Skip to main content

   May I introduce to you my hero for the day: Jed S. Rakoff of the Federal District Court in Manhattan. Yesterday, Rakoff said what we all know: the government, our government, is not serious about holding people accountable for the robbery and greed and incompetence that led to the financial collapse, costing millions of people their jobs and obliterating trillions of dollars in wealth. As Rakoff said, it's all a show.

  The Securities and Exchange Commission is trying to ram through a settlement with Citibank that would let the monstrous bank slide with a slap on the wrist. Rakoff is not pleased and isn't buying the capitulation on the part of the government:

Yet the judge made it clear during an hourlong hearing in a crowded courtroom that he had serious concerns about how the commission reached such settlements — and whether they were tough enough.

Doesn’t the S.E.C. have an interest in what the truth is?” Judge Rakoff asked, in reference to the commission’s longstanding practice of not forcing a defendant to admit any wrongdoing when settling a case.

Matthew T. Martens, a senior lawyer at the S.E.C., said that the government believed that the public knew the truth about Citigroup’s conduct because the government’s lawsuit laid out its claims against the bank.

Last time I checked, correct me if I’m wrong, anyone can make an allegation,” said Judge Rakoff. “The mere fact that you say it’s so does not make it so unless it’s proved.”[emphasis added]

   The answer to Judge Rakoff's question is NO. The Administration, and virtually every elected official in both parties, has ZERO interest in finding out what the truth is--though, we know what the truth is--and even less interest in holding anyone in any  serious position accountable.

   Part of that is just about business, to paraphrase Don Corleone: it's about campaign contributions and not wanting to put in jail--which is where these people belong--many of the underwriters of the political electoral system.

    The government goes after the little fish, mucking around with insider trading cases, which, while deplorable, pale in comparison to the damage done by the CEOs and leaders of Wall Street.

    The SEC lets off J.P. Morgan with a wrist slap fine. Pathetic.

   Even though we know of a vast conspiracy and crime laid out by Sen. Carl Levin in his investigation of Goldman Sachs where he found, "...a financial snake pit rife with greed, conflicts of interest, and wrongdoing"--the vast conspiracy goes unpunished other than a measly fine.

   And, now, in the dock is Citibank, gleefully ready to accept a miniscule fine and let its former and current executives skate--particularly Robert Rubin who I have argued may have committed perjury but certainly was at the center of Citibank's role in the massive financial collapse.

    Let me give the last word to Judge Rakoff:

On Wednesday, the judge criticized the $95 million penalty against the bank, pointing out that the S.E.C. estimated investors’ total losses on the mortgage deal at $700 million.

“So the net effect of this is that you’re only returning a small fraction of what the investors lost, yes?” Judge Rakoff asked the S.E.C. lawyer.

Later in the hearing, the judge teased Brad S. Karp, the lawyer for Citigroup, about the penalty amount.

I won’t be cute and ask what percentage of Citigroup’s net worth is $95 million because I do not have a microscope with me.”[emphasis added]

Originally posted to Tasini on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 06:14 AM PST.

