PDA

View Full Version : Mega TEA Party



Mega
09-12-09, 06:26 PM
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html

Oh My
Mike

metalman
09-12-09, 06:34 PM
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html

Oh My
Mike

mega,

the usa right wing is easily well organized & exploited by the oligarchs. they enlist the right to defend the banks' and insurance companies' right to rape them.

'i demand the right to be raped by insurance companies! you cannot take away that right! if you try you are a socialist! or hitler! or something!'

see, mega, that is why we're fucked.

Mega
09-12-09, 06:54 PM
Your WRONG

Its not about the Healthcare, its about never ending war, MEGA Taxes, TOO Big to fail.....this is an uprising!
Mike

metalman
09-12-09, 06:59 PM
Your WRONG

Its not about the Healthcare, its about never ending war, MEGA Taxes, TOO Big to fail.....this is an uprising!
Mike

send the debt serfs off to war.

fight for the right to drive a 4x4.

ever enter the word 'oil' into google images?

the 9th image links to what? (http://images.google.com/images?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hl=en&source=hp&q=oil&gbv=2&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g10)

are u paying attention?

WDCRob
09-12-09, 07:08 PM
There were about 60,000 to 70,000 here today, according to police estimates.

Two million filled the entire length and width of the Mall and shut down the city last January. This was nowhere near that scale.

IMO the teabaggers are much ado about nothing. I could get 60,000 to march on DC in favor of eliminating the designated hitter in the American League if I had one of the major news networks pimping my cause with free advertising 24/7.

Serge_Tomiko
09-12-09, 07:18 PM
mega,

the usa right wing is easily well organized & exploited by the oligarchs. they enlist the right to defend the banks' and insurance companies' right to rape them.

'i demand the right to be raped by insurance companies! you cannot take away that right! if you try you are a socialist! or hitler! or something!'

see, mega, that is why we're fucked.

i'm sorry, but you apparently do not watch American television or ever attended an American university.

Communist indoctrination is nearly sole purpose of all major propaganda enterprises of the nation.

The public rejection of government run healthcare is simply due to the obvious ineptitude of nearly all government enterprises. Perhaps, if we had a greater sense of civic duty in this nation, things would be different. But they are not.

Serge_Tomiko
09-12-09, 07:19 PM
There were about 60,000 to 70,000 here today, according to police estimates.

Two million filled the entire length and width of the Mall and shut down the city last January. This was nowhere near that scale.

IMO the teabaggers are much ado about nothing. I could get 60,000 to march on DC in favor of eliminating the designated hitter in the American League if I had one of the major news networks pimping my cause with free advertising 24/7.

Wait, so the right is NOT well organized?

Diarmuid
09-12-09, 07:28 PM
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html

Oh My
Mike

OMG one of those protestors had a sign up "Glen Beck for president" - I would say he at least, is one of the people MM alluded to protesting for his / her right to be raped - its hard not to agree with MM on his points. I am not sure these people are stupid, it is question of information access, what is one to do, how does one break the propoganda effect?, as Fred commented in a previous thread (I think heath care, dont have the link), even well informed readers here on Itulip can be subject to the left right paradigm, it is very depressing to say the least and augers little hope. :confused:

Ghent12
09-12-09, 08:25 PM
There were about 60,000 to 70,000 here today, according to police estimates.

Two million filled the entire length and width of the Mall and shut down the city last January. This was nowhere near that scale.

IMO the teabaggers are much ado about nothing. I could get 60,000 to march on DC in favor of eliminating the designated hitter in the American League if I had one of the major news networks pimping my cause with free advertising 24/7.
I think you are confusing the causes and the effects. It's much more blended together than "FOX promotes tea parties, therefore tea parties are big events." In my opinion, FOX has a rather ingenious business model. They have some uncanny sense of upcoming popular trends, and feed into it. They very quickly overtook CNN as the dominant 24/7 "News" network because of their "personality" model. CNN tried to follow, with Anderson Cooper et al, but they also decreased the quality of their Headline News and meat-and-potatoes daily broadcast with random bullshit segments. Combine FOX's trend-finding ability with the fact that they have not forgotten the most basic principles of mass media--sex and violence sell--and you get a rock star of a cable network. That's just my opinion, but the proof is in the pudding. They saw tea parties as being one of the next big news things, and each has been mutually feeding into each other.

The "teabaggers" [deleted by admin for disrespectful language] (and you are despicable for using that term) are not much ado about nothing. You could not get 60,000 to march in DC and thousands more around the country to assemble on the same day for any other cause at the moment. That is, of course, unless you try to take credit for assembling people for the Independence Day celebrations :rolleyes:

Hopefully something good will come of it, and it will not serve to simply split the opposition and ensure never-ending government growth.

Starving Steve
09-12-09, 08:54 PM
Your WRONG

Its not about the Healthcare, its about never ending war, MEGA Taxes, TOO Big to fail.....this is an uprising!
Mike

When was there a time when the rednecks in the South and the haters in the Heartland were not ready to get out their guns and revolt?

Anything sets them off, any hint of change.... And who in the h. cares? Let them secede and good riddance to all of them! Let them take their FOX News TV and their Michael Savage with them too.:rolleyes:

doom&gloom
09-12-09, 09:10 PM
yeah, gotta brain-wash them ALL with lefty spin from Media Matters, right?
why should we expect any kind of sound governance -- let's just spend our
way into oblivian.

ThePythonicCow
09-12-09, 09:21 PM
mega,

the usa right wing ... that is why we're f*cked.

Are you suggesting the usa left wing is any less of a problem? If so, I respectfully disagree.

LargoWinch
09-12-09, 09:30 PM
Are you suggesting the usa left wing is any less of a problem? If so, I respectfully disagree.

TPC, I think MM is referring to the big "O", or bloodsuckers as Medved would have it.

bcassill
09-12-09, 09:44 PM
Oh, my God...

Where were these morons when "W" was doubling the national debt? Oh, yeah. That was different. He was "protecting" America by invading a country halfway around the world. Now that tax revenues have collapsed and we're borrowing and printing like crazy...well, finally they take notice. How far behind the curve can you get?

