in comment 34 that gives McCain's addressing the senate re: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2005.

I'm not characterizing i... (Below threshold)
Brian:

I'm not characterizing it as anything other than laying out the possibility (and a valid one) that they cut the video at what looks like wasn't even a pause waiting for the next question.

Neither of us apparently noticed the link "The Sentinel's full interview with presidential candidate John McCain" on the same video page. If you watched, you'd see the complete uncut interview, showing that the very next word spoken is an editor saying he'd now like to ask a question on health care. So much for the "turning his notions upside down" theory.

You would also have noticed much more exposition from McCain that makes it clear he was talking about the crisis itself, and not the size of it.

On second thought, Brian, never mind. I'm going to bed. I've got a lot to do tomorrow and this flyweight sparring with you is boring.

Just as well, since your response to the video was the stuff of fantasy. I'm sorry it bores you to be wrong.

Good ol' cherry picker B... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Good ol' cherry picker Brian. Responds to comment 31 but ignores the link in comment 34

If you notice the times of the posts, I likely started #35 before #34 was posted. But regardless...

that gives McCain's addressing the senate re: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2005.

So what? I responded to one link about McCain's statement in 2005, and you castigate me for ignoring another link to a similar statement. Fine, pretend I responded to that one instead of the other. No difference.

Brian - far from bei... (Below threshold)
Larry:


Brian - far from being off the field, I was trying to bring you back to the facts presented in Jay Tea's article. Of course if you don't want to go there, I can't make you.

But that changes nothing... (Below threshold)
Brian:

But that changes nothing, you made your point long ago and have drug it out far longer than it deserves

I'm just responding to replies to it. So if you're so upset about me dragging it out, try shutting up.

and it fails to directly comment on the overall topic

Hmm, I can't seem to find any comments of yours on the overall topic. All I see are childish drive-by insults to others. Apparently commenting on the overall topic is not one of your requirements.

it singles out one small parsed sentence. That's all.

No, it was a completely expressed point. Something you wouldn't know much about.

Your long winded defense of the trivial diverts from the topic at hand and just as obviously has allowed you the "luxury" of not being critical of both parties when they certainly warrant it.

This from the guy who's had no original thought that didn't contain the word "asshat".

But thanks for reaffirming that your agenda, your sole agenda, is to paint any and everything remotely wrong as being all the Reps fault.

Yeah? Where's that?

To add to the conspiracy, I... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

To add to the conspiracy, I'll point out that advocates of 'big government' thrive on crisis. Wilson and FDR have been accused of manufacturing crisis in order to expand the power of the Federal Government.

It's moronic and a little ironic that the problem has been caused by government muddling in the private sector... and what's going to be proposed as the solution ? Why even more government muddling in the private sector, of course!

Brian - far from being o... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Brian - far from being off the field, I was trying to bring you back to the facts presented in Jay Tea's article.

Yeah, funny how no one comments on off-field posts that sing the praises of Republicans, but just let me respond to one of those and suddenly I'm the one changing the subject.

By the way, if you want to ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

By the way, if you want to get back on topic, you can ask Jay why the Republican-sponsored Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act doesn't make his hit list of contributing players.

No, no, according to Jay, Republicans just stood around, hands in their pockets.

but just let me re... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:
but just let me respond to one of those and suddenly I'm the one changing the subject.

So, you are going to stay off the field and ignore the facts in the article?

So, you are going to sta... (Below threshold)
Brian:

So, you are going to stay off the field and ignore the facts in the article?

I was responding to an on-topic comment.

You, on the other hand, have only two posts in this thread, both of them directed at my comment.

Pot, kettle, etc.

No, no, according ... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:
No, no, according to Jay, Republicans just stood around, hands in their pockets.

He also said in the post above:

Yes, there are plenty of Republicans to blame, too, but so far the vast majority of them commited "sins of omission" -- they failed to heed the warnings, failed to try to stop the looming disaster. They didn't do much actively, they just stood around and pretended that the train was not about to go flying off the tracks.

That would make your point redundant.

Hmm... I point out how Jay ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Hmm... I point out how Jay (deceptively) states the Republicans were just standing around, and you follow up by providing the actual quote where he says that. Thanks, I guess.

(Y)ou can ask Jay why th... (Below threshold)

(Y)ou can ask Jay why the Republican-sponsored Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act doesn't make his hit list of contributing players.