Also republished by Income Inequality Kos, In Support of Labor and Unions, The Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, ClassWarfare Newsletter: WallStreet VS Working Class Global Occupy movement, and Occupy Wall Street.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (217+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shaharazade, J M F, Preston S, ricklewsive, CitizenScientist, boadicea, Actbriniel, pioneer111, Azazello, ExStr8, katiec, hlsmlane, jfromga, GeorgeXVIII, Youffraita, blueoasis, white blitz, Mentatmark, milkbone, Spaghetti Western, Red Bean, democracy inaction, greenbastard, Robobagpiper, muddy boots, DarkestHour, lastlegslaststand, markdd, qannabbos, Muggsy, petulans, Tinfoil Hat, AboutTime, Statusquomustgo, Publius2008, lcrp, dougymi, Lily O Lady, IL clb, totallynext, glitterscale, mofembot, Lujane, p gorden lippy, millwood, where4art, bnasley, elengul, Geenius at Wrok, fugwb, kathny, ScienceMom, The Hindsight Times, artisan, dotsright, haremoor, SCFrog, howd, unclejohn, anodnhajo, drewfromct, mrkvica, 3rdOption, Arahahex, Wino, Seamus D, tidalwave1, DEMonrat ankle biter, la urracca, sleipner, semiot, opinionated, gustynpip, science nerd, timethief, Mr Robert, Mislead, zerone, Philpm, TomP, pcl07, yawnimawke, bluicebank, psnyder, babatunde, maybeeso in michigan, mikeconwell, hkorens, sc kitty, Horace Boothroyd III, 420 forever, No one gets out alive, deviant24x, Matt Z, Wood Dragon, legendmn, SallyCat, gbinwc, antirove, HugoDog, Ripeness Is All, Sychotic1, DBunn, wxorknot, enhydra lutris, luckydog, poe, democracy is coming, Yohannon, Horsefeathers, avsp, Marie, SpecialKinFlag, dewtx, MKinTN, eztempo, BradyB, Teiresias70, Mayfly, Celtic Merlin, Catskill Julie, paytheline, Tam in CA, DreamyAJ, CA Nana, tapestry, Alice Venturi, puakev, ask, cybersaur, xylonjay, barkingcat, Major Tom, Amber6541, poligirl, Larsstephens, JekyllnHyde, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, Remillard, pixxer, Limelite, Rick Aucoin, Laughing Vergil, LNK, merrily1000, ColoTim, Dumas EagerSeton, Aspe4, annan, Justina, SD Goat, strangedemocracy, JVolvo, ilyana, banjolele, SherwoodB, madgranny, shortgirl, fixxit, divineorder, CTLiberal, a2nite, eeff, Angie in WA State, Nance, tofumagoo, Laconic Lib, One Pissed Off Liberal, Calamity Jean, Anthony Page aka SecondComing, kurt, doingbusinessas, antooo, northern spy, IndieGuy, BMarshall, BYw, victoria2dc, mjfgates, revsue, hyperstation, Pilgrim X, citizendane, pickandshovel, DixieDishrag, terabytes, JDWolverton, ItsaMathJoke, bluestatedem84, sawgrass727, labwitchy, Mathazar, aerie star, Paper Cup, Empower Ink, radarlady, coppercelt, HeartlandLiberal, dalfireplug, Stripe, rmonroe, Creosote, angelajean, LI Mike, OHdog, Gustogirl, TheGrandWazoo, real world chick, bearette, PBen, emmasnacker, dwahzon, Oh Mary Oh, arlene, third Party please, chemborg, rlochow

    Follow me on Twitter @jonathantasini

    Visit Working Life.

    by Tasini on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 06:14:41 AM PST

  •  Thanks (33+ / 0-)

    I do hope judges keep pressing these issues so we can get rid of that "not admitting guilt" BS. It might force cases into court and maybe the SEC is not sufficiently funded or competent to win some cases, but I sure would like to have these banking monsters subjected to a few juries.

    Improvement is change. Not all change is improvement.

    by ricklewsive on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 06:48:29 AM PST

    •  Barack Obama is the face of Wall Street corruption (12+ / 0-)
      I sure would like to have these banking monsters subjected to a few juries.

      I agree completely.

      Further, I would like to see Obama and the corrupt Democratic leadership exposed to public scrutiny for their clear advocacy of these criminal Wall Streeters.

      No one on this site should seriously trumpet their support for the Occupy Wall Street movement and then turn around and talk about how important it is that we re-elect Obama, the #1 Wall St. fundraiser of '08.

      A vote for Barack Obama is a vote for Robert Rubin and Larry Summers (Citi), Rahm Emmanuel ("Free Trade" champion), Tim Geithner, Jeff Immelt (GE CEO, job exporter, 0% corporate tax payer), and Ben Bernanke.