If they want true pay-as-you-go government, maybe we need to cut out some of the entitlements and programs we've become accustomed to:

1. Eliminate Social Security and Medicare except for the most economically needy.
2. Eliminate WIC, unemployment insurance, and the like
3. Cut the size of the military in half: since when was it our job to be the world's policeman?

At the same time raise taxes back up to the rates we had during the Reagan years. The bottom end of the income spectrum have received much of the benefit of the tax cuts. The top end can probably afford to kick a little extra in too.

Does this sound cold? Maybe it is, but it will never happen. All I know is that when some of these people eventually lose their health insurance through job loss or go bankrupt because of a major illness, they'll likely understand the other side of the argument.

Instead, they protest and draw little mustaches on the president's picture. He's been in office for less than a year. Whether you like or dislike the guy, he doesn't deserve that. What everyone should be thankful for is that we at least got a conversation started about a very difficult topic that will require some hard choices one way or the other. No, forget that. It's easier to draw mustaches than to come to the table with an original idea.

Glenn Beck for president? Give me a break.

WDCRob
09-12-09, 09:58 PM
Exactly B Cass.

If this was anything other than some combination of partisan hackery, racism and a general desire to continue the make-believe they've lived for the past decade these same ass-clowns running around DC with their Glen Beck blow up dolls would have found plenty of reason to object before January 2009.

They didn't. They don't deserve to be taken seriously now.

Slimprofits
09-12-09, 10:16 PM
Your WRONG

Its not about the Healthcare, its about never ending war, MEGA Taxes, TOO Big to fail.....this is an uprising!
Mike

I'd be shocked if the group in D.C. was accurately polled and found to be against wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

WDCRob
09-12-09, 10:50 PM
Playing devil's advocate to my own ranting...

This struck me as a reasonably even-handed eye-witness account (http://www.worldofwallstreet.us/2009/09/offtopic-tens-of-thousands-mad-as-hell-at-dc-tea-party.html?cid=6a00d8341cba0553ef0120a568731a970b) of the protest today from someone who was generally sympathetic.

Diarmuid
09-12-09, 11:09 PM
yeah, gotta brain-wash them ALL with lefty spin from Media Matters, right?
why should we expect any kind of sound governance -- let's just spend our
way into oblivian.

not sure what media matters is, but if it the left equivalent of Beck then no. For my part I am apoliticial or more accurately my politics are, I refuse to part take in so called "democratic" politics by exercising a vote which is meaningless and hence give credence and legitimacy to system which has none, I see no substantive difference between the policies of Obama or Bush, the same can be said in the UK between the centre right and centre left and many other countries beside, Westerrn democracies now seem to be a fusion of political, media and corporate interests with a marginal place for the interests of the population in general, if I were to to offer support or a vote it would be for a candidate whom I believe has integrity, rather then necessiarly agreeing with their political positions, in US terms I would vote for Paul or Kucinich, while not necessarily agreeing with their political points of view, they have a voting record with consistency and hence I deduce integrity, but in a system which marginalises, or only uses those parties of integrity when convenient and to further monied interests, only to discard them later , whats the point, that was the question I posed how do we get past the proganda to allow us see the game for what it is when it is being played either by the right or the left, and usually at our expense. That was also why I mentioned Beck earlier, he is a symptom of the systems bankruptcy, as is O'Reilly, Media Matters (I suppose), Washington Post, ad nausem.

metalman
09-12-09, 11:43 PM
not sure what media matters is, but if it the left equivalent of Beck then no. For my part I am apoliticial or more accurately my politics are, I refuse to part take in so called "democratic" politics by exercising a vote which is meaningless and hence give credence and legitimacy to system which has none, I see no substantive difference between the policies of Obama or Bush, the same can be said in the UK between the centre right and centre left and many other countries beside, Westerrn democracies now seem to be a fusion of political, media and corporate interests with a marginal place for the interests of the population in general, if I were to to offer support or a vote it would be for a candidate whom I believe has integrity, rather then necessiarly agreeing with their political positions, in US terms I would vote for Paul or Kucinich, while not necessarily agreeing with their political points of view, they have a voting record with consistency and hence I deduce integrity, but in a system which marginalises, or only uses those parties of integrity when convenient and to further monied interests, only to discard them later , whats the point, that was the question I posed how do we get past the proganda to allow us see the game for what it is when it is being played either by the right or the left, and usually at our expense. That was also why I mentioned Beck earlier, he is a symptom of the systems bankruptcy, as is O'Reilly, Media Matters (I suppose), Washington Post, ad nausem.

one of my favorite itulip posts of all time... from sept 2007 ...
(http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1952)


http://www.itulip.com/forums/../images/firecandidates.jpg


During the first six months of 2007 presidential candidates raised more than $277 million. The left and right wing Anti-FIRE Economy
candidates have raised a total of $4 million, with Ron Paul raising $3 million to Kucinich's $1 million. The Anti-FIRE Economy
candidates have together raised 1.5% of the total for all bought and paid for FIRE Economy candidates.

cjppjc
09-12-09, 11:43 PM
The success Fox News has enjoyed should not be downplayed. There is no doubt they reach and speak for a large percentage of the American population. Like them or not, many people do believe their slogan "Fair and Balanced." I know at least one person who thinks what he watches on Fox is just that.

As to the people in Washington today, good for them. Maybe something will come from all this disdain for big government.

metalman
09-12-09, 11:47 PM
Maybe something will come from all this disdain for big government.

yep same as came from it since 1980... more gov't...

http://blogs.usask.ca/the_bolt/images/usa_debt_versus_gdp.gif

professing a disdain for big government... very effective cover for growing the gov't for more than 20 yrs.

ThePythonicCow
09-12-09, 11:54 PM
Playing devil's advocate to my own ranting...

This struck me as a reasonably even-handed eye-witness account (http://www.worldofwallstreet.us/2009/09/offtopic-tens-of-thousands-mad-as-hell-at-dc-tea-party.html?cid=6a00d8341cba0553ef0120a568731a970b) of the protest today from someone who was generally sympathetic.
That strikes me as a good report, yes. Thanks.

