posted
From the September 25 broadcast of ABC's Good Morning America:
CUOMO: A little surprising to you to hear the Democrats saying, "This came out of nowhere. This is all about the Republicans. We had nothing to do with this." Nancy Pelosi saying it. She signed the '99 Gramm bill. She knew what was going on with the SEC. They're all sophisticated people. Is that playing politics in this situation?
CLINTON: Well, maybe everybody does that a little bit. I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was president to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [break] I think the biggest mistake, by the way, that contributed to the current circumstance that almost nobody talks about, is the repeal after decades of something called the uptick rule --
CUOMO: Mm-hmm.
CLINTON: -- which allowed the hedge funds, heavily leveraged, and others to just drive down the market without any kind of automatic stoppers. But we are where we are. I think the most important thing is that you got two candidates for president saying, "Let's try to minimize the partisan differences. We'll have plenty of time later to look at who caused this and what mistakes were made. Let's figure out what to do now and go forward."
From the September 25 broadcast of NBC's Today:
LAUER: The president said we have time to debate the origins of this crisis, but last night in his speech to the nation, he also said the roots go back more than a decade. You can do the math there, what he was suggesting. He's suggesting the roots that are with your administration. How do you respond to that?
CLINTON: Well, I think he's suggesting that when we -- I signed a bill that the banking industry wanted that let them get into securities issuance. There are some people who believe that that bill enabled them to somehow participate in some of the riskier housing investments. I disagree with that. That bill primarily enabled them to -- like the Bank of America, to buy Merrill Lynch here without a hitch. And I think that helped to stabilize the situation.
I think the main thing that you could blame the Democrats for, maybe, is that we should have made more of the problems of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and maybe the -- and tried more aggressively to regulate derivatives. But this thing really took off when the SEC, under this administration, exercised less oversight and they got rid of something called the uptick rule, which enabled betting down --
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom: From the September 25 broadcast of ABC's Good Morning America:
CUOMO: A little surprising to you to hear the Democrats saying, "This came out of nowhere. This is all about the Republicans. We had nothing to do with this." Nancy Pelosi saying it. She signed the '99 Gramm bill. She knew what was going on with the SEC. They're all sophisticated people. Is that playing politics in this situation?
CLINTON: Well, maybe everybody does that a little bit. I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was president to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [break] I think the biggest mistake, by the way, that contributed to the current circumstance that almost nobody talks about, is the repeal after decades of something called the uptick rule --
CUOMO: Mm-hmm.
CLINTON: -- which allowed the hedge funds, heavily leveraged, and others to just drive down the market without any kind of automatic stoppers. But we are where we are. I think the most important thing is that you got two candidates for president saying, "Let's try to minimize the partisan differences. We'll have plenty of time later to look at who caused this and what mistakes were made. Let's figure out what to do now and go forward."
From the September 25 broadcast of NBC's Today:
LAUER: The president said we have time to debate the origins of this crisis, but last night in his speech to the nation, he also said the roots go back more than a decade. You can do the math there, what he was suggesting. He's suggesting the roots that are with your administration. How do you respond to that?
CLINTON: Well, I think he's suggesting that when we -- I signed a bill that the banking industry wanted that let them get into securities issuance. There are some people who believe that that bill enabled them to somehow participate in some of the riskier housing investments. I disagree with that. That bill primarily enabled them to -- like the Bank of America, to buy Merrill Lynch here without a hitch. And I think that helped to stabilize the situation.
I think the main thing that you could blame the Democrats for, maybe, is that we should have made more of the problems of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and maybe the -- and tried more aggressively to regulate derivatives. But this thing really took off when the SEC, under this administration, exercised less oversight and they got rid of something called the uptick rule, which enabled betting down --
Can you, even in your wildest imagination, see McCain or Palin even being able to decipher what they were speaking about, let alone being able to participate knowledgeably in such a discussion? I can't and if you were honest you would say the same.
IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with you on this one, Bdgee. Both have admitted ignorance on the issue (maybe not wise, but honest at least). It's good to see him able to hold a well thought out and apparently brutally honest discussion on the problem and the root causes.