      Remember, Barack Obama campaigns with a Progressive team, but he governs with a Corporatist team.

      Anyone who supports Obama in the face of clear evidence looks just like the pathetic drone Republicans who supported W in '04, in the face of clear evidence.

      •  I've got to chime in here with the typical - and (20+ / 0-)

        who then do you want elected - a republican?  I agree, Obama's been a disaster.  And I'd love to have another realistic option.  But we don't.  And the worst thing in the world would be to have the rethugs appointing more Supreme Justices.  So that leaves us with still needing Obama to be reelected.  Regardless of how distasteful that is.  OWS's job is to change the conversation and, for now, force those currently in power to be less corrupt.  In the long run, hopefully, it will be to actually change the make-up of the Democratic Party back to what it's supposed to be.  But that's not going to happen by 2012, so we deal with the reality we have for now.

        "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

        by gustynpip on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 09:53:26 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  u r both correct (22+ / 0-)

          This is going to be a fair and important debate in 2012. Here is my two cents--which I think I will be consistent on throughout but who knows.

          3rdOption is right about the corruption of the system. And Obama's role in shilling for many of the banksters--though, i would say, this is not surprising to anyone who actually looked at his background and votes and supporters...

          BUT BUT BUT BUT...I come down where gustynpip is: for real people, on a daily basis, it will make a difference if Obama is in the White House versus pick-any-of-the-Freak-Show Republicans. On the margins, I agree. But on those margins are a lot of people who won't survive a Republican White House. I can't ignore those people with a simple "they are all the same". In spirit and in long-term strategic goals, I see that systemic corruption--but on a short-term what happens in the next year, real people matter.

          We need to have this discussion openly amongst ourselves--without descending into "sell-out" or "naive" attacks.

          Follow me on Twitter @jonathantasini

          Visit Working Life.

          by Tasini on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 10:12:56 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  So the Corporatists pwned you both. (7+ / 0-)

            Again.

            If it keeps working on you, do you think this game is ever going to stop?

            Do you think the Democrats are going to offer you an anti-corporatist in '16? Nope. They'll pull the same fake-progressive scam on you, and there'll be another destructive nutjob opponent that you just CAN'T let win...

            Rinse. Repeat.

            Pwned.

            •  if the only other option WASN'T one of the (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              northern spy, Creosote, gustynpip

              bobble-heads currently vying for the Republican candidacy, your chastisement for those already planning to re-elect the President would have merit.

              But this is the real world, here at DailyKos.

              We deal with reality and what is possible - not in idle daydreams and "what might be"... because one can't work towards or for those sorts of amorphous things.

              But one can work towards "more and better Democrats"  in office. Howard Dean showed us all how, and 2008 showed that the nation's voters will respond to truth and facts instead of lies and foolishness, if they are given a chance.

              So join us, help us, work with us - to elect more and better Democrats in 2012... and perhaps the year in between is enough time to push the President Leftward and make him a better Democrat, too.

              It could happen. If enough of us do the hard work between now and next November.

              Otherwise, it's batten down the hatches and watch the krazy fly, as another trickle-down expert takes up residence in the Oval Office for four years. In which case, godz help us, every one.

              :(

              * * *
              I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization
              * * *
              "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy."
              THEODORE ROOSEVELT

              by Angie in WA State on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 05:29:12 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's not going to happen. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                citizendane, jsquared, Stripe
                ...perhaps the year in between is enough time to push the President Leftward and make him a better Democrat, too.

                If it could happen, it would have happened.

                You lost him at Rahm Emanuel.

                As I've said in previous comments, Barack Obama campaigns as a Progressive (like running around touting a "jobs bill" that he knows cannot pass...), but he governs as a Corporatist. Rahm, Summers, Geithner, Immelt.

