Fri Mar 23, 2012, 10:57 PM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
WTF is wrong with Bernie Sanders? Seriously.
Yesterday, the Senate took a BIG bipartisan step in helping our economy by passing Eric Cantor's JOBS Act. The House previously approved it, and President Obama will sign it.
Practical people like Eric Cantor, Chuck Schumer, you and me understand that our economy is being held back by all of those Washington regulations on Wall Street. If only Wall Street could be free of its regulatory shackles, the 1% could take what's left to be took, and the country would be better off. But nuts like Sanders won't let go, all they do is whine! Here's how Sanders greeted this breakthrough: "At best, this bill could make it easier for con artists to defraud seniors out of their entire life savings by convincing them to invest in worthless companies. At worst, this bill has the potential to create the next Enron or Arthur Andersen scandal or an even worse financial crisis. And that Mary Schapiro, the commie running the Securities and Exchange Commission? She whined to the Senate: “Too often, investors are the target of fraudulent schemes disguised as investment opportunities... As you know, if the balance is tipped to the point where investors are not confident that there are appropriate protections, investors will lose confidence in our markets, and capital formation will ultimately be made more difficult and expensive.” Incredible! Don't they realize that the free market will regulate itself? It's never failed yet. Let's drink a toast together to the new spirit of bipartisanship in Congress. Last November it was the three Bush "free" trade bills, yesterday Wall Street deregulation... who can predict what's next? Maybe Newt will get his wish and they can end those meddlesome nanny-state child labor protections.
|
59 replies, 17071 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2012 | OP |
villager | Mar 2012 | #1 | |
tularetom | Mar 2012 | #2 | |
ProSense | Mar 2012 | #3 | |
ProSense | Mar 2012 | #21 | |
grantcart | Mar 2012 | #28 | |
rhett o rick | Mar 2012 | #39 | |
ProSense | Mar 2012 | #52 | |
girl gone mad | Mar 2012 | #4 | |
AlbertCat | Mar 2012 | #30 | |
WillyT | Mar 2012 | #5 | |
Art_from_Ark | Mar 2012 | #7 | |
former9thward | Mar 2012 | #48 | |
Art_from_Ark | Mar 2012 | #55 | |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2012 | #10 | |
sabrina 1 | Mar 2012 | #12 | |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2012 | #14 | |
jtuck004 | Mar 2012 | #19 | |
Dont call me Shirley | Mar 2012 | #37 | |
SomethingFishy | Mar 2012 | #38 | |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2012 | #40 | |
Plucketeer | Mar 2012 | #43 | |
2banon | Mar 2012 | #46 | |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2012 | #53 | |
Dont call me Shirley | Mar 2012 | #36 | |
MrMickeysMom | Mar 2012 | #6 | |
fasttense | Mar 2012 | #23 | |
Rosa Luxemburg | Mar 2012 | #8 | |
saras | Mar 2012 | #9 | |
RZM | Mar 2012 | #11 | |
SunSeeker | Mar 2012 | #17 | |
RZM | Mar 2012 | #18 | |
Better Believe It | Mar 2012 | #22 | |
woo me with science | Mar 2012 | #13 | |
Justice wanted | Mar 2012 | #15 | |
a2liberal | Mar 2012 | #16 | |
chnoutte | Mar 2012 | #20 | |
polichick | Mar 2012 | #25 | |
xtraxritical | Mar 2012 | #54 | |
chnoutte | Mar 2012 | #58 | |
raouldukelives | Mar 2012 | #24 | |
Slit Skirt | Mar 2012 | #26 | |
SammyWinstonJack | Mar 2012 | #27 | |
midnight | Mar 2012 | #29 | |
xxqqqzme | Mar 2012 | #33 | |
Dont call me Shirley | Mar 2012 | #35 | |
2banon | Mar 2012 | #47 | |
southernyankeebelle | Mar 2012 | #31 | |
progressoid | Mar 2012 | #32 | |
Dont call me Shirley | Mar 2012 | #34 | |
magic59 | Mar 2012 | #41 | |
malthaussen | Mar 2012 | #50 | |
gateley | Mar 2012 | #42 | |
mother earth | Mar 2012 | #44 | |
RufusTFirefly | Mar 2012 | #45 | |
progressoid | Mar 2012 | #56 | |
sulphurdunn | Mar 2012 | #49 | |
Octafish | Mar 2012 | #51 | |
Agony | Mar 2012 | #57 | |
DCBob | Mar 2012 | #59 |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:02 PM
villager (26,001 posts)
1. Does that whining, unicorn-seeking socialist think - what? - there should be *more than one party?*
Better to have all your bagmen in a single, easily controllable political entity.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:11 PM
tularetom (23,664 posts)
2. You just want to see if we're smart enough to know sarcasm
even when you don't use the little
![]() Well, it might be late on a Friday night but it ain't that late. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:12 PM
ProSense (116,464 posts)
3. The Senate
bill included Senator Merkley's crowdfunding amendment, which Senator Sanders voted for.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002457389 Still, they both voted against the final bill. |
Response to ProSense (Reply #3)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 07:08 AM
ProSense (116,464 posts)
21. Here's a good
article outlining the provisions.
