Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe Hoover-Palin Ticket
And the winner is ... Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Remember him-the great Democratic president who saved capitalism from the capitalists by reining in their exorbitant greed? Forget the Reagan Revolution heralding a new era of small government, which turned out to be nothing more than a fig leaf for legalized corporate crime. The hero of the hour is FDR, as the essential wisdom of his New Deal is now embraced by most Republicans as well as Democrats.
Roosevelt's legacy was acknowledged Monday when GOP presidential nominee John McCain absurdly accused his Democratic opponent, Barack Obama, of advocating policies pursued by Herbert Hoover, the Republican incumbent whom Roosevelt defeated in 1932. While clueless GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin prattled on at the same rally about Reaganomics and getting government out of the way of business, most other Americans noticed-and are grateful-that the federal government now directly manages many of our biggest businesses in the all-important financial sector.
The banking bailout is pure FDR at his big-government best. Greedy bankers are being taken to the woodshed and read the riot act: If they behave, then they will once again have the opportunity to be filthy rich-that's the American way.
As McCain put it Tuesday: "I will begin by making certain that the $700 billion already committed to economic recovery is not used to further enrich the very people and institutions that invited these troubles with their own reckless conduct."
Yes, McCain finally gets it: "I will not play along with the same Washington games and gimmicks that got us into this terrible mess in the first place. I am going to Washington to fight for you." I didn't check whether this performance made it into the "Moment of Zen" in "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart," but it should have. "I am going to Washington" is a classic proclamation of stupidity that assumes the rest of us are unaware of where McCain has been these past three decades.
The "gimmicks that got us into this terrible mess in the first place" were made legal by the passage of radical deregulatory legislation that McCain, as much as anyone in Washington, enthusiastically supported. Those gimmicks-hybrid instruments, credit swaps and so on-were codified in laws pushed through Congress by Phil Gramm, the man McCain esteemed so highly that he chaired the then-senator's 1996 presidential campaign and then chose Gramm to co-chair his 2008 run for the White House.
No one in Washington had a clearer warning of the dangers of those games and gimmicks than McCain, who, as one of the Keating Five, ran interference for the savings-and-loan swindlers of an earlier era. But McCain did not personally share in the financial misfortune of those who lost their life's saving in the S&L meltdown; his wife, Cindy McCain, had an inside track with Charles Keating and made more than a million bucks participating in Keating's swindles before the financier was dispatched to prison.
Instead of learning the harsh lessons of the S&L debacle, McCain plunged ahead, crusading for even more extreme deregulatory measures that dismantled the financial safeguards FDR had put in place to prevent another Great Depression. McCain, as much as anyone, is responsible for the decriminalization of the reckless conduct that he now attributes to Wall Street: "We will learn from this crisis to prevent the next one, with much stricter oversight. No more wild over-leveraging, no more liabilities concealed from the public and from shareholders, no more bundling of assets to maximize profit by assuming insane risks. Those days are over on Wall Street. With new rules of public disclosure and accounting, my reforms will make certain those betrayals of shareholders and the public trust are never repeated."
Why not begin with a reversal of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which Gramm sneaked into an omnibus bill only hours before Congress adjourned for the 2000 Christmas recess, codifying "Legal Certainty for Swap Agreements"? Or that act's Title IV, which explicitly exempted from regulation the new gimmicks (which McCain now condemns) by forbidding the government to "exercise regulatory authority with respect to ... an unidentified banking product which had not been commonly offered, entered into, or provided in the United States by any bank on or before Dec. 5, 2000 ..."?
Over the last eight years, McCain has consistently opposed all efforts to modify the legislation that gave the bandits the keys to the banks. It's McCain who is the Herbert Hoover in this presidential race.
29 Comments so far
Show AllMcSame is bats*** crazy. He really lost it completely during the economic discussion. Hero to the middle class? He never mentioned them once. He thinks making $250,000/year is simply middle class. He Just Doesn't Get It.
I don't support that CEO bailout BS one bit, but still will be voting for Obama.
I live in fear. I am so afraid that either Obama or McCain is going to win in November.
-- EKATON --
It's going to happen. Buck the hell up and deal with it. Start working with what you have instead of wasting your time and efforts in wishful mental masturbation.
Jim Swanson, Los Altos, CA
www.bushleagueofnations.com [For FREE downloads of ENTIRE book]
“Speaking German East of the Mississippi, and Japanese to the West:”
Bob Scheer is one of my favorite American patriots. If you have a chance to see him in person, do it.
I highly recommend his new book, “The Pornography of Power.” Dwight Eisenhower, who presciently warned America against the growing power of its military-industrial complex, would turn over in his grave if he knew how incredibly more dominant, interlocked and dangerous that military-industrial complex has in fact become.
I would add America’s concentrated corporate media to that powerful complex, thus making it the “military-industrial-media” complex.
As for McCain bearing any resemblance to Franklin D. Roosevelt, what a joke! As Scheer notes, it’s really the “Hoover-Palin” ticket.
Roosevelt led America out of the GOP Great Depression I, and Obama will have to do the same regarding the GOP Great Depression II.