Starving Steve
09-13-09, 12:08 AM
I'd be shocked if the group in D.C. was accurately polled and found to be against wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Doesn't it seem like a logical strategy that when you go to war, you go to war to win, and win big? So, how did NATO including America get side-tracked into schemes of nation-building---- schemes which might make sense in Europe but make little or no sense at all in the Middle East?

The Middle East is a rough neighbourhood. Tough bastards are respected in a rough neighbourhood---- certainly not neighbourhood-builders, not compromisers, not appeasers, and not humanitarians. So, NATO has to win by cutting-out cancers from the Middle East, and this can be done.

So why hasn't the cancer in Tehran been cut-out? That surgery would take is one day of missiles launched from ships, or maybe two days, at most. Hit the government hard and effectively. Give them a message they will never forget. If the govn't moves into mosques, then hit the mosques too. SIMPLE!

Similarly, why hasn't the cancer of the Taliban and Al Qaide in Afganistan been cut-out? Why not raid Taliban and Al Qaide strongholds and trails from the safety of ships at sea? Why not take-out the opium poppy fields that the Taliban uses to finance their war?

The winner in the Middle East doesn't have to be popular or liked. But the winner must be feared and definitely respected. The winner determines the peace, and that is the peace. The winner also writes the history of the war, not the enemy. Questions about the morality of the war will be answered by the victor.

BuckarooBanzai
09-13-09, 12:12 AM
Playing devil's advocate to my own ranting...

This struck me as a reasonably even-handed eye-witness account (http://www.worldofwallstreet.us/2009/09/offtopic-tens-of-thousands-mad-as-hell-at-dc-tea-party.html?cid=6a00d8341cba0553ef0120a568731a970b) of the protest today from someone who was generally sympathetic.

I have been to a few "tea parties" myself in the last few months and I generally agree with Monty's assessment. I went to a tax day tea party that was more concerned with overtaxation and government spending; the more recent tea party I attended was more anti-Obamacare and anti-big-government. I do think that more mainstream republicans are starting to get more represented in the movement, for better or worse; the April 15 tea party was a little more non-partisan in nature. Obama is polarizing the country even worse than Bush did-- never thought that that was even possible, but there you go.

Anybody who thinks that the tea party movement is populated by "right wing nutjobs" is delusional and has been duped by the liberal media... The vast majority of these people are middle-aged and middle-of-the-road people who have snapped out of their trance and are trying to unplug themselves from the Matrix.

Background: I am a former Clinton Democrat, and former regular NPR listener/NYTimes reader. I now consider myself a Ron Paul republican, or maybe more precisely, a conservative libertarian. I firmly believe that we are ruled by a one-party system (RepubliCrats or DemoPublicans, call them what you will) that happens to have two distinct wings. In the last 5 years I have also have come to realize how monumentally biased and laughably unprofessional the mainstream media is. Anything beyond basic human interest stories is largely propaganda.

cjppjc
09-13-09, 12:16 AM
yep same as came from it since 1980... more gov't...

http://blogs.usask.ca/the_bolt/images/usa_debt_versus_gdp.gif

professing a disdain for big government... very effective cover for growing the gov't for more than 20 yrs.


I take back my idea for your appelation, Chief Cynic is fine.:)

BuckarooBanzai
09-13-09, 12:19 AM
i'm sorry, but you apparently do not watch American television or ever attended an American university.

Communist indoctrination is nearly sole purpose of all major propaganda enterprises of the nation.

The public rejection of government run healthcare is simply due to the obvious ineptitude of nearly all government enterprises. Perhaps, if we had a greater sense of civic duty in this nation, things would be different. But they are not.

I have a number of Russian friends who grew up in the Soviet Union and emigrated to the US in the early 1990s. They are all horrified at how much like the Soviet Union this country has become in the last 15 years-- the media propaganda, the overwhelming size and scope of the Federal government, the "political correctness" that has infiltrated our educational system at all levels, the Patriot Act, etc. etc.

doom&gloom
09-13-09, 12:21 AM
not sure what media matters is, but if it the left equivalent of Beck then no. For my part I am apoliticial ...


i just get tired of the political sniping when both sides share a huge part of the
blame for where we are. it actually warms my heart to see ANYONE stand up to
more government spending ANYWHERE. to malign them issheerly stupid if you
have any belief in itulip whatsoever.

BuckarooBanzai
09-13-09, 12:30 AM
mega,

the usa right wing is easily well organized & exploited by the oligarchs. they enlist the right to defend the banks' and insurance companies' right to rape them.

'i demand the right to be raped by insurance companies! you cannot take away that right! if you try you are a socialist! or hitler! or something!'

see, mega, that is why we're fucked.

Given a choice of "being raped" by either a giant bloated federal government, or by banks and insurance companies, frankly the choice is pretty clear. Government is always the worst choice-- it is unjust, stupid, expensive, incompetent, and brutal. And what's worse-- after they rape you, they are quite likely to murder you as well. Don't forget that 99.999999% of all murders committed in the 20th century were committed by governments against their own people.

Diarmuid
09-13-09, 12:39 AM
i just get tired of the political sniping when both sides share a huge part of the
blame for where we are. it actually warms my heart to see ANYONE stand up to
more government spending ANYWHERE. to malign them issheerly stupid if you
have any belief in itulip whatsoever.

D&G you misunderstand me I think, it was not my intention to malign anyone or disparage people for protesting, just to pose a question as to how to get beyond the issue of propoganada which we are ALL subject to, Itulip and other alternative media sources seems like a small begining to me, but to do a MetalMan, this comes to mind.

http://www.amam-magazine.com/futility1.jpg

metalman
09-13-09, 12:41 AM
Given a choice of "being raped" by either a giant bloated federal government, or by banks and insurance companies, frankly the choice is pretty clear. Government is always the worst choice-- it is unjust, stupid, expensive, incompetent, and brutal. And what's worse-- after they rape you, they are quite likely to murder you as well. Don't forget that 99.999999% of all murders committed in the 20th century were committed by governments against their own people.

that's right. leave it to unregulated financial institutions. free market fundamentalists are slow learners with short memories.