JOBS Act: The good, the bad, the irrelevant
By Dan Primack <...> Update I: An amendment offered by by Sens. Merkley (D-OR) and Brown (R-MA) has passed. It would require companies raising up to $1 million to provide prospective investors with certain underlying financial information. It also would restrict investors with less than $100,000 in annual income from plugging more than 5% of their income into a crowd-funded offering. http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/03/22/jobs-act-the-good-the-bad-the-irrelevant/?section=magazines_fortune |
Response to ProSense (Reply #21)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:59 AM
grantcart (52,532 posts)
28. Thanks for posting that so I could see the details of what was wrong with this bill.
Response to ProSense (Reply #3)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 04:21 PM
rhett o rick (55,981 posts)
39. Does this mean you favor the bill? nm
Response to rhett o rick (Reply #39)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:48 PM
ProSense (116,464 posts)
52. It means
"Does this mean you favor the bill?"
...I see the flaws in the bill. Do I think it has the potential Senator Sanders decribed? Frankly no. A lot of the opposition was to the House version. The fact that, per the Merkley amendment, investors with incomes or net worth less than $100,000 are limited to 5 percent of their income and must be provided information helps. Senator Reeds amendment would have added more protection, but it was filibusted by Republicans. <...>
Reed’s amendment to strengthen the bill won 54 votes, however, 60 votes were needed to overcome a Republican filibuster and the amendment was blocked. Today, Reed offered another amendment to require the SEC to include “beneficial owners” when tallying the shareholders of record in a company – so that all companies count their shareholders accurately and cannot use gimmicks to avoid periodic reporting requirements. According to the Associated Press, Reed’s amendment “tightens the definition of "shareholder" so that large companies can't ignore the thousands of beneficial owners — the people who have the power to sell and vote on shares — to stay under the SEC threshold for filing information. Reed said that under the House bill, companies can count only record holders — such as brokers who sell the stock to thousands of beneficial owners — in order to stay under the shareholder limit, set to rise from 500 to 2,000, for SEC registration.” Reed’s efforts to help prevent financial fraud and abuse were backed by a strong coalition of consumer advocacy groups, including: the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA); state regulators; auditors; financial analysts; pension fund managers; the Consumer Federation of America, and AARP. However, Reed’s amendment was defeated by a voice vote and the underlying bill, which could open up the spigot to unsuspecting Americans getting solicited by unscrupulous brokers, passed on a vote of 73-26. Speaking today on the floor of the U.S. Senate, Reed warned: “By stripping away auditing standards and giving the investing public less information in almost every setting, sophisticated players and investment banks will have all the advantages. “The average investor will be operating in much more challenged circumstances. Middle-class Americans will be particularly affected. - more - http://www.reed.senate.gov/press/release/reed-ipo-deal-bad-for-consumers-could-harm-long-term-economic-growth http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=2&vote=00051 The bill will likely end up in conference, which means there is time to fix it. Everyone should contact their members of Congress. Still, given that there is a massive package of regulation still being implemented, I doubt it will have the devastating impact being predicted. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002464969 |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:15 PM
girl gone mad (20,634 posts)
4. I know, right?
We need Obama's Boiler Room Legalization Act to pass ASAP. Granny's got too much cash on the sidelines and Brantforth needs a new Ferrari.
|
Response to girl gone mad (Reply #4)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:42 AM
AlbertCat (17,505 posts)
30. We need Obama's Boiler Room Legalization Act to pass ASAP
Hey.... they can fix it later...
like the Health Care bill right? |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:16 PM
WillyT (72,631 posts)
5. Well Hell... He's Not A Democrat !!!
Of course neither are most of the ACTUAL Democrats.