                He didn't have to appoint those guys. He appointed them because they represent his objectives.

                Barack Obama is a Corporatist.

                You cannot push him anywhere. He's been exactly where he intended to be, all along.

                And he thinks Progressives are a joke.

                You need another option.

                Don't try to manipulate the corrupt. Replace them. If you can't, your party is dead and broken and useless as an instrument of Reform and you are wasting your time.

                The Occupy movement is making a difference that you dkos folks never have. They are focusing public opinion on corruption and the resultant economic injustice.

                The reason Progressives have never accomplished this is because they are dedicated to electing more and "better" Democrats. That means you can't talk about corruption, or you'll un-elect Democrats. That means more corrupt Democrats. And that's how you lost in '10. The cravenness of Democrats was painfully obvious after two years of pure D control, just like the destructiveness and incompetence of the R's was painfully obvious after Katrina.

                If the D's win back control, and Obama is re-elected, and they act on their corrupt nature (they will), the Democratic party will become a hollow laughingstock.

                Otherwise, it's batten down the hatches and watch the krazy fly, as another trickle-down expert takes up residence in the Oval Office for four years.

                And this will directly be the fault of the Democratic party, and those who support it in the face of all evidence.

                If Obama was the Reformer he claimed to be in '08, the Republicans would be the dead party, and he'd win '12 in a landslide.

                He's not. You're not going to make him one. Find another option, or you are working to doom the nation, not fix it.

                That is the reality of your circumstance.

                •  DKos hasn't accomplished shit in terms of (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  3rdOption

                  bringing about better representatives or better government.

                  We've learned a lot here and there is a lot of value to be had on this site. But a better Dem party has NOT happened, not even close.

                  Instead for example, we have John Corzine (former chairman of Goldman Sachs, former DEMOCRATIC senator and governor of NJ) who's just stolen $700 million from his customers while CEO at MF Global. And do you know what else he was doing this summer? Working on Obama's fund raising efforts from Wall Street of course! What the FUCK people?

                  Supposedly Corzine even hoped to be the next US Treasury Secretary. And why shouldn't he be? He fits perfectly with Obama's hand picked sociopathic parasites.

                  I heard recently on Democracy Now that of all the drone strikes done by the US, 85% have been authorized by Obama. 85%! And he's not slowing down one bit.

                  You know what that means? That means that Obama TODAY has committed almost 6 times as many murders by drone strike as Bush did in TWO terms.

                  Obama is a flat out mother fucking war criminal.  

                  Until the average Kossack admits that and demands BLIND JUSTICE, this site will continue to accomplish NOTHING for the country at large.

                  Are ANY of you STILL truly so FUCKING DELUDED as to think it matters which flavor of the corporo-fascist duopoly he claims?

                  As in: "Oh stop! I like the kinder, gentler corporo-fascism!"

                  I will NOT vote for Obama under ANY circumstances. He's lost my vote 100 different ways, all of the same pattern, pro-murder, pro-war, pro-war on Drugs, protection for war and financial criminals, prosecution of whistle-blowers, coverup of the BP spill, coverup of the ongoing worst nuclear disaster ever, and on and on. I hope the man joins Cheney, Bush, Geithner and Paulson in jail someday along with thousands of other war and financial criminals these two Administrations have contained or protected. That will be the day this country begins to live up to its promise.

                  Choosing Obama over a psycho Republican is like choosing death by having your wrists slit versus being shot in the face.  I'll choose neither thank you. They're both murderers even if one happens to be charismatic, well spoken and outwardly concerned that your murder not be too messy or hurt too, terribly much.

                  In spite of the pop-culture vampire revival, we're still missing the underlying social metaphor of the original Dracula: Those exotically beguiling aristocrats are sucking our blood. - Pericles

                  by citizendane on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 08:50:31 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  According to your math, no matter what (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Creosote

                  we do, we are doomed.