<object height="344" width="425">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fRu1nIAi9uc&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425"></object>

MulaMan
09-13-09, 01:03 AM
Yes the stupidity index was out in full force.

Ron Paul tea party on Nov 5th 2007 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKZmIzEMUN8

http://mysite.verizon.net/nathanielyao/index.html

The entire tea party thing was started by Ron Paul's people during the election and got ZERO press from the media - Ron Paul had grass roots tea parties across the nation and handed out copies of the constitution as a true libertarian would and the concept was completly different then what the right wing is doing today.

Attend one of these events and count the number of evangelical church buses in the parking lot...then put on your thinking cap. LOL.

The idea was hijacked by the right wing nut-cases and spun into a paid-for infomercial. I'll bet they keep trying it right through the next election.

Ron Paul raised millions and also got thousands of people out with ZERO corporate media coverage and no paid for right wing evangelicals bused in.

metalman
09-13-09, 01:08 AM
Yes the stupidity index was out in full force.

It is the neocon republican's attempt at moveon.org, the entire tea party thing was started by Ron Paul's people during the election and got ZERO press from the media - Ron Paul had grass roots tea parties across the nation and handed out copies of the constitution as a true libertarian would.

It was then hijacked by the right wing nut-cases as a good idea and is now a paid-for infomercial. I'll bet they keep trying it right through the next election.

bingo! tea party = right wing moveon.org.

MulaMan
09-13-09, 01:20 AM
I have a number of Russian friends who grew up in the Soviet Union and emigrated to the US in the early 1990s. They are all horrified at how much like the Soviet Union this country has become in the last 15 years-- the media propaganda, the overwhelming size and scope of the Federal government, the "political correctness" that has infiltrated our educational system at all levels, the Patriot Act, etc. etc.

This is VERY true. My parents escaped the U.S.S.R and I grew up with those lessons and I also feel the USA is more like the U.S.S.A each day and American's just don't get it - especially those that think they are "republican" and somehow voting for "conservative" or "free market" ideas..

...it is very hard to grasp how blind and ignorant people can be. Sad actually.

If you are republican and American then the only person you should be voting for is Ron Paul and if you are democrate then vote for Kucinich or someone like that.

ThePythonicCow
09-13-09, 01:28 AM
This is VERY true. My parents escaped the U.S.S.R and I grew up with those lessons and I also feel the USA is more like the U.S.S.A each day and American's just don't get it - especially those that think they are "republican" and somehow voting for "conservative" or "free market" ideas..

...it is very hard to grasp how blind and ignorant people can be. Sad actually.

If you are republican and American then the only person you should be voting for is Ron Paul and if you are democrate then vote for Kucinich or someone like that.
Right on. .

Mn_Mark
09-13-09, 01:35 AM
that's right. leave it to unregulated financial institutions. free market fundamentalists are slow learners with short memories.

<OBJECT height=344 width=425>
&nbsp
&nbsp
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fRu1nIAi9uc&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425"></OBJECT>


Yes, do leave it to unregulated financial institutions, if you're going to set up a strawman argument. (No one is arguing for no regulation.) But at least with an unregulated financial institution I have the choice of not participating, not buying their product. I can do my due diligence. With the government, there is no escape, no option not to pay for it when they decide to bail out the "regulated financial institutions".

I would take a completely unregulated free market 1,000 times over before I'd take a government-run market.

And please note the irony of suggesting that the massive bailouts of the financial institutions of the last year are somehow the fault of the free market! They are 100% the fault of a government which encouraged their recklessness by eliminating moral hazard (a la Fannie and Freddie) and then stepped in with taxpayer money when they predictably failed. The failure of the last years is not a failure of capitalism, it is the failure of a govenment-guaranteed, private-gains-public-losses system. That's not capitalism!

doom&gloom
09-13-09, 02:23 AM
gotta start somewhere...

hayekvindicated
09-13-09, 03:45 AM
i'm sorry, but you apparently do not watch American television or ever attended an American university.

Communist indoctrination is nearly sole purpose of all major propaganda enterprises of the nation.

The public rejection of government run healthcare is simply due to the obvious ineptitude of nearly all government enterprises. Perhaps, if we had a greater sense of civic duty in this nation, things would be different. But they are not.

It is a fallacy to call it "communist indoctrination". It is actually new left Cultural Marxism - the purpose of which is not so much to undermine capitalism but to attack traditional institutions - the family, the majority (hence the endless hectoring on "racism") etc etc.

I have friends who have suffered a LOT in academia. I never understood why they ever went there. I'd never waste one moment of my time in an American or British university. Other than some research in natural sciences, these institutions produce nothing and are a massive financial burden on society and destructive to the country.

hayekvindicated
09-13-09, 04:11 AM
Free market fundamentalists caused this crisis?

Consider the following:

(1)The price of money was controlled by the government and was kept too low for political reasons over long periods of time (this is not controvertible - we all acknowledge the role of easy money in the dotcom and housing bubbles). This is also the iTulip thesis.

(2) the financial institutions at the heart of the crisis were all regulated institutions. If lack of regulation was the problem, then the largest failures would have occured in the unregulated hedge fund world, NOT in the regulated banking world. Actually, the most leveraged institutions were the BANKS! I know of no hedge fund that is leveraged at 85:1 as Deutsche Bank is. So how is more regulation going to solve the problem exactly?

Actually, to all those who want more regulation, have you actually seen the volume of regulation that is currently on the books already? I happen to be a lawyer and am familiar with financial regulation. The total volume of regulation in Britain, for example, has grown exponentially within the last decade. The volume of regulation is now so large that most of the time, in my experience, even the regulators do not know what the regulations are. AND, the result is that this massively increases the cost of compliance with regulations as firms have to hire expensive lawyers to advise them on what they mean. This also has an anti-competitive effect as smaller institutions find the costs of compliance too high relative to their size. Hence, the financial oligopoly reinforces itself. This is what has concentrated power, money and influence in so few hands.

