Question for republicans, Fox watchers, and other isolationists

Glass-Steagall.

Simple question. Should it have been repealed and should it, or some version of it be reintroduced?

 

I am not a Republican nor a Fox Watcher and I am a non-interventionist instead of an isolationist but...

Man, if a bill like that were re-introduced today it would have to be at least 5,000 pages long in order to give the lobbyists enough loopholes, vague language and outs to satisfy them. Look at the finance bill just passed for proof.

What we really need is simple legislation to prevent the financial industry from making up fake investments and another simple law to forbid any branch of the federal government from forcing the banks, or from even helping the banks, to give loans to people who cannot afford them. That would be a good start anyway.

 

So that means you support it's abolition? Yes?

 

Never said that. In fact, the first sentence of my third paragraph would be at least a partial re-instating of the act in spirit, at least. No way the lobbyists would let this Congress pass something that simple though. They pay too much for that. Look at the current finance reform bill. They got themselves billion and billions of dollars of concessions.

I don;t know too much about that act but one thing about the repeal I thought was interesting, though...

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act (according to Wikipedia) was introduced by 2 Republicans but was passed in the Senate 90–8 and in the House: 362–57 and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1999.

So, it must have seemed like a good idea to repeal it at the time to get that much bipartisan support.

 

We are in the process of doing something similar to it over here, and the Banks are allready saying it would cost them 1 trillion pounds in lost investment and that the money will flood out of the UK to Germany & France!! What the seem to forget is that the European Union is also drawing up extreemly similar proposals LOL
The funniest bit is the banks claim it will hamper there ability to loan money to buisness, yet This is the biggest complaint from the buisness sector over here at the moment the lack of willingness by the banks to loan money LOL

 

Not at all familiar with the bill, but I will research it.

 

Bipartisan pigs at the troth. Introduced by republicans is correct. Had it been introduced by the left, it would have been blocked. Too bad that didn't happen.

 

I think you are making a mistake of cloaking the political events of 20 years ago in the clothes of today's politics in order to make your party look better.

 

I agree 100% the whole US goverment should be placed under the control of an honest public review commission, made up of say 1000 members. Their main qualification being no party affiliation, or lobby ties. Even if it takes years to find and appoint them. Its time to start from scratch. It cant possibly get any worse then it is now. Thats what Im thinking.

Steve

 

20 years ago or today, the grand ole party is same as the new ole party. Whether it's Clinton, Obama, Carter, whoever...the right is/has/always be obstructionists of anyone left of center. The are and will always be defenders exclusively of the top tiers of society. "Cloaking" is not needed to make the wacko right wing look bad. Far as making "my party" look good...well...I have no allegiance to the dems. I DO have a sort of an allegiance to making an effort to point out the right's hypocrisy, crimes, criminal leaders, etc. The allegiance is to myself however, not to any body of political organizations. That's the truth but believe as you wish if it gives you comfort.

 

Just think, if you joined the army, you really could be an army of one.

To the rest of us, your self proclaimed distance is simply a tactic to avoid counter criticism of your incessant attacks on the republican right. Since you have no ideas of your own, and don't support the democratic party, you think it insulates you from criticism. All it really does is confirm the fact that you are a clown.

 

Exactly.

 

Where did I use the word distance? I love how you insert words and attribute them to me as gospel. I say exactly what I think at the time. I speak for myself and no one else. Have at your apparent necessary fantasies though since it seems that you thrive solely on your own ego.
Oh...and since when have my "tactics" kept me void of criticism thus far? Please, stop holding back on the criticism!!! Let 'er rip Sparky. I say what I think I express my opinion an honest and forthright manner. I can understand to a point though, your need to try and nuke everything I say because as I've said all along, you have a hidden agenda. My agenda is my own whether or not you or anyone believes that fact is really irrelevant. So have another shot Sparky and throw in a few more chips. Maybe you guilt can be washed away one ounce at a time or maybe with more chips you can help relieve your guilt one stack at a time. In the meantime, just keep calling me names and slammin' 'em down dude and proceed with your agenda.

 

You're pretty funny too. Schmega

 

Yeah, remember, tomc claimed to be a Libertarian? Is that still how you identify yourself tom?

And just to set the record straight about left vs right and who does what....remember that people who call themselves conservative give an average of 20% more to charity than those who call themselves liberal. Also, 61% of the top CEOs classify themselves as liberal. And before you go too far claiming republicans are the rich & corrupt, remember that BO was raised in the lap of luxury, jet setting around the world & attending the most expensive private schools...Pelosi is the wealthiest member of Congress, Harry Reid has been exposed passing legislation that benefited him personally as well as cozing up to the gambling industry in Nevada...other millionaires? The Kennedy clan that has led the elite liberal movement? John Kerry? Crooks? Dodd? Frank? So before you attempt to argue that one side favors an interest over another you really should do your homework.

 

I think that all went back to 911 too. Ron Paul (who is a prominent Libertarian) has said stuff about 911 that tomc would like. Therefor, henceforth.

I have seen nothing I would consider Libertarian tendencies from tomc. Not even left libertarian. He seems to be Authoritarian Left to me.

 

Getting a little defensive their huh? Let me help you out.

= SELF PROCLAIMED DISTANCE

You see Tom, when you oppose everything that is Republican and simultaneously reject the opposing party view, you are not presenting an opinion. At that point, you are just whining. And that is certainly not going to solve this country's problems. As for my hidden agenda, I actually divulged on this site some time ago. Perhaps you missed it. Oh well, too bad!

 

I see you've been researching Fox propaganda one liners again. I've done all the homework I need to Spooky. This from a shill who believes everything he is spoon fed regarding 911, but he does his homework. Friggin' hilarious if it weren't so shameful.

 

Id' call myself independent and anti-right.