Skip to main content

View Diary: When the Next Crash Comes Remember Which Side You Were On and Learn (213 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think Obama would like to do more to take on the (7+ / 0-)
    I think Obama would like to do more to take on the Banksters
    What leads you to think that, mookins?

    There have been no criminal investigations of those banksters who destroyed our economy.

    Do you think that congress is blocking any efforts by the Department of Justice to investigate?

    "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand? David Crosby.

    by allenjo on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 12:07:55 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Great answers, this place is the best! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eric Blair

      Obama's heart seems to me to be with the people- taking the profiteers out of student loans is the best example I can think of.

      But don't get me wrong, I think it's a staggering blow to our democracy that our government has acquiesced in the crimes of the Banksters and the war crimes of the Bush gang.

      Add to that Obama's war on whistleblowers, that REALLY didn't need to happen, and the best thing I can say is:

      Obama is the '76 Eldorado. That car was the same old gashog, but it debuted the slabsided shape of the fuel-efficient Cadillacs to come.

      He speaks of community, people working together, and that's a sea change in  the national self-image, and the polar opposite of the Republicans' ideal.

      To me this is nothing less than the clash between the Domination and the Cooperation model of existence, the culmination of a dialectic that's existed since the Patriarchal invaders imposed themselves onto the Goddess civilization.

      The Republicans' War on Women really throws a bright light on this, shows it up in stark relief.

      So there's another Mookins comment that tells you nothing you didn't already know. And I'm pushing a thousand of these now. Sorry, everybody!

      •  thanks, mookins, for your response but I really (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mookins, gooderservice, priceman

        was interested to know why you think this.

        I think Obama would like to do more to take on the Banksters
        What stopped him?

        "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand? David Crosby.

        by allenjo on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 01:41:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  OK here: Congress shows no stomach for (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Eric Blair

          bank regulation, right?

          From that I'm inferring big-time Bankster clout over them.  Enough clout to be able to derail their re-election by switching support to some pol who'll swing their way with more enthusiasm.

          I mean, Main Street wants Wall Street held accountable right? And it's not happening, so- Banksters have more clout than voters.

          Then, I'm inferring that this is also true at the Presidential level. Obama has to gloss over the whole thing just like the other pols.

          If you're a pol, the Banksters can make you lose. You can't go against them very much.

          So we'll do it ourselves, like Occupy. I keep thinking of that line from the song 'Ohio': 'We're finally on our own'. It just seems more and more true.

          •  The DOJ, namely one Eric Holder, has only to open (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mookins, priceman

            criminal investigations, and that hasn't happened.

            Obama has to gloss over the whole thing just like the other pols.
            How terrible for our justice system under Obama if Holder acts like just another politician.

            "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand? David Crosby.

            by allenjo on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 02:22:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  If you fight the king.... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mookins

            you have to kill the king.  Obama's choice was 1) to really take on Wall St.  Go after them in his inaugural address as Roosevelt did, appoint an attorney general that would prosecute them (and the previous admin).  Propose legislation to regulate them properly etc. etc.  or 2) to get along with Wall St. Say a few mildly accusative things about them, appoint Holder who will not investigate Wall St. in any meaningful way and not solve the country's problems.  So he took alternative 2, but be aware that if he had taken alternative 1, Wall St. and the corporate media they own, would have gone after him with a vengeance.  You can not do this by half measures, Wall St. and their media stooges would not have patted him on the back and said "nice try." He and the Democrats would have had to campaign against Wall St. with resolve and vigor or be crushed.  There was no stomach for that and, besides, Obama is really a corporate kind of guy in any case, and the big paychecks after he leaves office are sooo difficult to give up...so alternative 2 it is.

            I'm truly sorry Man's dominion Has broken Nature's social union--Robert Burns

            by Eric Blair on Thu Aug 23, 2012 at 03:12:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site