(3) the government through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, completely distorted the mortgage market - this is an entire subject in itself. Considering the pivotal role these institutions played in the current debacle, I find it amazing that there are still people screaming that the "free market failed". First, there never was a "free market". Fannie and Freddie were massive exercises in social engineering to assuage the consciences of liberals that the lower rates of home ownership among racial minorities (except Asians) could be remedied through these agencies. Hence, lending standards inevitably got relaxed and a disaster ensued. Actually, I am fairly certain that not many on this forum know how large a risk banks started to run in the 1990s for not approving a proportionally equal number of morgage applications for black and hispanic applicants as white applicants. The threat of class action suits was tremendous and was re-inforced by various members of the Clinton Administration. (http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/2189196/clinton-democrats-are-to-blame-for-the-credit-crunch.thtml)




For generations, America’s bankers have been firmly refusing credit to those they judged unworthy of it. Yet the mountain of toxic subprime debt that has threatened to overwhelm the entire financial system, and the astonishing number of mortgage foreclosures across the United States, is proof that, at some point in the relatively recent past, bankers radically altered their behaviour and began to shower mortgages on borrowers who had no realistic prospect of keeping up their repayments. What could possibly have induced them to act so recklessly, and so out of character? The facile answer to that question is greed, the lure of a fast and easy buck. The correct answer is that banks were bullied, cajoled and coerced into lowering their lending standards by politicians in pursuit of an ideological agenda.


Let’s wind back to 1993 and Roberta Achtenberg’s arrival on the Washington political scene. Achtenberg had made her name in San Francisco as a civil rights lawyer and activist, campaigning to keep open the city’s gay bathhouses, and (I promise I’m not making this up) pressing for an increase in the number of gay Scoutmasters. Bill Clinton offered her a job in his new administration, and Roberta Achtenberg became the first openly lesbian nominee ever to receive a Senate confirmation. She duly took up her post as Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).


The main thrust of the Clinton housing strategy was to increase home ownership among the poor, and particularly among blacks and Hispanics. White House aides, in familiar West Wing style, could parrot the many social advantages that would accrue: high levels of home ownership correlated with less violent crime, better school performance, a heightened sense of commun-ity. But standing in the way of the realisation of this dream were the conservative lending policies of the banks, which required such inconvenient and old-fashioned things as cash deposits and regular repayments — things the poor and minorities often could not provide. Clinton told the banks to be more creative.

Meanwhile, Ms Achtenberg, a member of the kickass school of public administration, was busy setting up a network of enforcement offices across the country, manned by attorneys and investigators, and primed to spearhead an assault on the mortgage banks, bringing suits against any suspected of practising unlawful discrimination, whether on the basis of race, gender or disability. Achtenberg believed racism was a big factor in keeping minorities from enjoying the same level of home ownership as whites. She doubted if much could be done to change people’s attitudes on racial matters, but she was confident she, in cahoots with Attorney General Janet Reno, could use the law to change the behaviour of banks.

However, when little or no overt or deliberate racial discrimination was discovered among the mortgage lenders, HUD’s investigators turned to trying to prove ‘disparate treatment’ of minority groups, a notion similar to that of unintentional ‘institutional racism’. If a bank refused loans to proportionally more black applicants than white ones, for instance, the onus would fall on it to prove it had good grounds for doing so or face settlement penalties running into millions of dollars.

A series of highly publicised cases were brought on this basis, starting in 1994. Eventually the investigators would turn somewhat desperately to ‘disparate impact’, a form of discrimination so abstract and rarefied as to be imperceptible to its supposed victims, and indeed often only discernible at all through the application of multivariate regression analysis to information stored on regulators’ databases. In fact, by 1995 Achtenberg was actually having to rein in her zealots, issuing a clarification that the use of the phrase ‘master bedroom’ in a property advertisement was, despite its clear patriarchal and slave-owning resonances, not actually an actionable offence under the anti-discrimination laws.(4) another myth doing the rounds is that this is a problem centric to "Anglo Saxon" capitalism. But note that Deutsche Bank which is regulated in Germany is more leveraged than any US or British bank! And not only that, The European banks have not even begun to recognise their losses.

When will the left face up to its role in the crisis? Im no defender of Republicans - I actually find them indistinguishable from the Democrats. Actually if Bush had a spine, he would have clamped down on this insanity. He actually made it worse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8). Also see here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPqqZh45AJ8).

The insanity of the public debate on the issues clearly indicates that none of the participants who were responsible in causing this crisis will actually acknowledge their role or be brought to book. It is a heck of a lot easier looking for scapegoats. "greedy bankers"???? Since when were bankers known for being altruistic angels? Any system that runs on moral condemnation of actions that were encouraged by the government is decrepit and due for a collapse.

The ideal "solution" would be for the government to get completely out of the housing market. Rather than making housing affordable, government actions had the opposite effect - and they are now predicated towards sustaining higher prices. The irony of ironies here are too many to count.

In a just world, the real perpetrators of this debacle would be brought to book. That's not going to happen in the world that we live in.

Master Shake
09-13-09, 05:38 AM
Free market fundamentalists caused this crisis?

Consider the following:

(1)The price of money was controlled by the government and was kept too low for political reasons over long periods of time (this is not controvertible - we all acknowledge the role of easy money in the dotcom and housing bubbles). This is also the iTulip thesis.

(2) the financial institutions at the heart of the crisis were all regulated institutions. If lack of regulation was the problem, then the largest failures would have occured in the unregulated hedge fund world, NOT in the regulated banking world. Actually, the most leveraged institutions were the BANKS! I know of no hedge fund that is leveraged at 85:1 as Deutsche Bank is. So how is more regulation going to solve the problem exactly?

Actually, to all those who want more regulation, have you actually seen the volume of regulation that is currently on the books already? I happen to be a lawyer and am familiar with financial regulation. The total volume of regulation in Britain, for example, has grown exponentially within the last decade. The volume of regulation is now so large that most of the time, in my experience, even the regulators do not know what the regulations are. AND, the result is that this massively increases the cost of compliance with regulations as firms have to hire expensive lawyers to advise them on what they mean. This also has an anti-competitive effect as smaller institutions find the costs of compliance too high relative to their size. Hence, the financial oligopoly reinforces itself. This is what has concentrated power, money and influence in so few hands.