Roosevelt also united Americans and led America and its allies to victory in World War II.
On February 23, 2009, the war in Afghanistan will have lasted twice as long as World War II--with no end in sight.
If Bush, Cheney, McCain and the GOP had been in charge during World War II, we Americans would now be speaking German east of the Mississippi, and Japanese to the west.
Here’s a valuable free weapon for American patriots who are fighting to take back our country. You can download for free, "The Bush League of Nations: The Coalition of the Unwilling, the Bullied and the Bribed – the GOP’s War on Iraq and America," by James A. Swanson (2008, 448 pages). www.bushleagueofnations.com.
If you are so inclined, please let others know of this useful free resource.
I ask for nothing in return, except that you consider using my book to help kick out America's worst president and worst political party ever.
Jim Swanson, Los Altos, CA
www.bushleagueofnations.com
Regarding FDR, that one blemish is putting Americans of Japanese ancestry in concentration camps. THe one member of the administration opposing this was J. Edgar Hoover, a man who would go down in history as a racist.
Regarding Robert Scheer. During the 1960s when he was writing for Ramparts he wrote glowing articles praising North Korea. TOday he denies this.
Generally speaking, if a Republican attributes a despicable action to a Democrat, that means that the person doing the name calling has done exactly the same that is being called into question. The best defense is to be offensive.
Wow, this article is so bad I don't know where to start.
For one thing, Mr. Scheer, with his Democrat filters, apparently didn't notice that it was the Democratic leadership in the Congress that led the charge to pass the bailout that he now tries to tie to McCain.
Or that Obama came back to DC to both vote for the same bailout and to twist arms himself to make sure it passed.
Or that the Gramm legislation that he decries was also supported by Democrats and signed into law by Bill Clinton.
And of course there's the pure propaganda technique of trying to link Obama with FDR, even though Obama isn't proposing anything like the New Deal. In fact, Obama in practice works to overturn what's left of the New Deal. He typically describes it as 'failed policies of the past' or something like that.
In 1932, FDR ran on his New Deal proposals. His speech where he announced these to the Democratic Convention is famous and can be found on line. FDR clearly proposed an alternative to Hoover's policies and gave the people a clear choice.
Obama is backed by Wall Street, and he refuses to provide any alternatives. And he's already been saying that we probably won't get any of his lefty-sounded vague ideas into practice because its much more important that we give all our money to Wall Street.
McCain might be similar to Hoover. But Obama is no FDR. Its more like if in 1932 we had Hoover running against Hoover for President.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
Like you said, wow, this article is really bad! Is Scheer really so clueless that he doesn't even realize, as the majority of Americans do, that the bailout is a ripoff designed to benefit Wall Street, and doesn't even remotely resemble the policies pursued by FDR? Of course, as Scheer acknowledges, FDR's actions were designed to save capitalism, not to pursue some sort of altruistic agenda.
Scheer apparently hasn't noticed, however, that Obama supported the bailout, too, that Democrats were instrumental in the deregulation that paved the way for the crisis, or that nobody has re-regulated anything, helped out homeowners in danger of being foreclosed, or anything that would actually help Main Street rather than Wall Street. Is Scheer secretly an investment banker? Or just another brain-dead Democratic pundit? Maybe both?
Samson, I think we need to find a way to working towards getting a new party outside the two. I too am a Nader voter even though people will tell me that it's because I live in a safe Republican state like SC but I would still be voting Nader in a "swing" state. Whether Nader wins or loses, I say it's high time you, me, and the rest of us sick and tired of the two party duopoly actually started going local and putting forth Independent Progressive/Liberal minded men and women into offices, build it to the state level, and work it towards federal.
I just made the stupid decision to watch the duopoly debate---fuck...I am so bummed. I had sortve made a decision to go with one of them-cause a friend of mine thinks that one might help her--she is really sick. It will not help.-I just cant do this. I need an alternative. Give me an option.
God!! I will never watch one of thes corporate debates again--it really pissed me off They are both so full of shit.
I want America to TANK! Apathetic America deserves it! I want oppression, I want all your freakin savings wiped out! Every damn penny of it! And then.....
We will have 300 million pissed off Americans! And then our coachroach infestation will be exterminated!
Coffeelover
You should lay off the coffee dude. Its making you sound like an aggressive, evil jerk who is wishing horrible things for millions of people.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
http://www.BuyMyHouseBeforeTheBankTakesIt.com
This is so sad. A real site from another blog.
The fed says we have "avoided" two key mistakes of the Great Depression: money was tight and the financial system collapsed.
Memo to Bernanke:
Money IS tight. The financial system IS breaking down. And George called: He wants his rose-colored glasses back.
There are many things that need to be fixed with our corrupted economy: bankruptcy laws, healthcare (when people have to take out extra-mortgages to make a dent in medical bills, then healthcare is a problem for the financial system.), under-regulated industries (and not just financial), the laws that are on the books aren't rigidly enforced, if they are even enforced at all (there was a story some time ago, elsewhere, that said that the SEC and FBI and Dept. Justice rarely prosecuted white collar crime because it was too complicated, required a lot more time and energy and specialized knowledge). Any thing that can be abused for greedy financial gain will be so abused. It's a guarantee you can take to the bank, if it's still in business and the bankers haven't left the country to go into hiding.
"Over the last eight years, McCain has consistently opposed all efforts to modify the legislation that gave the bandits the keys to the banks."
And that plus the fact he wants to continue the failed economic policies that led us here are why he has lost this election.
You don't explain how Obama is any different as far as these particular policies are concerned. So far, he's been the same. No proposal to modify the legislation to which you refer, no ideas as to alternatives to the bailout that will help ordinary people rather than those who ran the economy into the ground in the first place.
Democratic Party and Republican Party elected officials are more beholden to the financial industry than they were during the First Great Depression. Keep in mind that, after 30 years of financial industry deregulation, financial industry executives earn more in a year than their counterparts in other industries earn in a lifetime. That kind of money buys A LOT of influence and will continue to do so irrespective of how many working class people lose their homes, pensions, cars, shirts, etc.
It is therefore naive to assume that Obama or McHoover will revive the New Deal when Dubya rides into the sunset on 1/20/09.
FDR was hesitant to buck the bankers and implement the New Deal until hordes of working class minions flooded DC and put the pressure on him. Starting Nov. 5, the minions will need to put forth a far greater effort in far greater numbers than their New Deal era counterparts needed to. Otherwise, we will witness a series of taxpayer funded bailouts that do not solve the problem (although they may prevent bankers from losing their houses in the Hamptons, chalets in Aspen and condos in Maui).
I would like to believe that Obama will implement a New Deal, however, when I hear him say things like "I will need to keep Hank Paulson on after Jan. 20", I lose hope . If Bernanke and Paulson haven't been fired by 2/1/09, you can bet your bottom dollar that you will not see any real changes.
Where are the Palin defender trolls?
I thought that with Maureen McCormic's new book, attention was shifted away from Sarah Palin. Maybe Maureen can run for Governor of Alaska.
But it was Obama and the Democrats who successfully pushed through the $700,000,000,000 bailout (plus another $150,000,000,000 of pork and tax cuts they added in to make it pass.)
Republicans in the House resisted it to the end: for the wrong reasons, on the whole, but resist they did, along with the most progressive Dems.
Is something wrong with this picture? One commenter wonders if McCain's new tune will push Obama to the left. Doesn't look like it: instead, they're switching positions.
Good luck with that "Progressive Democrats" strategy. You're going to win the election, all right, in a landslide; but you're electing a right-wing Wall St. flunky.
I predict 4 very good years for the Green Party.
Oregoncharles
Hoover was a far more honorable man than McCain will ever be; likely even more honorable than Obama, too. But we must remember that FDR also had many shortcomings. In many cases, much stricter regulation was watered down at his behest, which often turned into battles with congressmen far more radical than he. The picture described by Scheer is rather ironic as McCain attempts to outflank Obama on the left with his populist rhetoric in an effort to salvage his failing campaign. Perhaps McCain's tactic will prompt Obama to move left in response. I'm not going to hold my breath.
As Archie and Edith sang, "Mister we can use a man like Herbert Hoover Again.".
You don't perhaps attend UCF, do you?
At 65, my college days are long behind me.+
Why does every article on CD here contain blatant lies about economics, monetary policy and/or the bailouts? The last sentence of the second paragraph is one such lie: "...the federal government now directly manages many of our biggest businesses in the all-important financial sector." It gave the banks billions but DOES NOT manage them. No, the banksters stlll get to continue with their nefarious ways in the deregulated financial sector.
The same comment I submitted under "Morning In America: Buying Bank Stock Ends Reagan Era" by Kevin Hall applies here:
This is all lies and distraction. The banking system is inherently self-destructive. This "buy-in" or "bail-out" or whatever you want to call it just delays the inevitable - a complete crash of the economy. The essence of the problem is our usurious monetary system, which seeks to multiply debt to infinity in order to create infinite unearned income for the PRIVATE owners of the currency-issuing central bank, The Fed. The 64 trillion dollar question is, why do we continue to allow PRIVATE bankers to create the nation's currency and loan it to us with interest when we could create it ourselves interest free?
Because CD promotes Democratic propaganda. This site does not promote any reasoning beyond what the Democrats offer. And the Democrats are funded by Wall Street in this election.
If you want real analysis, go elsewhere on the web. CD only prints Democrat approved propaganda.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
The banking question is perhaps the USA's oldest and longest lasting political debate. It's entirely possible for the Treasury Department to also be the primary central bank and for a nationalized banking system to exist. But should private banks be outlawed? Or would they just cease to exist because they would fail to compete against a truely nationalized banking system that put the interests of the People/Country first? In answering these questions, it would be wise to keep in mind just how much of a battle it would take to accomplish such a change. It would make nationalizing health insurance seem like child's play.
True nationalization of the whole financial system constitutes the ultimate battle in the Class War, but you'll hear few voices calling for that to happen.
Another mediocre, hypocritical son of privilege revealed. Thank you Robert.
Excellent! Now, if only Obama and the Democrats could talk this straight!
John McCain has a long history of pushing deregulation for corporate America