Actually Bernie Sanders is more of a Democrat than the actual Democrats... ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to WillyT (Reply #5)
Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:23 PM
Art_from_Ark (27,247 posts)
7. Back in the '60s, Bernie would have been in the same league
with such Democratic Senate luminaries as Mike Mansfield, Frank Church and J. William Fulbright.
|
Response to Art_from_Ark (Reply #7)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 08:10 PM
former9thward (28,133 posts)
48. Don't forget Wayne Morse!
One of only two Senators voting against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution which authorized the Vietnam War.
|
Response to former9thward (Reply #48)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:26 PM
Art_from_Ark (27,247 posts)
55. Thanks for mentioning Morse
I didn't remember hearing about him, so I looked him up and found that the Oregon Senator had, indeed, been staunchly anti-war since the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. Ironically, he lost his next re-election bid to Republican Bob Packwood in part due to his opposition to continue funding the war..
|
Response to WillyT (Reply #5)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 12:30 AM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
10. Well
he's certainly not practical.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #10)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 12:45 AM
sabrina 1 (62,325 posts)
12. I think you meant 'he's not pragmatic'!
Shameful! Bought and paid for. Money is speech, money talks. They weren't kidding.
|
Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #12)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 12:51 AM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
14. I
heard rumors - unconfirmed - that Sanders thinks Social Security benefits should not be slashed.
What's he smoking? |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #14)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 04:18 AM
jtuck004 (15,882 posts)
19. I 100% agree with you.
It must not be very pragmatic for the rest of us to chip in so much to keep cold people warm any more, what with those banks and wars to to save and all, so they had to cut that back. Heck, that probably saved a whole truck. Or maybe a Maserati. But somewhere deep down inside I am glad he got the money from the state for heating assistance. It was his campaigning that got it restored. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #14)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 04:06 PM
Dont call me Shirley (10,998 posts)
37. Manny, maybe you ought to actually LISTEN to what Bernie is saying,
catch him every Friday on Thom Hartmann's Brunch With Bernie, ET 3 PM
|
Response to Dont call me Shirley (Reply #37)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 04:12 PM
SomethingFishy (4,876 posts)
38. Manny's comments are sarcastic...
He knows Sanders is right.
![]() |
Response to Dont call me Shirley (Reply #37)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 04:28 PM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
40. It was sarcasm.
Too dry sometimes, sorry!
Bernie is A-OK! |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #40)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 06:14 PM
Plucketeer (12,882 posts)
43. I knew it was sarcasm - even before I read the post.
What few dollars we can cough up for this election cycle - they'll all be going to the likes of Sanders, Grayson, Warren, Grihalva and the like. No more for the DCCC, the president or ANY of those fakers that carry a D next to their names. It's only the progressive warriors that hear the will of the folks back home.
Instead of (D) & (R), the new letters should be (C) & (CL) for Corporate and Corporate Light. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #14)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 08:06 PM
2banon (7,321 posts)
46. Manny, I have really come to enjoy your so very dry wit, makes me chuckle, and I need that
from time to time...
![]() |
Response to 2banon (Reply #46)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 10:20 PM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
53. Aww... shucks...
Thanks for the kind words.
|
Response to WillyT (Reply #5)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 04:05 PM
Dont call me Shirley (10,998 posts)
36. Bernie is a self-admited Democratic Socialist, such as the govt's in many European countries.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:22 PM
MrMickeysMom (20,453 posts)
6. You would think with the recent press about Wall Street...
from an insider (once retired) giving Wall Street a little truth and justice... would drive everyone to call a halt to this nonsense, you'd like to think people can understand... Does it actually have to get THAT bad for people to see what has been going on and on?
This craziness must stop. |
Response to MrMickeysMom (Reply #6)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 08:48 AM
fasttense (17,301 posts)
23. And Obama will sign the deregulation of Wall Street Act by Cantor
"Only in Washington could Wall Street deregulation be sold as job creation. And on the very same day, a bill to stop malevolent use of confidential Congressional information failed to include Wall Street—the biggest offender—in the prohibition. It’s their world, and we’re just living in it."