(3) the government through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, completely distorted the mortgage market - this is an entire subject in itself. Considering the pivotal role these institutions played in the current debacle, I find it amazing that there are still people screaming that the "free market failed". First, there never was a "free market". Fannie and Freddie were massive exercises in social engineering to assuage the consciences of liberals that the lower rates of home ownership among racial minorities (except Asians) could be remedied through these agencies. Hence, lending standards inevitably got relaxed and a disaster ensued. Actually, I am fairly certain that not many on this forum know how large a risk banks started to run in the 1990s for not approving a proportionally equal number of morgage applications for black and hispanic applicants as white applicants. The threat of class action suits was tremendous and was re-inforced by various members of the Clinton Administration. (http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/features/2189196/clinton-democrats-are-to-blame-for-the-credit-crunch.thtml)

(4) another myth doing the rounds is that this is a problem centric to "Anglo Saxon" capitalism. But note that Deutsche Bank which is regulated in Germany is more leveraged than any US or British bank! And not only that, The European banks have not even begun to recognise their losses.

When will the left face up to its role in the crisis? Im no defender of Republicans - I actually find them indistinguishable from the Democrats. Actually if Bush had a spine, he would have clamped down on this insanity. He actually made it worse (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8). Also see here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPqqZh45AJ8).

The insanity of the public debate on the issues clearly indicates that none of the participants who were responsible in causing this crisis will actually acknowledge their role or be brought to book. It is a heck of a lot easier looking for scapegoats. "greedy bankers"???? Since when were bankers known for being altruistic angels? Any system that runs on moral condemnation of actions that were encouraged by the government is decrepit and due for a collapse.

The ideal "solution" would be for the government to get completely out of the housing market. Rather than making housing affordable, government actions had the opposite effect - and they are now predicated towards sustaining higher prices. The irony of ironies here are too many to count.

In a just world, the real perpetrators of this debacle would be brought to book. That's not going to happen in the world that we live in.

http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w262/gator_momma/Applause.gif

Master Shake
09-13-09, 05:43 AM
mega,

the usa right wing is easily well organized & exploited by the oligarchs. they enlist the right to defend the banks' and insurance companies' right to rape them.

'i demand the right to be raped by insurance companies! you cannot take away that right! if you try you are a socialist! or hitler! or something!'

see, mega, that is why we're fucked.

Right, MM. Those stupid phucking rednecks don't know dick. Everyone knows how efficient the government is at running things. How dare those knuckle-dragging morons to suggest otherwise.

hayekvindicated
09-13-09, 06:16 AM
Thanks!

There's more.

Speaking of "Greedy Bankers", what about this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Raines)? Why isn't the left baying for his blood? Oh because he may have committed fraud, cooked the books and awarded himself a massive compensation (despite running the agency into the ground) - but hey, he was one of the "good guys" (i.e. the Left) and pushed the "politically correct agenda". The media and the Left have only one interest: finding the right kind of scapegoats.

Here are some more inconvenient facts. (http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/john-steele-gordon-on-the-financial-mess-greed-stupidity-delusion-and-some-more-greed/)


But at the heart of the problem is Congress and its deeply corrupt relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congress was equally at the heart of the savings and loan disaster 20 years ago and, obviously, learned nothing from it. (For a history of what led to the savings and loan collapse, see here (http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1991/1/1991_1_49.shtml).)


Fannie and Freddie, two of the largest publicly traded financial institutions on earth, are headquartered in Washington, D.C., where the next-largest non-governmental financial institution is probably a local credit union. Big financial companies are headquartered in New York and other cities where capitalism is practiced. That should tell you a lot about Freddie and Fannie: they were political to their fingertips.


Being “government sponsored entities,” they were able to borrow at lower interest rates than other profit-seeking companies, had less regulation, had lower capital requirements, and had an “implied” guarantee on their huge debts. This was supposed to translate into more money available for mortgages, but was used instead to roll up big profits and, not so incidentally, big bonuses for their top management — which came not from the financial world but from the political one.

Franklin Raines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Raines), Fannie C.E.O. from 1999 to 2004, had been budget director in the Clinton White House. He cooked the books at Fannie to increase his compensation (more than $50 million). Jamie Gorelick (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Gorelick), vice C.E.O., was number two at the Clinton Justice Department before going to Fannie Mae. She made $26 million. Jim Johnson, a perennial Washington big-foot, was chairman from 1991 to 1998. He too, according to an official government report, cooked the books to increase his compensation and failed to publicly reveal how much he received.

The Wall Street Journal editorial page has been giving chapter and verse for years on why this was a disaster waiting to happen (Pulitzer Prize judges, please note). The Bush administration tried way back in 2003 (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B 63) to change the system. It got nowhere. Alan Greenspan, then the chairman of the Federal Reserve, frequently noted the danger of Fannie and Freddie’s weak capitalization. He was ignored. Congressman Mike Oxley, then chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, introduced a bill in 2005 to correct the situation. Lobbyists from Fannie and Freddie succeeded in gutting it to the point that Rep. Oxley pulled the bill.


Why were Fannie and Freddie so successful at maintaining the status quo? Check it out (http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html).


Senator Chris Dodd — formerly ranking member and now chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, with oversight over Freddie and Fannie — recently said (http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/commentary/hc-commentaryhubbard0914.artsep14,0,5673162.story) on Bloomberg Television: “I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years.”


Excuse me? Just where the hell were you, Senator? Oh, right. You were standing in line at the bank in order to deposit the political contributions Fannie and Freddie were lavishing upon you. At least they got their money’s worth — until the party ended and the American people got the bill.

Members of Congress — aided and abetted by their many waterbearers in the media — wonder why their collective approval rating is about on par with colon cancer’s. The reason is simple enough: Congress is the sick man of Washington; a textbook example of the truism that institutions tend to evolve in ways that benefit their elites, at the expense of the people they were created to serve.
Why aren't all these people in prison? Jeff Skilling is cooling his heels behind bars for having done a lot less damage!