IP: Logged |
posted
No, I actually have always been anti-Clinton.
That is not to say that anything Clinton says or does must be wrong because he is the doer. The man is extremely intelligent. Still, he is not among my choices.
But it isn't surprising to see you pluck the hate chord on the republican banjo. It's what the Party tells you to do.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: the clintons are bdgees idols....especially billary. too bad.....so sad.
I can't speak for Bdgee but i can for myself and yes they are my idols and i'll admit it... and at least SF can admit that Clinton is intelligent and can have an intelligent conversation about such a issue whether right or wrong but that McCain/Palin can't because of their ignorance... this shows your own ignorance for at least not admitting someone's intelligence due to their party affiliation...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
posted
I never said Bill was not smart. He is! So is Hillary. If Bill was so smart then why on earth would he push home loans on certain demographic groups that couldn't afford them? Bill Clinton was a high profile Washington hustler.
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Dubya rode the coat tails of the plan because it made him look like a champion to that group who got the loans
Never-the-less whose coat tail it was, it was dubya that wore it to hell and back and showed it off, modeling it to the breaking of the world's financial system.
Had dubya bothered to give a damn about the issue (or maybe been capable of understanding) or the republican bloc in the congress (the senate mostly) cared about the country or the population, they had nearly eight years to correct it and didn't do squat.
This mess ain't a Clinton doing, it is a republican fu-k up, with John McCain mostly driving the cart that got us here.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: I keep forgetting Clinton was the best thing that ever happened to America
We didn't owe nearly 4 trillion dollars in the Clinton years, be in a unpopular war, etc. If i remember correctly and you correct me if i am wrong but we had a balanced budget and a surplus to boot back then...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
quote:This mess ain't a Clinton doing, it is a republican fu-k up, with John McCain mostly driving the cart that got us here.
There is largely a Republican created problem, but the problem is CERTAINLY NOT MCCAIN. The problem was mainly Bush! Several Democratic congressmen also deserve a good portion of the blame.
IP: Logged |
quote:This mess ain't a Clinton doing, it is a republican fu-k up, with John McCain mostly driving the cart that got us here.
There is largely a Republican created problem, but the problem is CERTAINLY NOT MCCAIN. The problem was mainly Bush! Several Democratic congressmen also deserve a good portion of the blame.
No, McCain is a leader in deregulating the markets......probably THE leader in the senate.
IP: Logged |
quote:No, McCain is a leader in deregulating the markets......probably THE leader in the senate.
That's a good thing. The problem is that the politicians keep meddling in the free market, like pushing the banks to make loans to people who weren't qualified and bailing out failed companies.
IP: Logged |
posted
The free market and the idiots that foist it on society are the problem.
That there are fools that actually believe that crap is equivalent to there being fools that can't see the evil and foolishness in communism. You just about have to be intellectually blind, deaf, and dumb not to realize that it is another simple minded Utopian scheme to placate the evil lust of the greedy.
There will never be anyone capable of making that stuff work, because it is impossible and anyone with half a brain knows instinctively that its only actual goal is to transfer riches from the population into the pockets of thieves and social leaches.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: I keep forgetting Clinton was the best thing that ever happened to America
We didn't owe nearly 4 trillion dollars in the Clinton years, be in a unpopular war, etc. If i remember correctly and you correct me if i am wrong but we had a balanced budget and a surplus to boot back then...
...Clinton got lucky. "Peace dividends" from the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the "Tech Boom" through most of the 90's led to the balanced budget and surplus, not some magnificent economic leadership by SlickWillie.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
quote:No, McCain is a leader in deregulating the markets......probably THE leader in the senate.
That's a good thing. The problem is that the politicians keep meddling in the free market, like pushing the banks to make loans to people who weren't qualified and bailing out failed companies.
Meddling in the market? ... it's actually the opposite. It's when they don't meddle in the market that causes these rampant cyles of Greed... ever notice that when deregulation happens?... no one pushed the banks to make those loans but themselves... put the blame squarely where it belongs... on Corporate American and it's Greed... it happened in the S&L Scandal and it happened now with the Mortgage meltdown... Corporate America has always shown it cannot handle deregulation... history shows that... that you are blind to it just shows your ignorance...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
Maverick was the surname of an early Texas family back in the open range days of the frontier, when it was all unfenced (because they had no means of fencing it).
