Too Big to Jail? Obama at the top of bankster fraud.

[L0oniX]

Last edited Tue Oct 7, 2014, 11:10 AM - Edit history (1)

http://billmoyers.com/episode/full-show-big-jail/ ---video well worth watching

Attorney General Eric Holder’s resignation last week reminds us of an infuriating fact: No banking executives have been criminally prosecuted for their role in causing the biggest financial disaster since the Great Depression.

“I blame Holder. I blame Timothy Geithner,” veteran bank regulator William K. Black tells Bill this week. “But they are fulfilling administration policies. The problem definitely comes from the top. And remember, Obama wouldn’t have been president but for the financial contribution of bankers.”

And the rub? While large banks have been penalized for their role in the housing meltdown, the costs of those fines will be largely borne by shareholders and taxpayers as the banks write off the fines as the cost of doing business. And by and large these top executives got to keep their massive bonuses and compensation, despite the fallout.

Yea I'll say it ...Obama was picked because of the banksters over the deal. The deal? Don't prosecute them for the fraud they were/are committing. The fraud still goes on because of Obama and Holder. Face it ...there is no real justice in this fucked up country. It really is one set of laws for us and ...well ...no laws for them. Our war criminals and banksters run free. They wanted to make sure that there would not be another round of prison like it did for the savings and loan crimes of the past where over a 1000 went to the slammer. Remember the Keating Five? Some Dems there ...huh. But now the system is fixed for them and they are free to do it again. Obama installed Geithner one of the chief crooks in charge. What does that tell you? I knew it was bad when that happened. I knew we had been had. It really doesn't matter who gets elected anymore ...it's just a good cop bad cop show and entertainment for the rich. They are laughing at us. You believe in this system? Fine ...vote then ...I will ...but I know it doesn't really matter. I'm just another zombie party voter. It's pathetic. Bottom line for me is ...until the rich controllers are expelled from politics we have no chance of changing this system. Since the rich are part of the House there's no chance that will ever happen. Poor people can't contribute enough to really assist in a election campaign ...but the rich can and do so to our ruin. I fully expect another financial crash or worse. Debs had it right...

[MohRokTah]

1. .

[Octafish]

5. Tim Geithner sacrificed homeowners to “foam the runway” for the banks

Neil Barofsky, the former special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, has published a new book, “Bailout: An Inside Account of How Washington Abandoned Main Street While Rescuing Wall Street.” It presents a damning indictment of the Obama administration’s execution of the TARP program generally, and of HAMP in particular.
…
By delaying millions of foreclosures, HAMP gave bailed-out banks more time to absorb housing-related losses while other parts of Obama’s bailout plan repaired holes in the banks’ balance sheets. According to Barofsky, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner even had a term for it. HAMP borrowers would “foam the runway” for the distressed banks looking for a safe landing. It is nice to know what Geithner really thinks of those Americans who were busy losing their homes in hard times.

CONTINUED w VIDEO and links and more letters...

http://washingtonexaminer.com/video-geithner-sacrificed-homeowners-to-foam-the-runway-for-the-banks/article/2502982

[navarth]

13. good stuff, thanks nt

[billhicks76]

181. I Agree 100%

Clinton vs Bush will be equally as disgusting. The system is rigged and needs to be scrapped.

[Historic NY]

23. I'd perfer this article since it outlines the timeline that the Democrats pushed through TARP

Oct. 2008 before the election.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/secret-and-lies-of-the-bailout-20130104


Even with what HAMP did modify 40% of those modified mortages defaulted. I know people right now that haven't paid one dime in over 5 yrs towards their mortages. The only reason they haven't been tossed is the excess in home inventory where I live. Then again others were out sooner. I do know that Treasury and banks tightened up on modifications, my cousin with the underwater condo had to go to a financial advisor and show she would be able to handle paying. I really don't think she learned much because she still spends more on herself then one the obligations she has.

[L0oniX]

24. +1

[dixiegrrrrl]

158. Octa.....my memory is that McCain and one of the bushes was involved with Keating fraud...

is that right?

I DO know McCain was, and got a complete whitewash.

[Octafish]

164. Poppy, Jebthro, Smirko, CIA and cronies got a BIG piece of the S&L action.

Know your BFEE: They Looted Your Nation’s S&Ls for Power and Profit

The Keating Five are five U.S. Senators who helped get regulators off the back of Charles Keating's S&L for a couple of years. Keating used the time to futher loot billions from the S&L and its members. Two of my personal heroes were tarnished, their political careers trashed: John Glenn and Donald Riegle. Who knew the S&L debacle would be a dry run for deregulating the Banks and Wall Street in 2008?

McCain was the most reprehensible, per an excellent overview from the outstanding Phoenix New Times.

Yet, thanks to him being a Republican, the national media forgave McCain. And the nation continues to be a land of laws for the 1-percent and their toadies and the other for the 85-percent.

[dixiegrrrrl]

175. It's time for McCain to go....as far away as possible. n/t

[littlemissmartypants]

192. Seriously. He is already brain dead.

Apologies to the medically brain dead persons reading this that deserve to have their stories told. Ok, the reading part is a joke. Nothing about being brain dead us a joke but McClaim is a definite clown.

~ littlemissmartypants 🙆

[L0oniX]

171. 4 of the Keating 5 were Democrats. McInsane was the only repuke.

[Octafish]

249. The S&L Corruption is Buy Partisan

Pete Brewton said if Dukakis had beat Poppy in '88, his book would be called: "The Mafia, CIA and Lloyd Bentsen: The Untold Story of America's Greatest Financial Debacle."

Brewton's book, “The Mafia, CIA & George Bush,” is a must-own for those interested in the workings of the Bush Organized Crime Family and its connected cronies on both sides of the political aisle and how it spearheaded deregulation and the looting of the S&Ls. Written by a former Houston Post reporter, the book documents, literally, the way the Mafia, the CIA and those connected and related to George Poppy Bush -- and to the late Lloyd Bentsen -- looted more than 1,000 of the nation’s Savings and Loans institutions — and pretty much got away with it, scot-free. At the time the biggest rip off ever, it has since been dwarfed by the Great Bankster Bailout of 2008.

Both were caused by deregulation. In the 90s, people like William K Black put thousands away behind bars. Without them in 2008, the rich got away with ripping everyone off. It seems the former served as a practice run for the latter.

[L0oniX]

286. +1

[MrMickeysMom]

168. I knew I had a group picture of us somewhere...

There we all are! - - - Making it EASY for the banisters! Weeeee!

[MohRokTah]

7. To the person who responded to me, I have you on ignore.

Did you know your "My Posts" moves a post up when somebody you have on ignore responds to your post?

Yes, whoever you are, you are one of the few people whose posts I found so utterly absurd that I had to put you on ignore.

[Marr]

27. No one cares who you have on ignore. /nt

[99Forever]

32. Oh, aren't you special?

Bless your heart.

[L0oniX]

127. +1

[L0oniX]

55. Ignore? LOL

[villager]

58. That goes to the exact point of the OP. This White House -- all of them -- "have us on ignore"

The question is what it will take to fundamentally change that.

Actual "change."

[ballyhoo]

69. That's the bottom line. The picture gets

clearer every day.

[woo me with science]

109. ^^^^^ This is the correct answer. ^^^^^^

The dispensers of Third Way talking points here could not do a better job of demonstrating/echoing/exemplifying the utter contempt of their politicians for ordinary Americans.

[Enthusiast]

122. +1! "have us on ignore" Precisely.

I'm for actual change.

[whereisjustice]

139. you are right about that. we have no representation except for the rare case where the

interests of the ultra rich might over lap those of the other 99%.

[villager]

179. Our minders are *slowly* realizing there's some overlap with "climate change" now

At least enough they can afford to pay it a lot of cool-sounding lip service...

[alcibiades_mystery]

116. The alert on your post

On Tue Oct 7, 2014, 10:14 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

To the person who responded to me, I have you on ignore.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5631891

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

The point of ignore is to..ignore! Not use the function to hurl a pejorative.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Oct 7, 2014, 10:17 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: MEH
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Say that to them instead of wasting other DUers' time with an absurd alert. Hopefully this is a 7-0 leave.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree with the person who alerted. If you have someone on "ignore," IGNORE them. Do not air your dirty laundry for all to see. This post is just plain old tacky.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What a whiney alert. Grow up.



Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Ouch.

[davidpdx]

191. Well god forbid we hurl pejoratives at each other

I've seen SO much worse on DU. Christ in a handbasket.

[littlemissmartypants]

193. I am totally empressed by the use of such an

Outstanding vocabulary word.

Yes, I say, empressed, I say!

!

*said in her best foghornleghorn voice*



~ Lmsp 🙌
Linguistics rock.

[davidpdx]

195. It wasn't me, it was the alerter

Whomever that was.

[Le Taz Hot]

120. Wow!

That says a lot about you.

[JDPriestly]

142. Which post are you talking about? Was it me?

I'd like to know whether you have me on ignore because you don't like my arguments opposing Hillary Clinton's candidacy. I guess if you don't answer my post, I will assume you have me on ignore.

Please understand that when you put people on ignore, they still respond to your posts and everyone else reads them. The DUer who puts someone on ignore misses out on essential parts of a discussion.

I really feel sorry for people who put others on ignore. I tried it once and realized I was being childish and that if I couldn't take the heated discussions on DU, I should leave the site. I decided to stay and not put people on ignore. I'm happy with my decision. Putting people on ignore defeats the whole purpose of being on DU -- which is learning from others' opinions and exchanging ideas.

[MohRokTah]

145. No, I haven't gotten around to putting you on ignore yet. eom

[alcibiades_mystery]

209. ROFL

Burn.

[SammyWinstonJack]

153. ...

[ChisolmTrailDem]

219. Nobody gives a shit who you have on ignore, especially the poster you're addressing. nt

[Jackpine Radical]

8. Lovely response

[MohRokTah]

10. Posting a picture that's all over wingnut and Libertarian sites?

[valerief]

29. How would you know? You must go to those sites. nt

[sabrina 1]

96. Lol, me neither, I wouldn't have a clue what is 'all over right wing sites'.

[Mnpaul]

150. All you have to do is a Google image search

Just look at all the RW sites

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4820843

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5502562



I did see one - sodahead

It is found more often on an atheist site

[SammyWinstonJack]

155. heh.

[treestar]

205. Good. See what they are doing and see who is bringing it here.

See it for what it is.

[City Lights]

35. You must visit those sites frequently to make

the claim that that picture is "all over" those sites.

Very telling post, IMO.

[Generic Other]

132. He doesn't have them on ignore

[laundry_queen]

147. HAHA! exactly. nt

[L0oniX]

172. LMFAO

[littlemissmartypants]

194. Thank you. nt

[ChisolmTrailDem]

221. He makes a big scene about how he has Octafish on ignore but he somehow knows

what Octafish posted!

[treestar]

206. Well it's telling more when people cannot bear to look at what the opposition says

And they end up in a bubble. No wonder people act like republicans have no power.

There is nothing wrong with looking at the opposition's arguments. How else could you know how to counter them?

And it is very likely that this "don't vote they aren't pure enough" crap is a Republican scam, and they are at their sites laughing at how stupid Democrats are.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

222. Everybody already knows what to expect from those other sites. So, you go there too? nt

[treestar]

231. How would you know what is there if you never look at them?

I sometimes look at them, yes. What's wrong with that? Do you think they are contagious or something?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

233. I don't go to any of them, ever. I see enough right-wing crap right here on DU. nt

[zappaman]

234. Soooo true.

Some posters here hope we lose the midterms just so they can say "I told ya so"
How crazy is that?

"When we lose the mid-terms,I will post "I told you so!" in every single whining post that results."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025500037

[ChisolmTrailDem]

238. So, you read my appeal to GOTV as hope that we will lose? I am not at all surprised considering....

that you believe me to be the reincarnation of a banned former DUer and have been trying to run me off.

As you can see, you fail. I'm still here. Haha!

[zappaman]

240. Your "appeal to GOTV"?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

243. You believe me to be the carcass of a long-gone DUer...

What are you going to believe next, that 9/11 was in inside job?

[zappaman]

244. "You believe me to be the carcass of a long-gone DUer..."

I do?
When did I say that?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

245. You better believe it! And I don't happen to have my zappaman file with me. Now...

...go away son, you bother me.

[zappaman]

247. Maybe it's in one of your self deleted posts...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5637256

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5633201

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5633186

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5633055

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5633048

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5632950

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025632920

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5628288

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5628274

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5628166

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5628110

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627984

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627956

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627940

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627899

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627861

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627859

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627853

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627843

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627819

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627795

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627661

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5627594

Those are only this week, so maybe it was earlier?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

248. So, you said something about me being a banned DUer in one of my deleted posts?

How did you do that, zappa? Do you keep a dossier on everyone, or just me?

You have an unhealthy obsession with me. Do you love me, zappa? Are you in love with me, zappa?

And I will delete any post I want to delete at any time I want to delete them. Since you and your crew are out to remove me from this board, I thought it prudent to delete anything you might get your rocks off alerting on.

Oh, and I'm still here! Haha!

[zappaman]

250. nope.

you seem confused or

[ChisolmTrailDem]

252. You're the one who is confused, zappy. You asked if your accusation was in one of my

deleted posts you linked, childishly, to above.

So, who's the confused one there, zappyman?

I grow weary of your continued fail at getting rid of me. Now, go away son, you bother me again.

[zappaman]

254. You gonna self delete, bro? n/t

[ChisolmTrailDem]

257. You're a stalker. Get away from me. nt

[zappaman]

258. Irony.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5637977

[ChisolmTrailDem]

259. GET THE FUCKING GODDAMNED FUCK AWAY FROM ME ZAPPAMAN!

[zappaman]

260. Love you too!

[ChisolmTrailDem]

261. STOP STALKING ME, BRO!

[zappaman]

263. Friends.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

264. LEAVE ME ALONE, ZAPPAMAN!

STOP STALKING ME, BRO!

[zappaman]

265. You want to keep engaging in conversation, bro.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

266. STOP STALKING ME, BRO!

Go. the. fuck. away.

[zappaman]

267. Sending love and positive vibrations your way, bro.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

268. STOP STALKING ME, BRO!

[zappaman]

269. Have a great day!

[ChisolmTrailDem]

270. STOP STALKING ME, BRO!

[zappaman]

271. You ok?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

272. Don't fucking touch me, and stop stalking me. nt

[zappaman]

273. Touch you?

This is the internet, bro.
You reply to me and I reply back.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

274. I don't want a hug from you. I want you to stop stalking me.

[zappaman]

275. I think you may be confused by the internet.

can I help you?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

276. DUDE! I make my living on the Internet. So, you fail again. Now...

GET. THE. FUCK. AWAY. FROM. ME.

[zappaman]

277. Well in that case...

[Rex]

279. Wowzers!

Somebody needs to switch to decaf.

[zappaman]

281. He just needs a hug.

We've all been there...

[Rex]

282. VR hugs fella.

Poor Zapp all he wanted was to give you a big VR hug!

[Marr]

224. You mean like putting people on ignore and bragging about it?

So let me get this straight. The guy who frequents right-wing forums and puts perfectly rational, liberal posters here on ignore is just peachy keen, but liberal posters who don't like Wall Street Democrats are just Republican stooges?

Hey, you ever see Hellboy 2? I saw it a couple of days ago on television. Fun movie. These glasses let the characters spot trolls that were disguised as regular people.

?t=1216267487

[treestar]

232. I don't put anyone on ignore eom

[Marr]

236. I was referring to the person you're defending. /nt

[blackspade]

37. And you know this...how?

Never mind....I don't give a fuck....

[Rex]

51. .

Too easy.

[L0oniX]

54. ...because you visit those sites regularly?

[LondonReign2]

78. This subthread did not go as you expected

[Bobbie Jo]

126. Point of order...

You left out the "how do you know this?" from your post.

Looks like youn broke the auto-response pattern.

The subthread looks a bit.....off.

[MrMickeysMom]

169. Hmmm… so THIS is where you spend your time!

[rhett o rick]

184. How do you know? Never mind. nm

[ChisolmTrailDem]

220. How the fuck do you know what's on those sites? Just visiting here? nt

[zappaman]

251. Irony.

?zz=1

[ChisolmTrailDem]

253. Still stalking me, eh? Give me a minute. I'm going to list all the posts you've

followed me around too...