WDCRob
09-13-09, 07:39 AM
Why aren't all these people in prison? Jeff Skilling is cooling his heels behind bars for having done a lot less damage!

Amen - it's obscene.

hayekvindicated
09-13-09, 10:02 AM
An old story from the 1950s from Nikita Kruschev's visit to America.

The discussion starts with the Russian wanting to enquire how America's political system works.

“In America, We have a two-party system," a Republican congressional staffer is supposed to have told a visiting group of Russian legislators.

"There is the stupid party. And there is the evil party. I am proud to be a member of the stupid party."

He added: "Periodically, the two parties get together and do something that is both stupid and evil. This is called—bipartisanship." :eek:

Master Shake
09-13-09, 10:27 AM
An old story from the 1950s from Nikita Kruschev's visit to America.

The discussion starts with the Russian wanting to enquire how America's political system works.

“In America, We have a two-party system," a Republican congressional staffer is supposed to have told a visiting group of Russian legislators.

"There is the stupid party. And there is the evil party. I am proud to be a member of the stupid party."

He added: "Periodically, the two parties get together and do something that is both stupid and evil. This is called—bipartisanship." :eek:

I believe it was the conservative columnist Sam Francis who bestowed the Stupid Party and Evil Party labels on the Pubs and Dems, respectively, sometime in the early 90's.

samgold
09-13-09, 11:14 AM
Great discussion here.

My humble opinion.

The TEA parties show that there is a lot of frustration among those like me who believe the "majority" will make enough noise to make the right things happen, and that there is a check and balance. It is not happening now. I personally dont want my taxes to keep going up to benefit all kinds of people who refuse to contribute.

Lately I have begun to realize that Democrats love to play with other peoples money (while making sure they themselves are covered and continue making more and more money).

I have seen a pattern where every politician started out poor and humble, and (for eg. Biden) ends up a multi millionaire, with all kinds of people paying for their daily needs and some more. In that area, I have also noticed that the Republican politicians generally have had their own money before they began, and in that sense less less likely to take advantage.

I have seen a pattern of more and more entitlements, with little responsibility. If my company shuts down, I lose my job and have to find another one. If I was part of a big union, then I would get paid regardless, and I would get retraining (now its is being put in the Cap and Trade Bill) and I get taken care of - as long as I vote for the right person.

The insurance reform is another area of contention. Both sides have a point. The real point being - find a way to take care of people with pre existing conditions, find a way to help poor people get health care, especially the ones who are on govt subsidized housing, use food stamps etc. I do believe that if the govt took care of those problem areas (by perhaps offering another subsidy, or outright paying insurance for those that are in trouble or dont want to work) we could continue without too much change. Open up the archaic laws to allow more competition between insurance comapnies and premiums would come down. Limit mal practice liability, and the premiums would come down as doctors start practicing less defensive medicine. If I go to a doctor and say I have no insurance and would like to pay on my own (and I have done that as a test) my fee has been $50. The amount they charged insurance - $150. Why? because the billing company had to be paid, because it takes so long to get reimbursed, because there is risk in getting reimbursed etc. If we "fix" insurance, I believe the whole industry will change, and there will be a lot more private sector unemployment and a lot more govt employment - with the associated perks.

By the way - most of the uninsured who everone is trying to help - the poor who are on food stamps etc. dont even know that this debate is going on. If they have a problem they go to the emergency room and they are fine with that. Truly. I have asked a few random people for their opinions at supermarket checkouts when they flash their food stamp card. They are more concerned about the next baseball game, the next party, and just ordinary things.

I am frustrated at the moment, and considering DOING something to promote what I believe - for the first time.

To me this means that frustration with what is going on has reached an unprecedented level compared to times before.

And that is what you see in the TEA parties, million man marches etc.

Sam

Yaowarat
09-13-09, 11:15 AM
bingo! tea party = right wing moveon.org.

Are the teabaggers protesting the cost in dollars or lives of the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan? Does anyone know ?

Slimprofits
09-13-09, 12:20 PM
But at least with an unregulated financial institution I have the choice of not participating, not buying their product.

Only if you've found a way to completely remove all influence from your life of the currency that said unregulated financial institutions do business in.

Are you off the grid and living in a barter system?

WDCRob
09-13-09, 12:25 PM
Are the teabaggers protesting the cost in dollars or lives of the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan? Does anyone know ?

No... they're only protesting developments that came about after about November 4th, 2008.

The idea that these aren't partisans is a joke. Based on the signs, posters, chants, speeches, legislative branch supporters and etc it's obvious that these "crowds" are made up almost entirely by the Republican Party's most loyal voters.

And it's equally clear that what they're really protesting is Obama himself.

Slimprofits
09-13-09, 12:38 PM
No... from all appearances they're only protesting developments that came abut from November 4th, 2008 and after.

The idea that these aren't partisans is a joke. Based on the signs, posters, chants, speeches, legislative branch supporters and etc it's obvious that these "crowds" are made up almost entirely by the Republican Party's most loyal voters.

And it's equally clear that what they're really protesting is Obama himself.

Watching coverage on Fox News, two out of three signs mention Obama.

Five out of the six people that Glenn Beck interviewed during one hour of coverage used their airtime to make explicit, anti-Obama statements.

And from the report that you linked to:


Q: Who are the main spokesman for what this is about? A: Nobody really gets it. Glenn Beck comes the closest. No mentions of Rush Limbaugh. A couple of Hannity mentions.

My sense is that most of the people there used to be “social conservatives”, but got so burnt out by Bush 2 and the trough-feeding by the post-Contract-With-America Republicans in power that now they are basically in the I'm mad as hell, “throw the bums” non-partisans.

Some of the key ideas/slogans were:

“You Work For Me” - these folks have concluded that the politicians exist just to feather their own beds and their big buck-insider pals.

“No Obama Health Care” - my conclusion is that this is a case where folks realize that the reason why the Obama health-care plan is so nebulous is because the politicians are clearly lying and that it would never pass (be acceptable to the public) if it was clearly stated because it is intended to benefit the Washington insiders (and their elite pals) and screw the “hard-working”.