                  I'm not quite so jaded as that, even after 30 years of GOTV efforts in my own personal set of friends, family, co-workers and acquaintances.

                  Yes, this president leaves much to be desired, to those of us who championed Single Payer Universal Healthcare; and to those who were flabbergasted when he and Harry Reid expended a year's worth of political capital on it, instead of coming out of his inauguration on a JOBS hunt, revamping a WPA for the 21st century and putting a couple million people to work directly for the Federal Government... which could have been a way to get the working and middle classes out of the Great Recession sooner, rather than later. Personally, I think that might have avoided the drubbing the D's took in 2010.

                  But hindsight is always 20-20, isn't it?

                  Still, your apparent disconnect from reality, in that you appear to be saying that Progressives and Liberals shouldn't re-elect Barack Obama, because he will be worse than a Republican, for the Democratic Party as a whole, coming out of the 2012 election cycle...

                  That idea is clearly not anywhere in the vicinity of reality-based thinking.

                  * * *
                  I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization
                  * * *
                  "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy."
                  THEODORE ROOSEVELT

                  by Angie in WA State on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 08:50:42 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  we are doomed as long as we think these two (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    3rdOption

                    corrupt parties represent the only choice we have.

                    It is why 3rdOption is absolutely correct that Occupy Wall Street is far more effective than this site and that until we find another option, we're spinning our wheels and sliding backwards, downhill.

                    In spite of the pop-culture vampire revival, we're still missing the underlying social metaphor of the original Dracula: Those exotically beguiling aristocrats are sucking our blood. - Pericles

                    by citizendane on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 08:55:20 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I'll agree, OWS is indeed being much more (0+ / 0-)

                      effective than this site has been.  But you seem to see this as an either/or.  I love OWS, support them 100%, will give them money before nearly any political candidate (except maybe Elizabeth Warren).  But.  And this is a huge but.  That doesn't mean I'm going to ignore the differences, minor though they be, between the rethugs and the Dems.  I can vote for Obama because he's the least evil of the only two options we'll have while still doing everything in my power to support OWS.

                      You're trying to put people into a lose/lose situation.  OWS can ultimately make a real difference only if we can affect the political aspects of this country.  And we only have two parties with which to work on that.  It's unrealistic to think we're going to be able to create a third party that's going to be some magic bullet.  Rather, it's going to take the very hard and long term work of taking back the Democratic party.  Of getting more candidates like Elizabeth Warren on board, and then letting the rest of the asshats know that if they don't shape up and become like Elizabeth Warren, they can take a long walk off a short pier.  

                      If you want to not only take the easy way out and feel superior to those who are working on two fronts rather than only one, feel free.  It's your right.  But not too many of us are going to buy into that cop out.  If it works for you, go for it.  Feel like you're the one that really gets it and those who are still fighting the system are the fools.  Bottom line is OWS is going to need an avenue to participate in the decision making process itself, rather than only participate in the conversation.

                      "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

                      by gustynpip on Fri Nov 11, 2011 at 10:48:48 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  And here's the Fail: (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        citizendane
                        I can vote for Obama because he's the least evil of the only two options we'll have while still doing everything in my power to support OWS.

                        So you vote for the Wall Street poster child, and give money to kids trying to break Wall Street's deathgrip on the throat of our democracy?

                        How does that make any sense whatsoever?

                        It's like stopping in the middle of your exorcism to do a quick Black Mass.

                        "Ok, thanks for the intervention, I'll go to rehab. Could someone make sure my dealer knows the clinic's address so he can visit when I need him?"

                        Ludicrous.

                        And we only have two parties with which to work on that.  It's unrealistic to think we're going to be able to create a third party that's going to be some magic bullet.

                        The reason we have only two parties is because a majority of people are wrongfully convinced that we can only have two parties.

                        This is a logical fallacy propagated by both parties to ensure their supremacy, and thus never allow the aforementioned deathgrip to be loosened.