[zappaman]

255. Take your time. n/t

[ChisolmTrailDem]

262. STOP STALKING ME, BRO!

[L0oniX]

17. Being close minded has it's drawbacks. Did you view the video? NO!

[Ichingcarpenter]

50. "Nothing in the world is more dangerous

"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than

sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."

-Martin Luther King, Jr.

[L0oniX]

53. + a billion

[woo me with science]

108. [phone]

[raouldukelives]

216. +1 And boy do we have a lot of that on display. nt

[clg311]

2. Another reason I regret voting for him in 2008. NT

[SidDithers]

4. Awwww....

Sid

[sarisataka]

11. So given a second chance

you would rather have McCain/Palin?

[L0oniX]

14. I'd hardly call McCain/Palin a second chance. It's a good cop bad cop show.

[chervilant]

44. Wow...

When will we stop hearing this canard? Such a red herring--we MUST hold every politician, including Obama, responsible for their decisions and their 'selling out' to the corporate megalomaniacs who've usurped our media, our politics, AND our global economy. I am concerned that it's already too late to recover our democracy...

[uponit7771]

72. "When will we stop hearing this canard? ".. when "we" stop avoiding the question? tia

[SomethingFishy]

91. Ok I'll not avoid the question...

Did I like getting punched in the stomach better than kicked in the face? Yeah, it's way better. But I'm still puking.

[chervilant]

97. Yeppers.

I appreciate this spot-on analogy.

(BTW, in my opinion, the 'foxes guarding the hen house' includes Arne "I play basketball!" Duncan, current SecEd and co-conspirator in the drive to corporatize public education.)

[SammyWinstonJack]

159. And that administration wouldn't have prosecuted the banksters either........

[L0oniX]

18. It's was a burger A or burger B choice anyway.

[tblue37]

26. Not really. Besides, the USSC is too important to allow any Republican president

to appoint even more people like Roberts, Scalia, Alito, Thomas, etc. If Bush had not been given the presidency, we would not have _Citizens United_ or the undoing of the Voting Rights Act protections, or voter suppression laws, including the recent USSC support of limiting early voting.

[L0oniX]

28. First you have to trust that a Dem POTUS will place a SCJ that is for the real people.

[tblue37]

41. Sotomayor and Kagan are better by far than the RWers on the USSC right now. And

Bader was also a Dem appointment, of course.

The Dem appointments on the USSC all dissented in the court's RW decisions, and if there had been just one more Dem appointment, those decisions would have gone the other way.

[emulatorloo]

283. And that's a fact

But the loud DU'ers are not fond of facts.

[1StrongBlackMan]

30. Don't worry ...

you won't have to vote for him ever again.

[BlueCaliDem]

64. Good one, 1SBM!

[URL=http://www.sherv.net/][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[sabrina 1]

99. No one ever has to vote for anyone. We supported this president because we thought

he would begin to undo the damage done by his predecessor.

Why eg, did he not appoint Democrats to National Security positions? Are there no Democrats qualified to protect this country? That is what the far right has always claimed. Why would a Dem practically verify that false claim by keeping on morons like Gates eg, who couldn't wait to go after him as soon as he was out of office?



Why did he keep the foxes, Geithner and Bernanke in the henhouse, instead of appointing people to clean up that whole, corrupt and destructive mess?

I know that is one of the main questions people are going to be asking from now on 'who will you appoint to Cabinet positions'. Far too many Republicans have served in this administration. We threw them out, the president brought many of them back in. How on earth do you get a Democratic agenda going when you have Repubicans right in your cabinet?

[Enthusiast]

123. PLUS ONE, a huge bunch!

[Thespian2]

146. Right On

We wanted a progressive president; we got a president owned and operated by corporations. Better than McCain/Palin? Of course, but why should Americans have to settle for someone who will not solve the problems of ordinary citizens? Why should Americans settle for another 8 years of Bush disasters? Because America is now an Oligarchy, and citizens must kiss the asses of the rulers.

[laundry_queen]

148. Bingo. nt

[Teamster Jeff]

278. Nailed It

[blackspade]

38. I don't regret my vote...

I regret that my choices were between center-right and batshit crazy.

[1StrongBlackMan]

71. The wider, more accurate, picture is, was, and probably will be ...

a choice between (arguably) center-right ON ECONOMIC ISSUES; but solidly left, on the other 70% of the issues facing the nation and batsh!t crazy on EVERY and ALL issues.

Just saying ...

[LondonReign2]

76. I think that is a fair statement

Clearly the Republicans are nutzoids on all issues and do not present a real choice.

I'd only disagree on the percentages of issues facing the nation. I'd peg it at 80% economic, which probably explains my frustration with the President.

[1StrongBlackMan]

84. Okay ...

even at 80%, President Obama is NOT center-right on issue that affect the working classes, e.g., the minimum wage, Paycheck fairness, Job Creation, U/C expansion, and a whole host of other issues.

To paint President Obama as center-right based on a (perceived) failure to regulate the banks and (criminally) prosecute the the banksters, or even based on his pushing of the trade agreement (TPP) that isn't ... the objections of which are purely speculative, based on "leaks" from clearly agendaed parties, is a bit ... well ... not factual.

[Enthusiast]

124. President Obama also promoted Chained CPI.

In addition to the trade deals and failing to prosecute the criminal banksters he also proposed cuts to social security. Unbelievable.

I am hugely disappointed in President Obama.

[1StrongBlackMan]

125. No ...

Last edited Tue Oct 7, 2014, 11:56 PM - Edit history (1)

President Obama offered CCPI in a budget deal that everyone, even republicans, knew was going nowhere ... which was the turning point in public opinion that has republicans as obstructionist and unserious about working in good faith ... even among republicans.

[blackspade]

80. I'll give you that.

But those economic issues are at the heart of our collapsing social system and the other 70% will not go any further than PBO has pushed them until the economic core is fixed.

So what one hand gives the other takes away.

[1StrongBlackMan]

85. Sincere Question ...

Given: even at 80%, President Obama is NOT center-right on issue that affect the working classes, e.g., the minimum wage, Paycheck fairness, Job Creation, U/C expansion, and a whole host of other issues, where does jailing bankers fall on the scale in terms of the collapsing social system?

[BrotherIvan]

106. If we could agree on your statement as a party, or even DU, we could have actual discussion

Try it as an OP as this goes to the heart of the matter of the DU divide. It might illuminate those who think detractors of the President are "bashing" or "haters." It might help those more critical to see where his ardent supporters are coming from. Most of the criticism I see on DU is for economic and foreign (defense) policy. Some weigh social issues higher than economic issues, giving them greater weight. Some feel economic issues are key, and therefore diminish social gains as not quite as important. It's would be an excellent argument and might bring about some understanding as we head into the midterms. Or it might be an epic flamewar...

[1StrongBlackMan]

110. LOL ...

I just might do that; but I suspect it'll just be another iteration of:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1187&pid=8922

I even recall you and I having a little back and forth, where you (essentially) told me that "without dealing with the economics, the civil rights/social issues won't matter."

But that said ... Maybe you'll give this question a shot:

Given that President Obama is NOT center-right on issues that most directly affect the working classes, e.g., the minimum wage, Paycheck fairness, Job Creation, U/C expansion, and a whole host of other issues, where does jailing bankers fall on the scale in terms of "his failing on 'economic' issues"?

[BrotherIvan]

137. I believe that poverty is a social issue

I hope that President Obama works with Senate and House Democrats to come up with a way to pass all the issues you mention.

[1StrongBlackMan]

163. He has ...

though there are times when Senate Democrats haven't been willing to work with this "center-right" President on those solidly left wing policy initiates.

It amazes me that DU willingly and enthusiastically ignores what he has actually done, in order to make him a center-right President. And not prosecuting the banksters, doesn't make him center-right, nor would it benefit the working class folks, DU claims to care so much about.

[sendero]

149. At the end of the day...

... if you cannot feed yourself the "social issues" pale into insignificance.

[1StrongBlackMan]

160. Spoken like someone that has never been on the down side ...

"social issues."

Hyperbole aside ... I suspect that there are far more people suffering from disparate "social issues", that would be willing to fight for economic parity ... if they thought those not suffering would fight for everyone's economic parity; rather than, just their own.

And the way to demonstrate that is for you to fight for our parity now.