"You Lie" - applies especially to Obama, but also to all of the politicians in congress. (nice little spin here by the writer. everyone that is paying attention knows these signs were ONLY about Obama, as inspired by Rep. Joe Wilson)

There was no clear fingering of the banksters or any other corporations (other than a resentment of the mainstream media). No much anti-Federal Reserve talk. The hostility was focused against unlistening politicians, power-hungy politicians and politicians taking/spending other people's money especially not for those people's own good.

Sounds completely non-partisan to me!

It's important to note Bernanke is still held up as a God. And mainstream Republicans place 100% of the blame for Fed policies that they don't like, at the feet of Obama. If you don't believe me / think my response is itself partisan nonsense than get off your ass and talk to some actual Republicans or in the very least, read their forums.

I've been saying this (to walls of silence) for a couple of months now and it seems that many on this forum are coming around in agreement - the mainstream "rightwing" is now represented by the birthers, the hypocrites, etc.

Starving Steve
09-13-09, 12:40 PM
This is VERY true. My parents escaped the U.S.S.R and I grew up with those lessons and I also feel the USA is more like the U.S.S.A each day and American's just don't get it - especially those that think they are "republican" and somehow voting for "conservative" or "free market" ideas..

...it is very hard to grasp how blind and ignorant people can be. Sad actually.

If you are republican and American then the only person you should be voting for is Ron Paul and if you are democrate then vote for Kucinich or someone like that.

The free market is what got the USA into this mess. And you don't see that fact?

The de-regulation of banking, the de-regulation of Wall St, the "greed-is-good", the supply-side economics of Ronald Reagan and Arthur Laffer, the Proposition 13 tax revolt in California, the for-PROFIT healthcare system, the repeal of the Glass-Stiegel Act by Congress, the zero interest rates to benefit Wall St, the "deficits don't count" by the George W. Bush, "the world needs America to consume", the "trickle-up economics" by Nixon, the bail-outs orchestrated by Goldman-Sachs, the T.A.R.P. that Bernanke demanded, the new Hummers and Yukons by Detroit, the corruption of the Congress by lobbyists for big business ---- all of this is the result of America's free market economy. Take a good look.......... The evidence is overwhelming. Completely unregulated free market capitalism is what killed America, nothing else, not socialism, not liberalism, not Democrats; capitalism run-a-muck is what killed America.

It is almost as if these Republicans have been asleep for 40 years or more, unwilling or unable to see the truth.... They have controlled the govn't in America for most the last 40 years, and yet they take no responsibility for any of this. They "know-nothing". And the know-nothings are still blocking change, right now thru the Senate, blocking healthcare reform in every way possible.

Tell the truth, for once, to your tea party meetings and at your NRA meetings. Tell the truth about what "conservatives" all have done to the country by blocking change and letting free market capitalism continue to run-wild.

Ghent12
09-13-09, 02:25 PM
Sounds completely non-partisan to me!
Imagine that! The anti-big-government rally is chanting against the people currently controlling and occupying the big government. Who'da thunk it?:rolleyes:

Although you are right about the general level of ignorance, that problem will seemingly always exist! It's like when Code Pink and other nut jobs attack recruiters in California. Like it or not, the military has nothing to do with why we invaded Iraq. It is very hard to educate a passionate person that their passion is being misdirected.

BuckarooBanzai
09-13-09, 03:08 PM
The free market is what got the USA into this mess. And you don't see that fact?

The de-regulation of banking, the de-regulation of Wall St, the "greed-is-good", the supply-side economics of Ronald Reagan and Arthur Laffer, the Proposition 13 tax revolt in California, the for-PROFIT healthcare system, the repeal of the Glass-Stiegel Act by Congress, the zero interest rates to benefit Wall St, the "deficits don't count" by the George W. Bush, "the world needs America to consume", the "trickle-up economics" by Nixon, the bail-outs orchestrated by Goldman-Sachs, the T.A.R.P. that Bernanke demanded, the new Hummers and Yukons by Detroit, the corruption of the Congress by lobbyists for big business ---- all of this is the result of America's free market economy. Take a good look.......... The evidence is overwhelming. Completely unregulated free market capitalism is what killed America, nothing else, not socialism, not liberalism, not Democrats; capitalism run-a-muck is what killed America.

It is almost as if these Republicans have been asleep for 40 years or more, unwilling or unable to see the truth.... They have controlled the govn't in America for most the last 40 years, and yet they take no responsibility for any of this. They "know-nothing". And the know-nothings are still blocking change, right now thru the Senate, blocking healthcare reform in every way possible.

Tell the truth, for once, to your tea party meetings and at your NRA meetings. Tell the truth about what "conservatives" all have done to the country by blocking change and letting free market capitalism continue to run-wild.

You are wrong in so many ways I don't even know where to start with this. You have correctly identified some symptoms but have mis-attributed the causes for those symptoms quite badly.

WDCRob
09-13-09, 04:46 PM
Re: stupid and evil parties...

There's a great Simpson's episode where Lisa Simpson wins a contest from 'Reading Digest' (catchline: "Brevity is...wit.") and goes to Washington.

On her tour of the Capitol she enters a Democratic room, hung with a banner that says, "We can't govern." Moving onto the Republican room the banner reads, "We're just plain evil."

LargoWinch
09-13-09, 04:55 PM
The free market is what got the USA into this mess. And you don't see that fact?

Tell the truth, for once, to your tea party meetings and at your NRA meetings. Tell the truth about what "conservatives" all have done to the country by blocking change and letting free market capitalism continue to run-wild.

Steve, there are days when I wonder if you and VancouverGoinUp (http://www.itulip.com/forums/member.php?u=3475)are one and the same.

hayekvindicated
09-13-09, 06:02 PM
I believe it was the conservative columnist Sam Francis who bestowed the Stupid Party and Evil Party labels on the Pubs and Dems, respectively, sometime in the early 90's.

Actually, the "stupid party" vs "evil party" first came from John Stuart Mill in 19th century England. I'll try to dig up the reference.

ThePythonicCow
09-13-09, 07:58 PM
My humble opinion.Well said, Sam. Thanks.