Republicans attack consumer advocate

[jackschmittusa]

Hated my '60 Corvair in the '60s. lol

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Hated my '60 Corvair in the '60s. lol

So did Ralph Nader...

 

[Fern]

It shouldn’t be surprising that Republicans chose to attack consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren but don’t have any sort of vitriol for the sort of corporate crime that popped up during Enron
-snip-

face/palm.

You do realize that Enron and it's execs were prosecuted by the Repubs?

If you're wondering why the Wall Street crowd isn't being prosecuted, can't fairly blaim the Repubs. Right after that crap hit Obama and Eric Holder took over. So, you'll need to ask them.

Fern

 

[Fern]

I don't know why the repubs are against her.

But I do not like the idea of a single person, who is unelected, having control over an industry (or anything for that matter). She doesn't appear to have oversight, or to accountable.

I suppose we could get lucky and it'll work out OK like with a benign dictatorship, but I think it's dangerous.

Fern

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I don't know why the repubs are against her.

But I do not like the idea of a single person, who is unelected, having control over an industry (or anything for that matter). She doesn't appear to have oversight, or to accountable.

I suppose we could get lucky and it'll work out OK like with a benign dictatorship, but I think it's dangerous.

Fern

From the article:

Warren was clearly anticipating the claims, which Republicans have been making to the press since President Barack Obama signed the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill into law last summer. She presented lawmakers with 34 pages of written testimony covering everything from the agency's plans for mortgages and credit cards to its budget needs, hiring procedures and organizational chart. Several Democrats on the committee were noticeably irked by the questioning.
"I do think that Dodd-Frank, in allowing the CFPB to be overruled by the safety and soundness regulators, does put a ... fail-safe in there," Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) said, referring to the bureau's housing within the Federal Reserve, the nation's central bank charged with preserving the stability of the financial system.
Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) ticked off a list of statutory oversight requirements the CFPB is subject to: the Government Accountability Office must perform an annual audit of the new agency's operations; it must submit quarterly reports to the Office of Management and Budget; and the director must appear before Congress at least twice a year. Perhaps more importantly, the Financial Services Oversight Committee can overrule any new regulation issued by the CFPB if the committee deems that the rule poses a threat to bank stability.

A dictatorship? Not from the above.

While I generally resist an added layer of bureaucracy, the Republicans have decided that the status quo of unaccountability in the finance industry is to be encouraged. I disagree with that policy.

 

[Phokus]

From the article:


A dictatorship? Not from the above.

While I generally resist an added layer of bureaucracy, the Republicans have decided that the status quo of unaccountability in the finance industry is to be encouraged. I disagree with that policy.

That's because the GOP started courting Wall Street after Obama's election and Wall Street has been very receptive to them, even though the supposed 'attack' on Wall Street has been pathetic so far.

 

[Matt1970]

Palin wouldn't be my choice. We need a President that will make you feel good about America, not just hate the other party. Like it or not, Reagan and Clinton were good at it. Obama looked like he was going to be good at it but hasn't in a while.

 

[manimal]

I don't know why the repubs are against her.

But I do not like the idea of a single person, who is unelected, having control over an industry (or anything for that matter). She doesn't appear to have oversight, or to accountable.

I suppose we could get lucky and it'll work out OK like with a benign dictatorship, but I think it's dangerous.

Fern

show us where she is in control of the entire industry?

she is a special adviser...


fear monger elsewhere...

 

[bfdd]

What more information could we possibly need about things we buy as consumers? There's fucking government mandated labels on EVERYTHING already.

 

[Craig234]

Palin wouldn't be my choice. We need a President that will make you feel good about America, not just hate the other party. Like it or not, Reagan and Clinton were good at it. Obama looked like he was going to be good at it but hasn't in a while.

Reagan wasn't really good at it. He did it with some people, but to more informed people, he didn't make them feel good about the country turning massive debt that was a tool for redistributing wealth to the top and 'buying' prosperity that was politically beneficial, a 'starve the beast' strategy, and at the expense of adding to taxes later; or about the country sponsoring terrorism and death squads around Latin America; or about the country beginning rolling back regulation and policies that benefit the middle class, from repealing Savings and Loan regulations that led to the S&L corruption and crisis, to labor rights. There was bitter divide over Reagan, despite some 'Reagan Democrats'.

His 'making the country feel better ' was mostly the effect only of a PR spokesman.

The President who IMO most really 'made Americans feel better about the country' in modern times was Kennedy. Clinton was mainly relief sanwiched between Bushes.

Making the country 'feel good' is a double edged sword, it can cover up some very bad things - it's also the things demagogues use to get support much of the time.

Pandering, flattery, to get power - then used often against the people.

Hearing Reagan praise the terrorist army he made, the Contras in Nicaragua, as "the moral equivalent of our founding fathers" might make the country feel better about them, but it was a bad thing to feel better about the things the country did with that army, we should have not done it and regretted it.

In contrast, Kennedy generally did it the right way, by pushing things for the country to be proud of, from support of human rights to the arts to the moon landing effort.