[sendero]

212. If you are living under a bridge..

.... whether or not you can marry or get an abortion is moot.

I'm sorry that so many Democrats accepts these substitutes for action on issues that matter the most.

Easily duped by the 1% that don't give two shits about any of that and are happy to offer it up if it will distract from the theft that is going on.

[1StrongBlackMan]

213. No. It's Not ...

whether or not you can marry or get an abortion is moot.

If you are living under a bridge and you are with an unwanted pregnancy, you are still pregnant ... and will soon face the added burden resulting from the unwanted pregnancy. If you are living under a bridge and cannot marry the person you love, you still are being sh!tted on ... and at the very least, both of these are added burdens to someone already down.

But the larger (and economically chauvinistic) issue here is: (your statement suggests and I sincerely hope you just didn't think it out) that your economic state determines the level of dignity you should expect and/or this society should afford you. I strongly disagree.

I'm sorry that so many Democrats accepts these substitutes for action on issues that matter the most.

Matters most to YOU ... one that (presumably) is not living under a bridge and being denied social parity or lives in a mansion on the hill, but is still being denied social parity.

[sendero]

214. So your actual position..

... is that "social parity" is as important as being able to feed yourself. Umm, whatever.

[1StrongBlackMan]

218. So your actual position ...

is one's economic status should determine one's access to equality. Umm, whatever.

Hyperbole aside ... We do have a smattering of a social safety net, even as woefully under-funded as it is. So reality has it that a (relative) very few people are starving to death or living under bridges for, purely, economic reasons ... And NO one is starving to death or living under bridges because of economic inequity; whereas, there are, literally, millions of people suffering the indignity of inequality.

And I would argue that this inequality, and the dehumanization that goes along with it, is a big part of the poverty that this nation faces. That may not be important to you; but, it is to me.

[littlemissmartypants]

196. This^ eom

[Cha]

157. The ODS network doesn't want to know about the "70%" or how much good President Obama has done

for our country. They will not appreciate it or even acknowledge. It's all about the ragin whine.

[littlemissmartypants]

197. Help!?

http://www.acronymfinder.com/ODS.html

[emulatorloo]

284. In this context, Obama Derangement Syndrome n/t

[Rockyj]

100. Excellent Response!

It looks like 2016 it will be corporate owned or corporate owned.

[1StrongBlackMan]

134. When, in the last 60 years ...

has that NOT been the case?

[stillwaiting]

208. Is it okay to be upset about that fact?

Is it okay to bring it up for discussion?

It seems even you are agreeing that this is the reality that our nation faces. Isn't that a pretty horrible place for our nation to be?

Every time DU posters mention it, express outrage about it (which is COMPLETELY understandable), or try and increase other peoples' understanding of what is going on in this country (and we need LOTS more of this) you rebut their arguments. You seem to stand up for the status quo.

There will need to be LOTS more dissension and anger throughout America in order for a large movement to begin that even BEGINS to turn around what's been happening in this country for decades now. Things ARE getting worse financially for just about all Americans (on average). I won't make excuses for it, and I won't behave helplessly while things are obviously corrupt and rotten within the Halls of Power.

And, if Obama were solidly left he would not have put so many Republicans and conservative Democrats that further right-wing economic and foreign-policy objectives in his Cabinet.

Our government has been owned for decades so anger and frustration being expressed shouldn't be mocked or ridiculed. It should be empathized with and understood. What's been happening in D.C. is NOT OKAY, and I'll be damned if I argue on behalf of the many corrupt actors that operate within it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

211. Yes ...

Last edited Wed Oct 8, 2014, 11:05 AM - Edit history (1)

Bring it up ... discuss it ... all that; but don't act like it's a new phenomena.

And, if Obama were solidly left he would not have put so many Republicans and conservative Democrats that further right-wing economic and foreign-policy objectives in his Cabinet.

I suspect that the only ones that thought/think President Obama was/is "solidly Left" were/are the unread, self-convinced "progressives" and the gop. The rest of us have him where he has always been, center-left ... center on some economic issues, left on others, and "solidly Left" on social issues.

And judging on what he has accomplished, in this political environment ... that is good enough for me. He moved the country's state a little to where I envision it being, in my perfect world.

But as a DUer is fond of saying: "Your mileage will vary."

BTW ...

and I'll be damned if I argue on behalf of the many corrupt actors that operate within it.

Recognizing what is, is not an argument for (or against) anything, nor does it suggest a course of action. Right?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

215. This is just a perfect response. Absolutely perfect!!!

[1StrongBlackMan]

225. I don't know ...

Maybe a bunch of folks just woke up to the state of America ... a state that has been present since shortly after the Clerk's error in Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific, back in 1886?

Maybe, a bunch of folks just discovered a new "light switch" that does wonderful things when flicked?

But I find it interesting that all this "discovery" finds its voice, today ... with THIS President ... is if history started in 2008.

And while I'm at it ... I must say, in find it "interesting" that so many ignore/mischaracterize this President's push for solidly left initiatives ... initiatives that actually affect broad swathes of the working classes, e.g., raising the Minimum Wage, Paycheck Fairness, his Jobs Plan, etc., in order to paint him as somehow not center-left.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

294. We've been down this road countless times, though, haven't we? It's pointless.

[Tommymac]

156. Corporate owned socially progressive warmonger or Corporate owned batshit crazy winger <Sigh> eom

[snooper2]

223. thanks for the vote!

you can keep your regret for free!

[zappaman]

242. Welcome to DU!

Sorry you regret voting for Obama.
Better luck next time!

[Octafish]

3. William K. Black as Attorney General and every Bankster is behind bars.

Forensic economist and an attorney, helped jail thousands of S&L fraudsters. Why was he ignored in 2008, when the fraud was a an order of magnitude or three larger?

The Two Documents Everyone Should Read to Better Understand the Crisis

by William K. Black
Assoc. Professor, Univ. of Missouri, Kansas City;
Sr. regulator during S&L debacle
February 25, 2009 10:31 AM

As a white-collar criminologist and former financial regulator much of my research studies what causes financial markets to become profoundly dysfunctional. The FBI has been warning of an "epidemic" of mortgage fraud since September 2004. It also reports that lenders initiated 80% of these frauds.1 When the person that controls a seemingly legitimate business or government agency uses it as a "weapon" to defraud we categorize it as a "control fraud" ("The Organization as 'Weapon' in White Collar Crime." Wheeler & Rothman 1982; The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One. Black 2005). Financial control frauds' "weapon of choice" is accounting. Control frauds cause greater financial losses than all other forms of property crime -- combined. Control fraud epidemics can arise when financial deregulation and desupervision and perverse compensation systems create a "criminogenic environment" (Big Money Crime. Calavita, Pontell & Tillman 1997.)

The FBI correctly identified the epidemic of mortgage control fraud at such an early point that the financial crisis could have been averted had the Bush administration acted with even minimal competence. To understand the crisis we have to focus on how the mortgage fraud epidemic produced widespread accounting fraud.

CONTINUED...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-k-black/the-two-documents-everyon_b_169813.html

FWIFW: I think the world of President Obama, but I don't believe the banksters -- like traitors and the warmongers who lied America into war --should be above the law.

[Scuba]

6. +1

[KoKo]

19. Obama was probably hustled & overwhelmed...but, Holder knew what was going on..

imho.

[L0oniX]

25. Why they chose Obama over Clinton is a puzzle.

The Clinton's have been and are cozy with the banksters. Was Obama chosen because he would give them less resistance? Just guessing. IMO either Dem candidate would have won.

[valerief]

31. They wanted BLACK to take the blame for the crash instead of WHITE. nt

[littlemissmartypants]

199. Breaking it down...

A black man vs a white woman and if a sister ever runs for president and wins in the current state of money politics... she will be in deep dodo. Framed. I fear.

~ Lmsp 🙌

[KoKo]

42. Good Question...

Thinking it over though. Remember all the Banking Deregulation that occurred under Clinton. Remember the Dem Parties emphasis on courting Business under the DLC that Bill and Hillary helped found. Maybe that would have come back to haunt the Dem Party....so they went with the new guy figuring the Clintons would get another chance in 2016 after it all blew over?

[mrdmk]

56. Clinton is a known corporatist and is also known for being a staunch war-hawk

If Clinton did not end the wars and have Wall Street in a court room within two years, she would have been out of office after one term.