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:32 PM
Rosa Luxemburg (28,627 posts)
8. Bernie is left of Stalin!
what will these commies do next!
![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:32 PM
saras (6,670 posts)
9. You can't have it both ways. Either corporate money is the problem, or it isn't
If it is, there's no way in hell they can be trusted with the task of managing the nation's jobs, and it is stupidly self-destructive to ask them to.
If it isn't, then ALEC isn't really a problem at all, it's just a more effective way of corporations managing the job market. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 12:34 AM
RZM (8,556 posts)
11. You'll have to ask the lovely folks at counterpunch
They aren't big fans of Sanders over there. Apparently he's a 'technofascist disguised as a liberal' (that's an actual quote):
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/30/the-myth-of-bernie-sanders/ |
Response to RZM (Reply #11)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 02:14 AM
SunSeeker (48,696 posts)
17. Thanks for the link.
Pretty shocking to see anyone accuse Bernie of being a sellout to military contractors. Man, if they don't approve of Bernie, who do they approve of? They do make the hard to dispute point that "he’s done little to constrain their [the super-rich] power and influence." But who, in the last 40 years, has?
|
Response to SunSeeker (Reply #17)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 02:52 AM
RZM (8,556 posts)
18. Good question
I don't know. But I'm pretty sure Patrick Cockburn has a crush on Muqtada al-Sadr.
|
Response to RZM (Reply #11)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 08:38 AM
Better Believe It (18,630 posts)
22. Oh .... it's an article by Thomas Naylor, not a Counterpunch editorial. Thanks for the link!
Thomas H. Naylor is Founder of the Second Vermont Republic and Professor Emeritus of Economics at Duke University. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 12:47 AM
woo me with science (32,139 posts)
13. Every day. There's a new one every damned day.
You gotta hand it to Bernie. He must have had a million opportunities to sell out, too.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 12:55 AM
Justice wanted (2,657 posts)
15. It is a Fluff piece. NO REAL JOBS are created.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 01:59 AM
a2liberal (1,524 posts)
16. K&R (n/t)
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 05:43 AM
chnoutte (36 posts)
20. IMHO Bernie would be a Democrat
if the DLC and Thridway had not taken over the democratic party.
Senator Sanders is about the only one in Congress worth supporting any more, the rest are mostly corporate whores. |
Response to chnoutte (Reply #20)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 08:53 AM
polichick (37,151 posts)
25. You're probably right - and if the DLC and Third Way hadn't taken over...
...the party I'd still be a democrat.
Sometimes I imagine what the country would be like if we had lots of senators like Sanders. |
Response to chnoutte (Reply #20)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 10:50 PM
xtraxritical (3,576 posts)
54. I think you're overlooking the Progressive Caucus. eom
Response to xtraxritical (Reply #54)
Sun Mar 25, 2012, 06:51 AM
chnoutte (36 posts)
58. The Progressive Caucus is prettry much useless right now
the GOP with their allies the 'moderate' dems have made the progress caucus a minor player with no ability to really effect any legislation.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 08:52 AM
raouldukelives (5,178 posts)
24. If god didn't want kids to work he wouldn't have given them hands. nt
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:38 AM
Slit Skirt (1,789 posts)
26. whiner Bernie Sanders...
really?
case you haven't noticed he "whines" for both you and me remember..you get what you settle for |
Response to Slit Skirt (Reply #26)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:47 AM
SammyWinstonJack (44,095 posts)
27. It was
![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 10:08 AM
midnight (26,624 posts)
29. Eric works for ALEC....
In February, Common Cause wrote to House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, asking for an explanation about an apparently unreported $1,350 gift from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in 2009. Cantor’s office immediately responded, claiming our inquiry was without foundation, but last week his office quietly amended his financial disclosures to include the gift from ALEC.
