I’m not wading into this, but here’s a blog article I came across today that is related: Law and Disorder: Why the Feds Won’t Prosecute Bankers.
I just felt the need to share.
Apparently I am not the only one who has issues with Obama’s “compromises”.
Nice strawman you built there. No one is advocating that the Dems go totally negative, just that they use a harder and most of all for God’s sake, SMARTER negotiating strategy than they’ve been using. OPENING negotiations by conceding major issues to an opponent who is KNOWN to play hardball is just fucking DUMB. Which is what our Democratic leaders in Congress and the White House have been of late.
God forbid the Democrats ever be allowed to do what the Republicans have been doing.
The Republicans get away with outright lying (death panels, anyone?)
more lying (we won’t let Obama take your Medicare!)
racism (the whole “Obama isn’t an American citizen” is nothing but thinly-veiled racism)
more racism (Arizona’s “pull all Hispanics over” law, anyone?)
and more racism (Texas’s new education curriculum changes, anyone?)
absolute refusals to compromise on anything, their rampant misuse of the word “socialism”, their line-in-the-sand 100% no votes on every fracking issue, holding America’s unemployment benefits hostage at every turn…
The GOP is allowed to get away with this and no one criticizes them. But if the Democrats were to do that? The GOP would go mad and the Democrats themselves would go into handwringing.
I’d say we give the GOP a taste of their own medicine, but the Democrats lack the balls to do it.
That’s not what I said at all. I said that without comprehensive re-regulation of the financial industry we’re going to see another massive financial crisis. And whether or not I can predict the exact date of the next financial crisis has zero relevance to what we’re arguing about.
I’m happy that I’ve shown enough examples of people who should be indicted, including one guy who actually was indicted. And IK’m going to ask you again, do you believe that there wasn’t any criminal activity going on in the financial community during the bubble years of the 2000s?
Thanks for that. It’s amazing that there appear to be a bunch of people who think thatnobody did anything wrong during the bubble years and that the government is this super-strict overregulating menace who would take great socialist delight in locking up any banker they could bring charges against.
I know probably 90% of all economists approve of the GOP* but the ignorant masses are already feeling buyers’ remorse about the extremists and madmen who took over Congress.
I hope you’re holding onto your seat when you see the magnitude of the shift that has occurred.
- that’s a joke, folks, some of you probably know which argument I’m making fun of.
A really impressive argument from Glenn Greenwald: Obama’s “bad negotiating” is actually shrewd negotiating.
The thrust of it, as it relates to this thread, is a complete dismissal of the notion that Obama would ever “do what his more liberal/progressive supporters want him to do”.
Which is an argument for them simply staying home and voting for no one. If there is no possibility of being listened to, why bother? And it is also support for the argument that there’s nothing to be lost by not voting for him, since he really is just going to do what a Republican would do in his place.
More and more we are in effect a one party system under another name.
A strong leader can shape public opinion, but he needs to demonstrate that he is a capable leader. Because President Obama has not done that, moving to the left on a liberal wish list would only make him more vulnerable to the Republicans than he already is.
Obama was elected because most Americans did not benefit from the Bush economy, and because Bush started two expensive wars he could not win. Before moving on a liberal wish list, Obama needed to restore the good economic numbers of Clinton’s second term, and he needed to achieve successful conclusions to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Unfortunately, unemployment continued to rise after Obama’s inauguration, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq smolder on with no end in sight, and Obama has blundered into a third war
I voted for Obama before. I will vote for him again. Nevertheless, I am disappointed with him. I am not disappointed because he is not liberal enough, but he has not been effective enough.
That’s actually a far cop. I went back and re-read your post on the first page, and your comment about “arrest all the bankers” and the “inevitable financial ruin” were indeed two different sentences. I mistakenly conflated your two arguments, and I apologize for misrepresenting your position on this point.
But I still disagree with you, of course. 
Lately a “liberal wish list” is, well … anything.
It took too long but it appears the admin will go after bankers. They also will get a ratings agency worker or two.
The bankers were easily unethical selling derivatives to customers while they were behind the scenes setting up bets that they would fail and they could get rich both ways.
The ratings agencies were giving Triple A ratings to stuff they knew were crap and the emails they said that in , were read in front of a congressional investigation. The agencies had a regulative function too. If they rated a product AAA ,pension funds could invest in it for example. Investors trusted the agencies and lost fortunes.
It appears some of these fine folks are going to get prosecuted.
It is a question asked repeatedly across America: why, in the aftermath of a financial mess that generated hundreds of billions in losses, have no high-profile participants in the disaster been prosecuted?
[…]
But several years after the financial crisis, which was caused in large part by reckless lending and excessive risk taking by major financial institutions, no senior executives have been charged or imprisoned, and a collective government effort has not emerged. This stands in stark contrast to the failure of many savings and loan institutions in the late 1980s. In the wake of that debacle, special government task forces referred 1,100 cases to prosecutors, resulting in more than 800 bank officials going to jail. Among the best-known: Charles H. Keating Jr., of Lincoln Savings and Loan in Arizona, and David Paul, of Centrust Bank in Florida.
Former prosecutors, lawyers, bankers and mortgage employees say that investigators and regulators ignored past lessons about how to crack financial fraud.
As the crisis was starting to deepen in the spring of 2008, the Federal Bureau of Investigation scaled back a plan to assign more field agents to investigate mortgage fraud. That summer, the Justice Department also rejected calls to create a task force devoted to mortgage-related investigations, leaving these complex cases understaffed and poorly funded, and only much later established a more general financial crimes task force.
Leading up to the financial crisis, many officials said in interviews, regulators failed in their crucial duty to compile the information that traditionally has helped build criminal cases. In effect, the same dynamic that helped enable the crisis — weak regulation — also made it harder to pursue fraud in its aftermath.
A more aggressive mind-set could have spurred far more prosecutions this time, officials involved in the S.&L. cleanup said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/business/14prosecute.html?_r=1
We also get a nice graphic showing the different leveols of prosecutions relating to the Savings and Loans crisis, a drop in the bucket compared to the 2000s crisis, and the 2000s crisis. As you can see there was a serious attempt to prosecute financial evildoers by the insane socialist Ronald Reagan. This time, nothing. And this is going to come back to bite us very severely in the backside.
Also, see :
NEW YORK – Top executives at Washington Mutual actively boosted sales of high-risk, toxic mortgages in the two years prior to the bank’s collapse in 2008, according to emails published in a wide-ranging Senate report that contradicts previous public testimony about the meltdown.
The voluminous, 639-page report on the financial crisis from the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations singles out Washington Mutual for its decision to champion its subprime lending business, even as executives privately acknowledged that a housing bubble was about to burst.
and
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/business/14crisis.html?_r=1
And the guy from “Jobs, Go Elsewhere!” aka GE is under fire for certain jobs problems, too. With luck he may be ousted. Yet another part of the liberal wish list.
Let’s hope so. They have an uncanny track record of getting out of these things.