Having Clinton in office would have given away the illusion a president for the people.

jmho

[1StrongBlackMan]

79. "THEY" didn't choose President Obama over HRC ...

"WE" made the choice. And the reason WE made that choice is because the VAST majority of WE don't really care about jailing bankers.

And BTW ...

For now, though, Sen. Clinton of New York is leading the way, bringing in at least $6.29 million from the securities and investment industry, compared with $6.03 million for Sen. Obama of Illinois and $2.59 million for McCain, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Those figures include donations from the investment companies' employees and political action committees.

"THEY" really didn't choose President Obama over HRC, if money equals speech. A difference of $200,000 (5%) on $12,300,000, isn't much of a statement of preference.

[Number23]

154. WHY are you bothering??! Seriously!

Look at the stuff you're responding to and the people saying it. WHY WASTE YOUR TIME? You think you'll be able to break through?

Do what I'm doing. Read the OP, try to keep your eyes from rolling out of your head and say nothing. This is one of those typical DU battles that is so NOT worth fighting.

[1StrongBlackMan]

161. LOL ...

masochistic tendencies? The eternally optimistic belief that people can stand to reason? I don't know!

[Number23]

162. It's like Scorpio talking about his battles with the mouth breathing cretins on Discussionist

I just want to smack him on the back of the neck and say "are you mad??! A masochist??! A glutton for punishment? WHY ARE YOU BOTHERING WITH THIS IDIOCY???" and I'm saying the same to you.

With love, of course, but the same.

[1StrongBlackMan]

165. LOL ...

Point taken!

But what about the lesser informed ... removing my voice, leaves them with ... well ... THAT!

(Only half way kidding)

[still_one]

188. Exactly, this is just anothe Obama hate fest thread which seems to appear all to frequently here

It was the ron and rand Paul's, along with the tea baggers who wanted the government to let the banks fail. Frankly Obama did what was necessary to prevent a total depression and economic collapse, and guess what, it worked. That does not mean pele are not hurting, but it is moving the right direction, and hiring is going in the right direction

[Caretha]

128. No

They chose him because he was one heck of a campaigner & he appeared more innocent & believable with less baggage.

It was a screen test & he won.

[L0oniX]

21. +3

[Hubert Flottz]

22. +2

[1StrongBlackMan]

88. Having read the excerpted sections of the two must read documents ...

do suggest, even point to, fraud ... but not by the banksters, but rather in the rating agencies. These documents are actually a get out of jail free card for the banksters.

[Octafish]

112. Try this...

[1StrongBlackMan]

117. Okay ... watched it ...

Yes ... there's a dead body and blood is everywhere; but, no one seems to be able to place the knife in the hands of the bank executives.

Instead, in this thread we have "William K. Black as Attorney General and every Bankster is behind bars", despite his saying, if we were the UK, the central bank could have had the head of Lehman fired (not jailed), and two documents placing the fraud, not at the feet of the banksters, but the feet of the rating agency.

[Octafish]

135. You make a good point. No one has prosecuted the banksters.

That's why I suggested William K. Black for the job.

[1StrongBlackMan]

178. Perhaps you should watch the clip again ...

you'll note that he talked about past convictions, but didn't/hasn't mentioned how to get convictions NOW (with the changes in regulatory scheme that occurred in the interim).

He, also, seems to think that what is possible in the UK is possible in the US. By that logic, he should have used Iceland as the exemplar.

[Autumn]

9. Obama told the banks he was the only thing standing between them and our pitchforks.

I think it would have been a lot more than pitchforks.

Recommended

[navarth]

12. Thanks, L0onix

I haven't checked Bill lately, appreciate the reminder.

Re: Eugene Debs: I have been curious about him for some time, he's on the list of people I want to know more about. You've just given me a nice preview. Sounds like my kind of people.

I wonder if that person upthread is ignoring you like they did Octafish? Personally, I don't put anybody on ignore, even those I consider to be gaping assholes.

[Sheepshank]

15. good god

repetition ...again. from the same predictable posters.

[KoKo]

16. Recommend OP and Eugene Debs!

[librechik]

20. I listened to Matt Taibbi on a late night radio show last week

He says Holder has been spending the last few years erecting a para-legal structure for treating the Big Banks. a way to "punish" them through cash settlements instead of litigation, or what should be PROSECUTION. It's all handled in back channels and the BB LOVE it, and everything stays stable, no boat-rocking. He waited to resign for this structure to get up and running before the resignation.

Taibbi thinks it's a massive atrocity that is now permanent. (If I got him right.) I tend to agree.

[KoKo]

43. +1 "...massive atrocity that is now permanent."

Until the next Blow Up down the road. It even extends to the Eurozone... They are now doing "Quantitative Easing" to fix their own banking mess. That's causing austerity in UK and elsewhere except Germany. Germany has it's own problems with the instability it's causing and the Russian Sanctions, though.

Not prosecuting gives the "Criminal Element" more cover to grow. And infects the new employees joining to get in on the game.

Global Finance.....Ain't it just Grand....... until it isn't...down the road.

[woo me with science]

246. [phone] They retain the shell of the democratic government,

but they have constructed an elaborate parallel corporate government alongside of it...for "justice," for elections, for surveillance, for war...

The original one we learned about in school is just for PR now.

[valerief]

33. The U.S. is becoming one big gulag. nt

[L0oniX]

57. More like a herd of lemming serfs.

[xocet]

189. It is as was said the other day: "The new American Dream is to be a slave to a billionaire." n/t

[SamKnause]

34. K&R

I am in 100% agreement with you LOoniX !!!!!!!!!!!

[nc4bo]

36. And, there you have it.

This is part of what so many disturbed and really disgusted with our party's politics.

[MaggieD]

39. So you'd rather John McCain had been elected?

Not me.

Sometimes I wonder how much better the country would be without the consistent circular firing squad we seem to love on the left.

[grasswire]

45. electing McCain was not the only possible alternative.

Expecting a Democratic president to adhere to Democratic values was what people voted for. They were betrayed.

[MaggieD]

61. Tell me about it

I didn't vote for him in the primary. I'm kind of an idiot savant about politicians, and saw very clearly that he was not a liberal on anything but social issues. But once he won the primary we would have been stupid not to support him over McCain.

[RufusTFirefly]

52. Electing Obama effectively neutralized outrage and opposition

If McCain had done many of the things that the President has done, the people on this board would be apoplectic. The public might've been galvanized and opposition to neo-liberalism would've gained extraordinary strength.

But since the Right are the only opposition to the President who receive any publicity in the corporate media, objecting to his policies gets you branded as a right-winger, even though those of us raising a hue and cry on these boards are anything but.

It's really a brilliant strategy.

[MaggieD]

60. Well how do you think you change that?

I will tell you that a circular firing squad won't do it.

[RufusTFirefly]

68. Not be repeatedly mischaracterizing it as a circular firing squad, that's for sure

Democrats need to be driven by policies not personalities. We need to define our goals and ideals and then choose the candidate who best embodies them. For more than a generation now, we've had it bass-ackwards. We've selected someone who the hype told us was "electable" and then adjusted -- and often distorted -- our core ideals to match the person.

Politics requires compromise. Everyone here knows that. No one expects perfection. But we keep folding before all the cards have even been dealt. We need the courage of our convictions.

[MaggieD]

81. I disagree....

One reason we are probably going to get trounced in these mid terms (and did get trounced in 2010) is directly because of the circular firing squad we seem to be addicted to.

The media will hammer on the low approval rating (that comes directly from democrats not supporting democrats, because hey, it's not like he lost republican support), and that will in turn decrease turnout. So we will lose more political power.

We are so frigging bad about celebrating the good democrats do, and cannot wait to stab them in the back. Politicians inevitably disappoint. Now I am not talking about blind support. But in the main, once you pick them they have been picked. And all you are going to do is hurt out chances of advancing the democratic agenda when you hammer on a democratic president.

If you aren't happy choose someone better next time. THAT is the lesson to learn, IMO. I was NOT an Obama supporter during the primaries. And thus I am not surprised in the least by his policies. I am happy about some of them, but I have plenty to complain about as well.