 

[Fern]

show us where she is in control of the entire industry?

she is a special adviser...


fear monger elsewhere...

Special advisor?

Bull, special advisors don't need oversight or accountability. They just advise. It'll looks as though she'll have substantial power, and it looks like Congress is stil trying to figure exactly what power and how much.

Fern

 

[Craig234]

Special advisor?

Bull, special advisors don't need oversight or accountability. They just advise. It'll looks as though she'll have substantial power, and it looks like Congress is stil trying to figure exactly what power and how much.

Fern

What SPECIFIC power are you saying is bad? Not broad, unsubstantiated fear-mongering phrases, specific things.

 

[bfdd]

no one un-elected should be allowed to make decisions for our nation. whatever position they're trying to create for her, allow us to vote on it or else fuck off. i think that's a fair proposal. we need to stop allowing our politicians to just do shit willy nilly.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

They're pro-oligarchy, pro-plutocracy - some know it and some blindly follow an agenda they don't even understand.

Both sides blindly follow it now. It doesn't matter which side of the fence you are on anymore, only that you're going to be shitting in everyones' yards whether you're a Pub or Dem. Both parties sold out decades ago and have proven the two party system cannot work with big business greasing their palms...and you are living in a world of denial if you think they aren't.

 

[Craig234]

Both sides blindly follow it now. It doesn't matter which side of the fence you are on anymore, only that you're going to be shitting in everyones' yards whether you're a Pub or Dem. Both parties sold out decades ago and have proven the two party system cannot work with big business greasing their palms...and you are living in a world of denial if you think they aren't.

You are mostly wrong about the progressive wing of the Democrats.

 

[Jhhnn]

no one un-elected should be allowed to make decisions for our nation. whatever position they're trying to create for her, allow us to vote on it or else fuck off. i think that's a fair proposal. we need to stop allowing our politicians to just do shit willy nilly.

How can you possibly imagine that makes sense? You rave about unelected (appointed) people being able to make decisions for our country, but support the lifetime tenure of (appointed) conservative toadies on the SCOTUS, even when they're in breach of their job requirements.

And You seem to think that elected representatives weren't elected for any purpose other than having the people vote directly on everything, which is moronic.

The sad truth is that the only reason we're not re-living 1932 is strong govt intervention in the economy, in the form of bailouts, deficits and quantitative easing by the Fed, all of which Righties seem to find abhorrent. The only way to avoid more of that down the road is to disallow Wall St from creating the credit bubbles that *always* precede such events, and Warren's job is intended to do just that. You can't have a hangover if you don't get drunk, and somebody needs to keep Wall St on the wagon, because they sure as Hell won't do it themselves.

 

[werepossum]

Palin wouldn't be my choice. We need a President that will make you feel good about America, not just hate the other party. Like it or not, Reagan and Clinton were good at it. Obama looked like he was going to be good at it but hasn't in a while.

I picked Palin only because she is the scariest Bogey man for the left, outside of zombie Reagan. Don't kid yourself though, the left absolutely hated Reagan and the right absolutely hated Clinton. Government is now so powerful, and so obtrusive, that no President can make everyone happy and love America. The best a President can hope for is a substantial majority, with a substantial and highly motivated minority convinced that hell itself lies just ahead, down a slippery slope.

 

[manimal]

Special advisor?

Bull, special advisors don't need oversight or accountability. They just advise. It'll looks as though she'll have substantial power, and it looks like Congress is stil trying to figure exactly what power and how much.

Fern

Thought so...


baseless AND disingenuous...

 

[bamacre]

Can't say I'm enamored of layering yet another bureaucracy onto the financial sector. In many ways, this is emblematic of government in general and Democrats in particular. When regulation fails, we simply add on another layer without removing the previous layers of regulation, often under the direction of one politically appointed individual who cannot be held accountable for her performance but CAN be held accountable for her politics. I fear that, as often happens, this new bureaucracy's procedures and rules will conflict with the existing bureaucracies' procedures and rules, simply making it more difficult to do business in the USA and increasing government's ability to politically select winners and losers.

Those of you who love Warren probably won't be so pleased with the selection from, say, President Palin. Simply adding the self-bestowed title of "Consumer advocate" to one's name does not bestow sainthood or business acumen. Hell, Ralph Nader was a "Consumer advocate", and he killed a fine little car by way of building himself a power base. This woman may well have the power to kill an industry.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

Read it, and understand it.

That said, while I don't agree with her solutions to problems, at least she acknowledges a lot of them. She's a damn smart lady, and seems to have integrity. A rarity for Washington, DC.

Also, LOL, at Craig's "progressive wing of the Democratic Party," crap. Craig, I'll give you folks some credit when your wing stops supporting the other wing of your craptastic party. Progressives just bring in more votes for Democrats, you're a tool, and being used like one.

 

[Steeplerot]

Progressives just bring in more votes for Democrats, you're a tool, and being used like one.

I really wish we could ditch both parties Egypt style.

 

[Infohawk]

I really wish we could ditch both parties Egypt style.

...but Craig likes the Democrats. He says they're different.