(Yep, there really was a family from early Texas named Maverick, but I don't think any of them were Bret or Bart or Bo and the gambling they specialized in was with getting caught.)
On the open range, ownership of cattle couldn't be determined by where cattle were found. Ownership had to be defined by the brand on the backside of the brute.
Of course, at round-up time, there were many calves still tagging along with their mama and the custom and the rule was to brand a calf according to its mama's brand, and with the brand of the finder only if the mama couldn't be found (assumed to be dead, ya know).
Mavericks were, for good reason, not trusted and it was the overwhelming consensus that Mavericks ignored the custom and branded any calf or other brute that was found unbranded with their own brand, whether or not the mama could be located and the appropriate brand recognized (and, whenever possible, to use a running iron to convert other brands into the Maverick brand).
The name began to be applied to cattle when, for instance a cow with a brand not the Maverick brand was seen caring for a calf with the Maverick brand. Inevitably, it became popular to declare, derisively, any non-branded calf to be a Maverick.
In time, the term "Maverick" began to be used descriptively for certain disreputable people, but as you can see, calling someone a "Maverick" is terminology intended to convey anything but that someone is responsible or respectable for it is actually someone that steals from others and and has no respect for other's rights.
IP: Logged |
quote:No, McCain is a leader in deregulating the markets......probably THE leader in the senate.
That's a good thing. The problem is that the politicians keep meddling in the free market, like pushing the banks to make loans to people who weren't qualified and bailing out failed companies.
you still don't get it do you? the sub-prime lending was done by private lenders at their discression.
the govt didn't force them. there are no laws requiring them to do it.
furthermore? the govt didn't create ARMS, or credit default swaps...
even Newt Gingrich has written articles pointing out that ACCOUNTING irregularities called level three mark to market caused the most problems in this mess.
in other words? the bankers did this to themselves, and the rest of US...
i notice your call-in campaign was a failure, and that's because the bailout stopped a total collapse of the whole world's economic system...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: I keep forgetting Clinton was the best thing that ever happened to America
We didn't owe nearly 4 trillion dollars in the Clinton years, be in a unpopular war, etc. If i remember correctly and you correct me if i am wrong but we had a balanced budget and a surplus to boot back then...
...Clinton got lucky. "Peace dividends" from the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the "Tech Boom" through most of the 90's led to the balanced budget and surplus, not some magnificent economic leadership by SlickWillie.
I suppose a certain act he signed had nothing to do with it:
"Clinton signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 in August 1993, which passed Congress without a Republican vote. It cut taxes for fifteen million low-income families, made tax cuts available to 90% of small businesses,[45] and raised taxes on the wealthiest 1.2% of taxpayers.[46] Additionally, through the implementation of spending restraints, it mandated the budget be balanced over a number of years."
I also suppose the rise of the Tech boom had nothing to do with the Internet coming into fruition and Al Gores' hand in it as well:
"As a Senator, Gore began to craft the High Performance Computing and Communication Act of 1991 (commonly referred to as "The Gore Bill") after hearing the 1988 report Toward a National Research Network submitted to Congress by a group chaired by UCLA professor of computer science, Leonard Kleinrock, one of the central creators of the ARPANET (the ARPANET, first deployed by Kleinrock and others in 1969, is the predecessor of the Internet).[44][45][46] The bill was passed on December 9, 1991 and led to the National Information Infrastructure (NII) which Gore referred to as the "information superhighway."[47]
I guess neither one of these had nothing to do with an economic boom that led to a balanced budget and surplus under Dem rule as opposed to the budget deficits of the Reagan and Bush Jr. years. Was not a Presidency or the Dems of the 1990's but just plain dumb luck for the balanced budget and surplus.