But here is the thing -- it's a double insult to those of us smart enough to know, before he was anointed, that he was nothing but a mirror that reflected whatever the voter wanted to see him. We basically have the same wing of the party that insisted on him bashing the party after he was elected, which does nothing but more damage to the agenda.

We wanted it -- we got it. And if you want to see the democratic agenda advance "we" should make the best of it.

[LondonReign2]

77. This argument again?

Hint: A supposition starting with "So," is almost always a strawman.

[MaggieD]

82. I'm just commenting on the Debs quote

Why insert it if you're not serious?

[1StrongBlackMan]

118. Frankly ...

Last edited Tue Oct 7, 2014, 07:49 PM - Edit history (1)

I'd rather vote for someone that is likely to give me some of what I want and win, than either of Debs options!

But that just me ...

[MaggieD]

131. +1

[Autumn]

89. For some silly reason the line so you want McCain/ Palin just doesn't work anymore

I doubt either could be elected dog catcher, and that for sure would be a horrifying tragedy beyond measure. Dogs and cats deserve better than that.

[MaggieD]

104. Then it would be advisable to drop the Debs quote

[Autumn]

136. Ya think?

[MaggieD]

140. I do think....

"I'd rather vote for something I want and NOT GET IT, than vote for something I don't want and get it."

So, let's suppose you had the choice to vote for the most leftist candidate in the world. Let's say Dennis Kucinich, or maybe someone even more leftist, like Ralph Nader. Someone who had zero chance of winning a general election. The Debs quote is clearly saying "I'd rather vote for that, and live with the consequences."

So, "not getting it" would have been a republican president.

Sooooooo, if you agree with the Debs quote than the "You'd rather have McCain?" still unfortunately "works."

And it does tend to point up the folly of the Debs quote, which some people don't, obviously, like having pointed out. I've been through the "both parties are the same" nonsense. That's how we got the worst. president. ever. in the first place. Thanks for nothing, Ralph and all the Debs quote devotees.

[Autumn]

144. Poor poor Ralph had just as much right to run for president

as Obama or Hillary. What was it Obama said yesterday ? Oh yeah "Democracy is always a messy business"

I'm very aware of what the supreme court did and I hold them responsible. I will never give them a pass on that. Never.

[L0oniX]

293. I like parrots.

[Autumn]

87. John MCCain couldn't have been elected. Romney was the republican nominee.

[MaggieD]

103. The article is referencing back to the bank bailout - so 2008

But no, Romney would not have been preferable either.

[polichick]

107. I think about how much better this country would be if...

The people didn't allow themselves to be divided and conquered by a corporate party with two faces.

[rhett o rick]

187. The "lesser of evils" meme is so last year. The people eating at soup kitchens, getting a few days

food at foodbanks, losing their homes to the banksters, getting their foodstamps cut, probably don't care.

Please wake up and smell the oligarchy. They have the resources to manipulate the candidates so you think you are getting the best of the deal and still get screwed.

The wealth gap is growing and Pres Obama can't stop it and neither can H. Clinton-Sachs.

[mopinko]

40. ben bernanke

was a historian of the great depression. much that happened had to do with hoover not realizing the damage that a moralistic response did.
at the time, i think that perp walks would have been damaging.
the stress tests did sweat the bankers.

now that things are stable, tho, frog march.

[KoKo]

47. "Statute of Limitations" expired on much of it...and as memory fades

the Meme of "It's Fixed...Out of Sight Out of Mind."

There are still some things that could be done but Repubs have watered down "Dodd/Frank" and obstructed it so much that it's leaving the door open for more fraud down the road. The running "Sequester" has cut back the Regulatory Agencies personnel to bare bones. That doesn't help, either.

But...we have to hope the next Blow Up will finally bring change. Maybe the FDR reforms to Banking System which Repubs and Wall Streeet interests worked for decades to dismantle will finally get reinstated. But, we'd have to live through another crisis and I wonder if there's enough money (with our ongoing wars) for it be handled by the FED.

[L0oniX]

49. +1

[ballyhoo]

46. Have known that for a long time, but thanks for

the reminder for 2016, when I have to decide which brand of neocon I want.

[stupidicus]

48. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CF4QFjAI&url=http

obviously killing the money is speech doctrine and it outta our politics is a necessary first step towards substantive solutions to all that ails us

[1StrongBlackMan]

59. All I can say is ...

it must be nice living in a bubble where, what CAN BE, even what SHOULD BE done, is unaffected by the reality of likely outcomes.

That is the wonderful world of the political commentator!

[Rex]

62. Too big to play by the rules.

Laws are great things, sadly there are many different levels - depending on how much money you have. Have a big enough company? Immune from prison. Maybe a small fine.

[polichick]

63. Yes, that's where we are now. Question is, what will "the people" do about it?

[L0oniX]

173. Well ...we can't all be banksters so I guess we are stuck with our pathetic votes.

The cops do seem to be ready for an uprising.

[polichick]

230. Americans will have to use the ingenuity we're so known for.

[WillyT]

65. K & R !!!

[JDPriestly]

66. K&R for William Black.

Obama owes us a big apology. His appointments of Geithner, Bernanke and Holder were pure corruption. Shame on him.

He did well for our economy in other ways. But those appointments were sheer corruption, and the legacy of that corruption will outlive any other legacy he leaves. Outlive healthcare insurance reform for sure. Outlive his sincere attempt at reform of our foreign policy, outlive everything else. He needs to admit to what he did, because he is a good guy with a good heart, but somewhere along the way he made a deal with the devils on Wall Street. And those devils will claim the soul Obama sold to them for a long time to come.

I am thinking of the turmoil in American families as they lost their homes, the investments they made in their homes, their equity, their sweat.

I am thinking of the children in American families in which mama who has a college education now works for minimum wage.

I am thinking of the emotional price that families have paid, the divorces, the anger, the loss of confidence in each other. in themselves, the despair.

I am thinking of the talented, intelligent, hopeful children who have no money for college.

I am thinking of the many, many people in their 50s and 60s who are willing to work hard but can't get jobs and are living on what was supposed to be their retirement money.

Obama is fundamentally a kind and loving person. But, all this, and not just the good, will be part of his legacy, part of what will weigh on his conscience after he has left office, part of what he will have to live with as he watches his children become sucked into it, into the mire that his deal with the devil helped create because, in order to do the good things he tried to do, he went along with the corruption.

Corruption, the devils of Wall Street.

Satan.

Karma. It sucks.

[ballyhoo]

67. That's the best interview I have ever seen regarding

what happened in the crash and how Obama got elected. Thanks so much. I may have to burn my hand that shoved my ballot in the box.

[L0oniX]

114. Yea ...it really hit home with me.

[ballyhoo]

115. Well, good job again, as usual. I never in

a million years thought I'd see what is happening. I keep thinking I'm in a bad movie and the lights will go on and I can drink the rest of my Big Gulp and leave. TTYL

[NYC Liberal]

73. Anyone who voted for Obama in 2012 even when they really didn't like his policies after the first 4 years

is part of the problem then. Anyone who put party over their own personal beliefs is part of the problem.

Obama's policies and actions have significantly strengthened this country and put us back on the right track. That's what I believe. But anyone who didn't in 2012 and voted for him anyway instead of voting for someone they truly believed was better -- as your Debs quote says -- is a massive hypocrite if they complain now.

[Autumn]

75. Some people voted for him again in 2012 for one reason only, he wasn't romney.

Nothing hypocritical about that. We vote for the Democrat, like it or not. Because the republican is worse.

[NYC Liberal]

90. And that's how the two-party system stays alive.

The reason there are never any other candidates is because everyone does what they did. If people actually started voting their conscience, things could change.

[Autumn]

95. We bought into that crap that if we don't vote for a D the republicans will win.

The damn thing is that just don't work anymore. If a D doesn't act like a Democrat there's a bunch of us who just won't go there in 2016. We have one vote, that vote is our only voice, I won't throw it away out of fear again.

[NYC Liberal]

102. I strongly supported Pres. Obama in 2012 and still do.

But anyone who doesn't should vote their conscience. You won't find me begging them to vote a certain way. Their choice.

[littlemissmartypants]

200. And a secret ballot. Whether we like it or not. nt

[Electric Monk]

111. There's a Senate seat race in Kansas where the Dem pulled out and an Independant is leading

http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article2518735.html

Independent candidate Greg Orman has opened up a double-digit lead among likely voters over three-term incumbent Sen. Pat Roberts in Kansas, a new NBC News/Marist poll released on Sunday morning finds.

Funny, that.

[treestar]

203. Yeah, duh we have to work with people who are closer to/more like us

Because there are people who would vote for Republicans. Who knew it involved joining forces with other people rather than stamping our feet and uselessly demanding that only our vote counts. When it's not true. There are people out there voting for Bachmann and the like. They aren't going to stay home because the Dems aren't progressive enough. No Dem politician can win an election by appealing to me alone and "earning" my vote. They need other votes to win.

[Autumn]

217. Okay.

[RufusTFirefly]

83. Non-hypocrite checking in

I'm saddened to admit, after a lifetime of voting for and actively campaigning for Democrats (my first stint as a campaign worker was in 1972), that in 2012 I cast my first non-Democratic vote for President.
It was depressing to consider, but I just couldn't bring myself to convey the impression that I approved of what the President was doing. I had to vote my conscience.
In truth, I would've had a harder decision to make if I didn't live in a "safe" blue state.
And no, I didn't vote for Romney.
In fact, as negative as it sounds, who I voted for was not as important as who I didn't vote for.

[NYC Liberal]

93. Good for you. I'm tired of people saying how much they hate the candidates

and then voting for them anyway.

I voted for Obama because I really did support him and not as a "lesser of two evils". But if you truly believe neither major candidate is good, then don't vote for either of them. The hypocrites complain over and over about the two-party system but they never do anything about it.

[Caretha]

138. I berated

my Republican friends for voting for Bush the first time. We had long hours of discussion on Vent about politics. I told them I was right and that they would be apologizing to me before it was over. Guess what, my Republican friends didn't vote for Bush twice...they voted for Obama in 2008

They told me I would be sorry if I voted for Obama twice - I heeded their words as they heeded mine. I didn't vote for Obama in the 2nd time...neither did they. We sat it out and realized we were all fucked. I have smart loyal friends.

I know you ask how can my Republican friends be smart & compassionate at the same time.....well they aren't 30 - 40 - 50 somethings...they had parents that loved Ike as much as they loved Kennedy...those are my friends.

[AlbertCat]

74. Obama was picked

I thought he was elected....twice.

Dubya was picked.

[grasswire]

86. Obama was picked (to be "elected")

A relative noob to the national scene, thrust forward by the kingmakers and positioned against the most ridiculous and UN-electable opponents.

It's a rigged game. And we ain't in it.

[99Forever]

92. K$ R

[randome]

94. So why don't you promote someone you admire instead of coming on a Democratic forum...

...and dissing Democratic incumbents? I guess it's so much easier to whine and stomp your feet than it is to actually be positive about someone.

You're only proving the GOP strategy for them: going negative is always easier than going positive about something.


[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[polichick]

105. Yeah, shut up! Freedom of speech is anti-American!

[L0oniX]

113. If the truth is too much for you maybe you should try Fox.

[1StrongBlackMan]

119. +1. And ironically ...

the pick a Democratic message board to be negative about Democrats.

How about a strategy of coming to a Democratic message board and be positive about whomever; and, if you must be negative, reserve that for the gop?

[Bobbie Jo]

129. Because it's all

rigged, RIGGED I tell you!

Or some such Illuminatti, Free Mason, NWO, black helicopter nonsense.

[1StrongBlackMan]

133. I posted this to another thread (or maybe this one) ...

but I think it applies here:

And "Mission Accomplished" ...

could be heard whispered throughout the land. (It seems)

GOP: "Government doesn't work" ... Check!

Libertarians (right and left): "Government is evil" ... Check!

Tea Party: "Government doesn't work and there is no difference between establishment republicans and establishment Democrats" ... Check!

"Liberals/Progressives": "Government is evil and there is no difference between establishment republicans and establishment Democrats" ... Check!

The media has played this narrative on a 7-day, 24-hour loop.

Result: Only 15% of the American people pay close attention to the only mechanism for change.

Nicely played, Oligarchs!

[freshwest]

190. Wow, that is the full list, 1SBM. Wash, rinse, repeat to infinity, just as Segretti would.

Why should the Oligarchs give up such a winning strategy?

I'd love to see promotion of a party and candidate would do better than the Democrats. I prefer a positive case made for something to evaluate.

More productive than restating endlessly what one is against, without stating who and what will do better than Dems.

I'd really like to see the solution to this, plainly stated, of a non-Dem who would do better. Why not, since so many times the case is made that Dems do nothing?

The other case made so often is Dems are bad, the Oligarchs have won, so GIVE UP. Nothing to discuss after the venting, because if the negative isn't translated into a positive plan of action, it becomes inaction.

Which leads right back to what you said, and also what MrScorpio said:

The oligarchs would rather you not organize...

They'd rather you not vote, if you do bother to vote they'd rather you'd slice off your own nose to spite your face by voting for their candidates, they'd rather you politely allow the police to violate your civil rights, they'd rather you hate unions, they'd rather the government not tax their excessive and hidden profits, they'd rather you have a low opinion of government, they'd rather you'd vegetate in an easy chair rather than fighting their system in the streets, they'd rather you'd die than get an affordable education and medical care, they'd rather you worship them as a role model, they'd rather you'd not listen to your own hearts and minds, they'd rather you think that you can go it alone...

The want you isolated and afraid. Afraid of losing your home, afraid for the future and safety of your family, that you'd not care how your neighbors are scraping by just as bad as you are, they'd rather you be so angry that you can't even spell straight.

They know that there more of us than there are of them, they know that they can't desert the country fast enough, they know that your vote counts today more than ever.

So vote and fight back against them and take back which belongs to us all... Our lives and our future.

to MrScorpio:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5633467

Possibly the best ever on what the Oligarchs want us to do - and NOT do. Myself, I won't do what they want me to do, since I don't have that luxury.

[elleng]

151. thanks

[Unknown Beatle]

98. "Fore!"

Jamie Dimon: Hey, Barry, watch as I hit this drive into that group of people.

Obama: Yeah! I'll see if I can hit them too. Watch this.

Dimon: We both hit a couple of them. Wow! They're cussing up a storm at us.

Obama: Yeah well, wouldn't you if you got hit too?

Dimon: Let's do it again. What can they do to us anyway.

Obama: They can't do anything as long as I'm in charge so let's keep on swinging away to see who gets more hits.

[bahrbearian]

198. Thats Funny, sadly

[MisterP]

101. Debs: under the bus since 1918!

but I see that George Creel's offspring are still with us today...
George Wallace also ran the first Black voter registration drive '48--but the Dems greenlit persecution in the South against the Progressives and even Strom Thurmond's segregationist campaign to stop America's lessers from having a voice

[1StrongBlackMan]

121. And losing elections since 1904. eom.

[hunter]

130. I think Obama was patching over the bad shit as best he could.

Things could be worse. It's only money, an abstraction.

The ideal fix would be to tax the uber-wealthy out of existence but they reject that and they control the machines.

[PatrickforO]

141. Martin Wolf, in his book Shifts and Shocks,

says that we'd have been better off using the $750 billion to give direct aid to the victims of subprime loans. $90,000 to every mortgage holder? That would have ended the recession and dramatically bettered many lives. Instead of that we padded the pockets of a bunch of criminals - socialized their risk and privatized their profits.

Without strong government regulatory influence, capitalism destroys all but the few at the top. All for the sake of 'a little more profit.'

[certainot]

143. should be a crime to evoke Eugene Debs for an election month hit job to convince dems not to vote

were you trying to get this out right before the news that individuals are going to held accountable?

i just heard that on hartmann this morning (or yesterday maybe...)

[L0oniX]

166. Bill Moyers does not work for me. Thanks for playing.

[certainot]

167. but you're using moyers

[L0oniX]

170. What you are trying to do is stop free speech.

[certainot]

182. oh, bullshit. while you link to the moyers vid you're just using it for

the normal "they're all the same", obama's as bad as the republicans so don't vote bullshit.

obama's done a lot with a total obstruction, even treasonous, strategy that they pledged to support the day he was inaugurated.

anyone who doesn't vote sucks. worse than that, they might as well be voting for republicans and global warming.

[L0oniX]

227. ...because republicans are the only ones who fuck us over. Enjoy your delusion.