Alternately, Brian, you snide little shit, you could ask me directly.

But I'll answer anyway:

Because I am unfamiliar with that Act, and hadn't heard of it before. You might have noticed that I've made a point of stressing my ignorance in matters like this, and have BEGGED for people to educate me. Such as, say, pointing out this "Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act."

A casual research shows that the bill, by allowing the merger of commercial and investment banks, MAY have allowed some of the havoc we've been facing... but DEFINITELY allowed some of the rescues and bailouts that have followed in its wake. Such as, say, JPMorgan Chase buying Bear Sterns, or Bank of America buying Merrill Lynch.

Also, the bill was finally passed with overwhelming majorities and signed into law on November 12, 1999. Care to guess who affixed his signature on that bill, after saying he "would veto any legislation that would scale back minority-lending requirements?"

Yup, those same minority-lending requirements that have since been proven to be based on bogus studies, those same minority-lending requirements that forced lenders to issue lots of high-risk loans at low interest... gee, I wonder how THAT could go wrong?

Oh, yeah.

So, Brian, if you've got other info that shows how GLB actually contributed to this mess, please say so. I'd made the request a general one, but apparently you need your own custom engraved invitation -- consider this yours.

J.

brian - "Pot, kettle, e... (Below threshold)
marc:

brian - "Pot, kettle, etc."

Well thanks, glad you noticed, but I'm merely artful at the practice you... you, on the other hand do at a PHD quality level.

Snark aside, I weighed in on this topic far in advance of you (and in the first thread on the topic) slithering into this thread, while you had to gather crib notes from your "Thread Disruption Handbook."

NOTE for JT, ref the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act brian is crying about:

A-Hola sen. reid weighed in on that bill as a way slam McCain, but funny, he failed to mention he signed the bill in the affirmative and as you point out it passed by a wide majority and with most of the dems approving it also.

GLB Act is why Fanny & Fred... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

GLB Act is why Fanny & Freddies mess has extended to institutions like Lehmans and AIG, but has little to do directly with Fanny & Freddy themselves.

However the GLB Act was part of an effort for stockmarket puffing up that was practiced throughout the mid to late '90s to help the politicians in power stay in power (or help their legacy). Everyone thought they were going to retire to their own desert island the way their 401k's were growing. Its also partly why the rest of the industry wasn't impartial to what was happening with banking institutions. They had found a way to benefit.

There's some guilt to spread around on that one.

The sad fact is that this p... (Below threshold)
Kathy:

The sad fact is that this probably won't hit the mainstream media. They constantly lie by omission, under report Obama's flaws and are in my opinion, generally corrupt. Unless Americans start to really study Obama's policies, past and present associations etc., they will continue to swallow what journalists-and I use that term loosely- tell them to swallow. I don't see how Republicans can get anywhere under the current conditions. Sad

A casual research shows ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

A casual research shows that the bill, by allowing the merger of commercial and investment banks, MAY have allowed some of the havoc we've been facing... but DEFINITELY allowed some of the rescues and bailouts that have followed in its wake. Such as, say, JPMorgan Chase buying Bear Sterns, or Bank of America buying Merrill Lynch.

Would it be good engineering to attach the seatbelts of a car to the brakes, if it weakened the brakes but made the seatbelt stronger?

Also, the bill was finally passed with overwhelming majorities and signed into law on November 12, 1999. Care to guess who affixed his signature on that bill, after saying he "would veto any legislation that would scale back minority-lending requirements?"

I didn't say there wasn't bi-partisan involvement in that act. And the passage was veto-proof, so you at least can't blame Clinton for it. But although you said "there are plenty of Republicans to blame", you failed to name any. "Gramm-Leach-Bliley" are three right there, and they didn't just "stand around".

I do concede I could have brought this act to your attention more directly.

*sigh*. Despite talking po... (Below threshold)
jpm100:

*sigh*. Despite talking points being stronger than research you can do yourself with Brian, I'll say it again.

GLB had nothing to do with Fanny Mae, the core of Jay's post.

If we were talking about, AIG, then it would apply.

Jay's post was about "our c... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Jay's post was about "our current financial mess". He doesn't even mention Fanny Mae once.

GLB applies.

ahahahaha brian you spincht... (Below threshold)
Jihadnochoice:

ahahahaha brian you spinchter keep on spinning in defense of obama




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy