Skip to main content

View Diary: U.S. Filmmaker Laura Poitras Repeatedly Detained at Border: She Has Filmed Three of My NSA Clients (128 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Did anyone really think that? (24+ / 0-)

    I know I didn't - just that I was told to STFU on this site, because you know - McCain would have been SO much worse . . . .

    OTOH, at least in that case, this site could be united in opposition to all the shit the administration is pulling.

    •  Yes, millions of American voters thought that (19+ / 0-)

      Yes, rightly or wrongly, millions of American voters thought that Obama would be a substantial change from the Bush years.  And they voted for Obama for exactly that reason.

      It will be interesting this fall to watch both Romney and Obama struggle to swim upstream against their own records of corporate cronyism while claiming to be the real representative of the American people.

      I expect vast numbers of voters will decide not to vote out of cynicism and frustration.  I expect a very close race with a very low turnout.

      However, regardless of who gets elected, the corporatocracy will win, and the hopes of the American people will fade.

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Mon Apr 09, 2012 at 07:28:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  from Matt Taibbi's January article (16+ / 0-)
        (emphasis mine)

        Most likely, it’ll be Mitt Romney versus Barack Obama, meaning the voters’ choices in the midst of a massive global economic crisis brought on in large part by corruption in the financial services industry will be a private equity parasite who has been a lifelong champion of the Gordon Gekko Greed-is-Good ethos (Romney), versus a paper progressive who in 2008 took, by himself, more money from Wall Street than any two previous presidential candidates, and in the four years since has showered Wall Street with bailouts while failing to push even one successful corruption prosecution (Obama).

        There are obvious, even significant differences between Obama and someone like Mitt Romney, particularly on social issues, but no matter how Obama markets himself this time around, a choice between these two will not in any way represent a choice between “change” and the status quo. This is a choice between two different versions of the status quo, and everyone knows it.
        The auctioned election process is designed to reduce the field to two candidates who will each receive hundreds of millions of dollars apiece from the same pool of donors. Just take a look at the lists of top donors for Obama and McCain from the last election in 2008.
        Obama’s top 20 list included:
        Goldman Sachs ($1,013,091)
        JPMorgan Chase & Co  ($808,799)
        Citigroup Inc
        WilmerHale LLP ($550,668)
        Skadden, Arps et al ($543,539)
        UBS AG ($532,674), and...
        Morgan Stanley ($512,232).
        McCain’s list, meanwhile, included (drum roll please):
        JPMorgan Chase & Co ($343,505)
        Citigroup Inc ($338,202)
        Morgan Stanley ($271,902)
        Goldman Sachs ($240,295)
        UBS AG ($187,493)
        Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher ($160,346)
         Greenberg Traurig LLP ($147,437), and...
        Lehman Brothers ($126,557).

        without the ants the rainforest dies

        by aliasalias on Mon Apr 09, 2012 at 11:29:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  McCain would have been worse (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      OpherGopher, sb, cas2, elwior

      His chief financial adviser was Sen. Phil Graham.
      The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 was one of the evolving steps to the economic melt-down in 2008.
      Without the bailout, the banking system would have stayed paralyzed and the recession would have been much worse.

      I often wonder what things would have been like had Republicans had not taken a stance against the Obama presidency to do whatever they could to sink his boat in spite of what it did to the economy at the expense of the working people in this country. You seem to ignore the responsibility of both parties to do a better job.

      You need balance in your criticism. I am not over-looking the short-comings of Obama but after the economic shock and eight years of siege under Bush , is it any wonder people wanted to believe that things could be better?
      They can be and they should be. We need to focus on electing better representatives and protesting against the corruption we have.

      Unity,not division, is the key to over-coming poor leadership at the top. Jesselyn keeps us aware of the on-going problems that plague our democracy. That is all the more reason to stay united in common purpose to oppose the assault on our liberties, not one another.

      •  Stop pretending that the BailOut with no (25+ / 0-)

        accountability was the only alternative to economic collapse.

        The Republicans were irrelevant in 2009.  They had exactly as much power as the national Democratic leadership, including the President, decided to give them.  We had the largest majorities in over a generation.

        You need to stop trying to obscure the President and the Parties failures, and you need to stop making excuses for the inexcusable.

        There can be no "unity" between those who beg for crumbs at the masters table, and those who would live as free human beings.  The key to overcoming corruption isn't for as all to fall in line behind the "Lesser Evil", but for all of us who truly want change to unite behind a Greater Good while leaving behind the cowards.

        Kos should start a PvP server for this game.

        by JesseCW on Mon Apr 09, 2012 at 09:42:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Obama deserves his knocks for his part (0+ / 0-)

          but that is not what I am getting at.

          As I see Tea Party candidate , Rep. Bobby Schilling,
          seeking a second term and likely to get it because he won't have to have to pitch to his voters that he stood with the other Republicans against all jobs programs, I am concerned  because he can now brag about how he "brought home the bacon" (earmarks) to his district and win re-election based on the jobs issue.

          He can also brag about his two votes against the Patriot Act on the grounds that it infringed on Constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
          Many Democrats share that concern as well.He promotes himself as a "man of the middle".

          He isn't the only Tea Party candidate that shares concern about infringement of rights and civil liberties as a platform issue. Heck Joe Walsh was elected on the platform of fiscal responsibility and now he is America's #1 deadbeat dad. If these guys get reelected you might as well kiss The Affordable Care act goodbye. That would certainly do more harm than good.

          If you think Obama's reelection is a sure thing,you may be in for a shock. As much of a shock as those who voted for Tea Party candidates for their defense of citizens rights or on jobs.

          Obama didn't have many options in the beginning of the financial crisis but he certainly appeared to waste opportunities that could have changed things for the better. I  would have liked to see Citigroup  go down the tubes. They were rescued by taxpayers four times in the last 40 years. What is to stop them from pulling this again?

          Jesselyn was a light of hope when she first appeared in the madness of the Bush years.Wikileaks and Occupy have broadened that hope.

          I am not a coward, just a tired citizen who sees small steps as important as big ones in this battle.

          •  So, you prefer to distract from the issues (0+ / 0-)

            and cry about deep red districts we will never win electing batshit crazy conservatives who are just more honest about their long term goals than their "reasonable Republican" forebearers?

            That's an agenda I can't call helpful.  Not to me and mine.

            Small steps backward, steps away from accountability and toward a view that all the crimes of the rich are to go unpunished, are important.

            To those who want to continue to abuse us and steal all the fruits of our labor.

            Kos should start a PvP server for this game.

            by JesseCW on Mon Apr 09, 2012 at 08:50:31 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I wouldn't call Joe Walsh honest,just crazy (0+ / 0-)

              In the world of political lies, apparently Obama lies 1% of the time, Hilary lies 2% of the time and Romney lies 11% of the time. That is where accountability begins. Holding people accountable for their lies.
              It also begins with election integrity. That is where my energy is invested.

              We are suffering from 30 years worth of unaccountability in the election process. Elections have consequences.

      •  Glass-Steagel Connect the Dots (11+ / 0-)

        You do realize that, while Sen Phil Grahm helped draft the repeal of Glass-Steagel, Democratic President Clinton signed it into law.

        And while its great fun to falsely portray the repeal as some sort of GOP plan, it passed with huge bi-partisan support.  

        a joint Senate and House Conference Committee reported out a final version of S. 900 that was passed on November 4, 1999, by the House in a vote of 362-57 and by the Senate in a vote of 90-8. President Clinton signed the bill into law on November 12, 1999, as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act of 1999 (GLBA).[

        Clinton's Treasury Secretary, Larry Summers, pushed for the repeal.

        Along with Robert Rubin and Alan Greenspan, Summers brought about elimination of key US financial regulations including the Glass-Steagall Act. He was particularly aggressive in his efforts to block regulations of derivatives, regulations that might have prevented the economic meltdown the US suffered in 2008. According to economist Dean Baker, "The policies he promoted as Treasury Secretary and in his subsequent writings led to the economic disaster that we now face."
        Laurence Summers

        So, did his work as an architect for the financial disaster we are currently trying to work our way out of preclude Summers from ever getting a job in government again?  Of course not.  Obama made Summers a top financial advisor based on his work in crashing our economy so Wall Street could make more money.  

        In sum, blaming the GOP for Glass-Steigal repeal is complete bull shit.  It was a bipartisan effort, lead by the Clinton Administration. And the Obama Administration won't do shit about it either.  

        •  No, it wasn't "lead" by the Clinton administration (0+ / 0-)

          It did happen on his watch.

          I remember Clinton saying he regrets that and wasn't aware of how damaging it would be. I believe what  he says because Clinton is enough of a egotist that he regrets anything that gives his presidency a black mark.
          That is certainly small comfort for the damage it did. He also had Greenspan advising him.

          The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report by Public Affairs that was to determine the causes of the financial crisis lays the blame at Greenspan's feet.In '99,when the Commodities Futures Trading Commission wanted to regulate derivatives,Greenspan led the attack against it.He wanted to eliminate the Glass-Steagall restrictions that prevented major banks from engaging in all financial transactions.He refused to regulate the suspicious mortgages being issued by Countrywide and others,even though the Fed had the authority to do so. He was warned many times,even by the FBI,that mortgage brokers were writing deceptive and fraudulent mortgages to unsuspecting home owners.
          Greenspan is a "free-market" economist.

          I realize this doesn't fit the Clinton-bashing narrative but these are the facts.

          I've often puzzled over why Obama appointed Summers as his top financial advisor. It wasn't so that he could screw things up. He might have made Clinton's mistake in trusting someone's recommendation.Presidents aren't usually economists.

          •  Blaming Greenspan (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            How many votes did he have in the Senate or on the House?  That's right, zero.

            Could he sign bills into law, like the president.  Nope.

            Frankly, corrupt politicians, from both parties, are to blame.  

            •  I am not "blaming" Greespan. The Financial Crisis (0+ / 0-)

              Inquiry Report:Final Report of the National Commission of the Financial and Economic Crisis" as well as "Inside Job" took a good slug at Greenspan. From What I can tell it was well-deserved.

              Greenspan addressed Congress and assured them that derivatives and subprime mortgage securities didn't need any federal regulation "at all". The unregulated derivatives were a principle source of the risk taking behavior that brought down the financial system. I'd say his visit payed off and Congress didn't do anything to stop this risky behavior. I think it is safe to say they were influenced by Greenspan's visit.

              Politicians aren't always corrupt, they're often stupid.Just ask my husband who has to deal with them in regards to tax law.

              They make laws that contradict one another constantly.
              You just have to choose the one you want to benefit your client. This is why tax schemes are successful.They are complicated and they contradict one another.

              There is a reason Elizabeth Warren couldn't get confirmed. She is too smart and would reveal many of the stupid things that Congress does to disadvantage the working poor. I agree about the corruption. I don't know how Obama can stop it. He can't get the people appointed that can do the job.

      •  hmmm (0+ / 0-)
        The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 was one of the evolving steps to the economic melt-down in 2008.
        By William Jefferson somebody or another - help me with this, triangulating third way New Democrat, what the heck was his name?

        That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

        by enhydra lutris on Mon Apr 09, 2012 at 01:14:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Read "The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report: (0+ / 0-)

          Final Report of the National Commission on the Causes of the Financial and Economic Crisis in the United States" by
          Pubic Affairs,545pp. only $14.99 in paperback and worth every penny to cure the ignorance that ails us all about this once and for all.
          It isn't particularly partisan by Greenspan had a big part to play in this and so did Phil Graham. I believe they endorse
          "free market" economics.

          "Inside Job" , a film by Charles Ferguson is a great source of information.

          •  I prefer reading history, and, I was able to (0+ / 0-)

            remember the answer.

            Since you would appear to be ignorant of it, it was Clinton, William Jefferson Clinton, I was trying to remember. He and his hand picked Treasury Secretary, de-regulation Rubin strongly backed the first Leach bill to repeal Glass-Steagall, and all subsequent attempts until they were finally victorious.

            You could've saved $14.99 by just reading the papers at the time, going to a library periodical reading room today, or even using Wikipedia.

            That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

            by enhydra lutris on Tue Apr 10, 2012 at 09:42:36 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The Financial Crisis Inquiry Report" is the most (0+ / 0-)

              comprehensive indictment of the American financial failure that yet been made". It took 2 years to gather the evidence of" the many hundreds of irresponsible and unethical practices by Wall Street bankers" according to Jeff Madrick.It was written by 6 appointed members of Congress.
              There's lots of blame to go around. Banks didn't have to get involved in speculative investments. Greenspan didn't have to project his influence on Congress.

              Its overly simplistic to say that Clinton was chiefly to blame.
              Papers do get updated and corrected.  

              History is great but it isn't contained in just one volume.
              There are many versions of the same story and each one has its value even when it fails to update the subject.
              There are five different biographies of Lincoln in our home.
              All are good but Sandburg's version is a favorite. Lincoln is brought to life with a sense of humor in that one.

        •  People, put some thought into what you write (0+ / 0-)

          Mindless political bashing without real thought behind what you say is so "Fox News". Don't fall into that trap.
          You are on Daily Kos. You can read and think and it wont' cost you thing. In fact , you will be recommended for it.

          •  Take your own advice - it appears that you (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            need to. Calling a well known truth "Fox News" is, just so "Fox News" that it is absolutely mind boggling.

            That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

            by enhydra lutris on Tue Apr 10, 2012 at 09:37:19 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Obama Said Many Things That Turned Out to Be False (6+ / 0-)

      We are the victims of a fraud Obama pulled off on voters.


Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site