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
posted
And particularly note that the tremendous economic gains brought by the Clinton efforts came about with "(tax cuts) for fifteen million low-income families, (tax cuts) made available to 90% of small businesses, and (taxes raised) on the wealthiest 1.2% of taxpayers", which directly disproves the absurd republican mantra that tax cuts to those with the highest incomes is required (or even related or contributory) for this Nation to enjoy truly healthy economic benefits that are good for America instead of mainly just to benefit corporations at our expense.
IP: Logged |
posted
I am reminded of a man I knew that owned a huge truck line. He was always going on about income taxes he had top pay, claiming he was being cheated because his truck drivers didn't have to pay nearly so much.
He, like so many refused to look into the income tax structure enough to discover that on that portion of his taxes that matched the drivers income, he paid exactly the same percentage income tax. Yes, he did pay more income tax than them, but he used more of the nations facilities than them too.
(Then there is payroll taxes. Those drivers paid dearly into those and he paid none what so ever.)
Indeed, if you bother to think about it, without the government supplying the roads over which his trucks rode, he had no business at all.
Having once been professionally involved in determining how roads and highways are financed, I can assure you that the great majority of those funds come from people that are no where close to rich and the amount it cost just to have any one of them is beyond the richest of us.
That also is the case with airports and ports and trains and barge traffic(and most of the things we must have in order that some of us can be rich). It is why we have a government, so that, collectively, we can do things that no one of us could do without a government.
Yep, it is socialistic, just as it was when Kings ruled the roost, though they thought they were favored by the gods and the gods didn't approve of that stuff. If you don't like it or don't approve, you can leave, I guess. But don't ask me where to go if you don't want me to tell you. I will tell you that after long and serious consideration, every worthwhile place I can imagine has the same debt to socialism and always will.
Government, but its very definition is socialistic.
The lack of government, by it's very definition is chaos and leads to nothing good. (And a belief that "government is the problem" is asking for chaos).
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: I am reminded of a man I knew that owned a huge truck line. He was always going on about income taxes he had top pay, claiming he was being cheated because his truck drivers didn't have to pay nearly so much.
He, like so many refused to look into the income tax structure enough to discover that on that portion of his taxes that matched the drivers income, he paid exactly the same percentage income tax. Yes, he did pay more income tax than them, but he used more of the nations facilities than them too.
(Then there is payroll taxes. Those drivers paid dearly into those and he paid none what so ever.)
Indeed, if you bother to think about it, without the government supplying the roads over which his trucks rode, he had no business at all.
Having once been professionally involved in determining how roads and highways are financed, I can assure you that the great majority of those funds come from people that are no where close to rich and the amount it cost just to have any one of them is beyond the richest of us.
That also is the case with airports and ports and trains and barge traffic(and most of the things we must have in order that some of us can be rich). It is why we have a government, so that, collectively, we can do things that no one of us could do without a government.
Yep, it is socialistic, just as it was when Kings ruled the roost, though they thought they were favored by the gods and the gods didn't approve of that stuff. If you don't like it or don't approve, you can leave, I guess. But don't ask me where to go if you don't want me to tell you. I will tell you that after long and serious consideration, every worthwhile place I can imagine has the same debt to socialism and always will.
Government, but its very definition is socialistic.
The lack of government, by it's very definition is chaos and leads to nothing good. (And a belief that "government is the problem" is asking for chaos).
Everything you say here is accurate. Government may not always be the problem, but it is also not always the answer.
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!!
IP: Logged |
posted
It is generally the answer, when allowed to do its job. We do not enable it to determine a workable answer by refusing to allow it to function, which is a step to anarchy.
Government must be allowed, within the bounds of the Constitution, "in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, to govern. To describe or consider it as "THE PROBLEM" is simple minded and childish. It is what makes us be "WE". Elect responsible people and government is good!
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: It is generally the answer, when allowed to do its job. We do not enable it to determine a workable answer by refusing to allow it to function, which is a step to anarchy.
Government must be allowed, within the bounds of the Constitution, "in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, to govern. To describe or consider it as "THE PROBLEM" is simple minded and childish. It is what makes us be "WE". Elect responsible people and government is good!
I guess electing responsable people is the answer. How about some term limits on congressional members so they aren't in bed with lobbiest's that make them rich.
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!!
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