At that time, I wrote about Cantor’s failure to disclose: ‘ALEC, the so-called “free market, small government” lobby group underwritten by some of the nation’s largest corporations, reported in its tax filings for 2008 and 2009, making “cash grants” to the recipients of several annual awards. Common Cause has identified 22 legislators who received ALEC awards in those two years, including Rep. Cantor, who ALEC records indicate received $1,350 in 2009 as part of their Thomas Jefferson Freedom Award.’ Cantor responded within hours, saying no cash changed hands, but that he received a bust of Thomas Jefferson from ALEC, pictured above. But, under House Ethics Rules this type of award can only be received by a Member of Congress if it is disclosed, which Cantor did not do. This appears to be a clear ethics violation, and we have asked the Office of Congressional Ethics to investigate. Prompted by Common Cause, Cantor has now very quietly amended his 2009 Financial Disclosure Report to include the ALEC gift. He also amended his 2010 report to include another bust given to him by the Associated Builders and Contractors trade group. We had no idea about this second award, but now we do. Cantor’s relationship with ALEC really does matter. They are a highly prominent lobby group, with a clear and unambiguous agenda to advance their corporate funder’s interests, which includes advocating for Congressional action. So they actively seek the ear of leading politicians like Cantor, hoping that he will go to bat for them (and their corporate clients) in Congress. Of course Cantor knows why ALEC courts him, and although I am positive he would say he listens to all sides before making policy decisions, ultimately only an informed electorate can decide how much influence ALEC has on elected officials—which is why these public disclosures are so important!http://www.commonblog.com/2012/03/16/cantor-quietly-acknowledges-failing-to-report-alec-gift/ |
Response to midnight (Reply #29)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 12:24 PM
xxqqqzme (14,887 posts)
33. Cantor receives
ALEC's 'Thomas Jefferson Freedom Award' WITH cash award attached?
Who says rethuglicans don't have a sense of humor? |
Response to midnight (Reply #29)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 04:01 PM
Dont call me Shirley (10,998 posts)
35. Thomas Jefferson is, no doubt, rolling in his grave
or in a current reincarnation as Bernie Sanders.
The gops take Orwell to the max. |
Response to midnight (Reply #29)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 08:09 PM
2banon (7,321 posts)
47. interesting. that makes sense now. n/t
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 12:21 PM
southernyankeebelle (11,304 posts)
31. I wish there were more Bernie Sanders. He stands for what he believes in and the working people.
Go Bernie Go.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 12:22 PM
progressoid (47,673 posts)
32. Wah wah wah. Bernie didn't get his pony.
k/r!
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 03:58 PM
Dont call me Shirley (10,998 posts)
34. WTF kind of poison pill is in THAT jobs act? You know there's gotta be one
Poison pill in Medicare, Part D, must pay cost plus for drugs.
Poison pill in the Post Office bill, Ten years to fund 75 years of pension benefits. Bernie Sanders says it as it really is, always. Wall Street needs to be HEAVILY regulated not DEregulated! |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 05:19 PM
magic59 (429 posts)
41. Good ol Bernie
If we could clone him and fill the house with Bernies then "we the people" would actually mean something instead of its empty meaning today. Sen Sanders is one of the few great Senators in history. He can't be bought.
|
Response to magic59 (Reply #41)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:26 PM
malthaussen (15,775 posts)
50. No chance
Bernie is opposed to cloning human beings.
-- Mal |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 05:48 PM
gateley (62,683 posts)
42. Great piece at the link, Manny. Thanks. nt
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 06:25 PM
mother earth (6,002 posts)
44. Only in this country do they have the audacity to sell a bill that further enables the swindlers as
a jobs bill...and for this they worked together to pass it. Bastards!
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 07:10 PM
RufusTFirefly (8,812 posts)
45. The JOBS Act: Joining the fine tradition of Healthy Forests, Clear Skies, and the PATRIOT ACT
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH |
Response to RufusTFirefly (Reply #45)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 11:37 PM
progressoid (47,673 posts)
56. It's Doubleplusgood!
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:24 PM
sulphurdunn (6,891 posts)
49. Our best hope
is to offend the gods so much that they leave Wall Street and return to Mt. Olympus in disgust, leaving us to suffer our fate without the beneficence of their invisible hands in our pockets.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sat Mar 24, 2012, 09:32 PM
Octafish (55,745 posts)
51. That darn Bernie.
What can you say? The guy's got Integrity.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 25, 2012, 06:47 AM
Agony (2,605 posts)
57. Sarcasm is the last refuge of a scoundrel...
apparently also the only way to speak the unspeakable
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 25, 2012, 06:56 AM
DCBob (24,689 posts)
59. Nothing.. he's just being a socialist.
what's wrong with that?
|