[certainot]

235. i'm well aware of what the corporate wing and blue dogs and liebermans are doing

it just sounds like another attempt to suppress the vote and raise obama's negatives in time for the election.

especially considering the RW radio's free speech free ride from the left, expecting obama to march into the white billionaires house and throw a bunch of entrenched billionaires and their servants in jail in a year or two seems delusional.

[L0oniX]

289. If the truth suppresses the vote then that's just too bad. Do lies suppress or swing the vote? Yep!

...and

RW radio's free speech free ride from the left

well maybe you haven't heard about Rush loosing a lot of sponsors because of people on Facebook (flush Rush) and other groups ...and individuals so no there isn't a free ride from the left. Is there a free ride for Hillary from the centrists? Oh now the hyperbole --->

expecting obama to march into the white billionaires house and throw a bunch of entrenched billionaires and their servants in jail in a year or two seems delusional

Yea right ...and it is delusional to expect equal rule of law? So it's the United States of Anarchy now?

[certainot]

295. the rush actions are a great start, but it's the only thing the last 25 years

and it's not just limbaugh and his bigotry that problematic- he's point man for a nationally and locally coordinated PSYOPS

So it's the United States of Anarchy now?

apparently it's a plutocracy, not a democracy- that free ride republican radio's been getting has worked very well for them.

[INdemo]

287. Question

Is DU for liberals anymore? Or does one have to be center or be leaning to the right to be welcome here?
There seems to be an awful lot of members here that think a politician cannot be elected unless they are center or even right leaning.
The big difference between Obama and Hillary is that Obama can give one hell of a convincing speech and then after elected he shows his corporatist favoritism. For example how many damn Republicans did he appoint to his cabinet? And did he really do much for the consumer "vs" the banks with the mortgage crisis? Oh he threw them a few crumbs but not enough to piss off the banks.
Hillary is not as sharp as Obama and her speeches would be just another leftist sounding speech but for Hillary its a matter of her thirst for power.She would be the corporates dream candidate.
To say that Bernie Sanders could win or Elizabeth Warren could win would be shot down here on DU with those believing that ...a Democrat must be right leaning in order to win...
So just maybe liberals don't belong here because anytime a liberal expresses his or her views that person is shot down and reminded that "liberals" cant win.
After all President Obama convinced us to vote for him in two elections..and on both occasions when it came down to keeping his campaign promises to the middle class, he kept handing out favors to the banks and Wall Street and consumers lost and not one banker went to jail.
While Obama claimed to have a grassroots campaign he took billions from the corporate world.

[L0oniX]

290. IMO liberals and progressives embarrass the centrists so they lash out. They know they...

are selling out to the money (MIC, banksters and corporate interests) to win ...truth, principal and conscience be damned. It's a dance with the devil IMO. We get to zombie vote for Dems because TPTB have made it look like it will be worse if we don't vote and the repukes win. Looks to me like the party wins and the people loose less or more but loose all the same. They haven't got the guts to be an FDR.

[treestar]

201. Eugene Debs didn't win either

and didn't build a coalition of voters that got him into power, or people of his party. He sat on the sidelines and criticized. I see he is being attributed with the foolish idea that it's better to be powerless than to work with others who don't agree with you.

[SammyWinstonJack]

152. Well we had to 'look forward' because McCain/Rmoney..........or something like that.

Neither would have prosecuted any bankster(s), either.

[ucrdem]

174. 2009 called and wants its conspiracy theory back. nt

[blkmusclmachine]

176. Sadly, inaction on bankster reform came from the top, the White House. Someone got paid back by

Obama's phony "looking forward" stunts.

[frazzled]

177. Whenever "They" is invoked

You know you're in for some real fine conspiracy theory caca. But since reality can never break through to the true conspiracist, we just hum and walk away.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[ReRe]

180. K&R

Eugene V. Debs, William K. Black, Bill Moyers.... all great Americans. For years, I have wanted to stop everything in my life and just study Eugene V. Debs. Yes, LOoniX, I agree that the deck is stacked for it all to be repeated. It may be our future from here on out until this country totally collapses upon itself.

[slipslidingaway]

185. "...The problem definitely comes from the top ..." ...

exactly, policy is set from the top, one just needs to watch and listen with an open mind to see what the course will be.

There were many examples right from the beginning. Obama and his financial advisors saying 'who could have known?' Were they so blind as to the problems that had been mounting for years? When he appointed Geithner there was the 'Geithner bump' in the stock market.

IMO too many people are ready to cheer, on both sides, for anything because their party won. Debating the issue takes a back seat when one's party gains control and many fall right into line.

Remember Obama's campaign ad called 'Billy' and then soon after Tauzin was invited to the WH by Obama and he made a deal not to negotiate drug prices with the pharmaceutical industry. So much for the speech two months earlier when he said 'that is not who we are...' Great speech, clap, clap, clap but words do not necessarily translate to actions.

Watch the second segment on 60 minutes last night and the price of cancer drugs, great deal for the pharmaceutical companies. Thanks Obama for taking the issue of negotiating drug prices off the radar, even though it was a printed campaign promise and made for a great speech.

http://www.cbs.com/shows/60_minutes/

Years ago when Obama was first running my daughter was entering med school, seven years later she is now in practice and guess who is bringing in lunch to their office most days of the week ... the drug companies.

So may clues on a variety of issues, but we need to listen.

[littlemissmartypants]

204. Drug lunches predate President Obama. nt

[slipslidingaway]

285. No disagreement, nothing changed under Obama, but policy is still set from the top. n/t

[littlemissmartypants]

288. Agreed. The top down approach, irksome for me.

A bottom up approach with input from available and willing members, attempting to be egalitarian is what I prefer.

Thanks for your reply.

Love, Peace and the Righteous Fight.
~ littlemissmartypants 🙇

[slipslidingaway]

291. Top down has the financial backing ...

so that is what we'll have, for now.

[pa28]

186. Shortly after the '08 election the score became clear.

His objective was to shore up the status quo, protect fortunes at the expense of ordinary Americans if necessary and make sure the right people stayed out of jail.

Obama really should get a Patek Philippe watch or something from JP Morgan and a nice plaque identifying him as employee of the century.

[BuelahWitch]

239. He'll likely get a prime spot at the Carlyle Group or Goldman-Sachs for his efforts n/t

[treestar]

202. It's been shown on the board many times that people have been prosecuted

Or shown that the laws were repealed, so there was no crime.

This one is a big fail. So was Eugene Debs, who never won anything.

[littlemissmartypants]

207. This is why I suspect that his community organizing penchant is

Easily exploited. He has organized an inner circle, no doubt on the advice of self serving, narcissist values leaning, yes men, types. The reward is: look what I have done to get my inner circle representative of the real world of politics, but not the real world of our society.

Am I making any sense?
Or is it nap time.

He's done the best he could with what he had to work with and that includes the masses.
But he never really belonged to us.

Love, Peace and the Righteous Fight!
~ littlemissmartypants 🙅

[INdemo]

210. Hillary too would be financed by by bankers and the corporate world

Still think she is a Democrat? Millionaires and Billionaires are lined up waiting for her to announce

[L0oniX]

229. Party names don't have much meaning anymore. Liberal or conservative with a description...

such as bat shit crazy or truthful or corrupt or corporate or etc. Party names have not changed but the core of its members has.

[INdemo]

237. I agree. I am one of those Democrats who is not ashamed to

be called a liberal and don't think "liberal" is a dirty word. So no chance that I would ever win a political office.
Even on our local county council.

[YoungDemCA]

226. BREAKING NEWS: The Democratic Party is not the Socialist Party

DEVELOPING...

[L0oniX]

228. BREAKING NEWS: NOTICE MY POST CAUSE I USE CAPS.

[BuelahWitch]

241. So if someone thinks that people should be held accountable for

the near collapse of world markets they're "socialists"? Really reaching there, kid.

[L0oniX]

292. That's not a reach, that's a pole vault to a whole other level.

[Octafish]

256. Socialism for the Oh-So-Social.

How many banksters went to jail?

How many trillions are missing?

[Capt. Obvious]

280. BREAKING NEWS: I HAVE CAPS LOCK TOO

AND THAT'S THE SHITTIEST RESPONSE TO THE OP. MORE SHITTY THAT THE SO YOU'D RATHER MCCAIN/PALIN POSTS.