                        You believe it, you're the problem.

                        If you want to not only take the easy way out and feel superior to those who are working on two fronts rather than only one, feel free.  It's your right.  But not too many of us are going to buy into that cop out.

                        Failed ego-tweak.

                        This isn't about the ego victory of being right. When I predict a destructive outcome, and I end up being wrong, I'm gleeful.

                        There is simply no evidence that Obama can be turned from the Dark Side. At every opportunity he and his administration have heaped contempt upon the Progressives. He's not a Progressive.

                        He's had every opportunity to do the right thing, and he consistently choses evil-doers for his staff (think: Rahm, Geithner, Summers), abandons the righteous (think: Warren), and then makes compromises that benefit the 1% at all of our expense.

                        Feel like you're the one that really gets it and those who are still fighting the system are the fools.

                        If you're working to re-elect Obama, you are supporting "the system", not fighting it.
                        •  You know what? You're being an asshat yourself. (0+ / 0-)

                          You can disagree with someone's opinion and decision without being such a jerk.  What exactly do you think you're accomplishing by trying to tell me I'm stupid and being an idiot????  All you're doing is ticking me off so that I don't even want to discuss anything further with you.  Which in fact I won't bothering doing.  So I hope you really feel good about yourself.  You certainly didn't convince me in the least that you're right nor that I'm the one being a fool.  But you did manage to tick me off.  I expect that's probably enough for you.

                          "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

                          by gustynpip on Fri Nov 11, 2011 at 12:16:51 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Your frustration comes from being ego attached... (0+ / 0-)

                            ...to a wrong position.

                            Not from being trolled by an "asshat".

                            I never said, in any way:

                            ... tell me I'm stupid and being an idiot????

                            I've simply explained the logical errors in your comments.
                            You certainly didn't convince me in the least that you're right nor that I'm the one being a fool.

                            A) I'm not trying to demean you by calling you a fool.
                            B) You cannot convince anyone who is ego attached to their position that said position is wrong. Try doing that with a FOXNews drone, if you haven't already. It's impossible.

                            I'm not trying to convince you of anything, because you've already shown me that I can't. I'm writing for others who might stumble across this thread, and to make sure my positions are clear in my comment history.

                            But you did manage to tick me off.  I expect that's probably enough for you.

                            I'm not a troll, I'm not here to frustrate people for sport.

                            My advice? Do not allow yourself to be ego-engaged in these online discussion threads unless you enjoy this type of conflict.

                            I have a little sensor that goes off in my head, warning me when I'm getting into an ego fight instead of simply arguing concepts, logic, and facts toward an ultimate resolution. If the ego alarm goes off, I ask myself, "Do I feel like a fight right now?" The answer is almost always "no".

                            So I consciously disconnect my ego from the thread, and focus only on the logic of the thread. I actually had to learn this in a different place online, long before I ever found dkos.

                            I believe that your heart is clearly in the right place, you're just suffering from the same problem/dilemma we all face. You like Obama, personally. So do I. You probably voted for him and felt a combination of relief, elation, pride, and hopefulness the moment he was sworn in. So did I.

                            But everything we've seen since has registered 5 or higher on the betrayal scale. How do you deal with that? The Supreme Court argument is a legitimate one. The lesser of two evils point has its merit. The Republicans really are that bad. They are scary, destroy the country bad.

                            So how do you cope with this obvious betrayal, the craven corruption of the Democrats, who were poised to save us, but sold us out, threw the game? How do we act to counter or overcome all this?

                            The only thing I can say is, denial is not an option.

                            Good luck, and I'm sorry I upset you.

                          •  Wrong. You're just being a jerk because you (0+ / 0-)

                            think you're right.  Period. Therefore, I'm not interested in talking with you further.

                            "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

                            by gustynpip on Sat Nov 12, 2011 at 04:18:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  Doom and Chaos (0+ / 0-)
                    But hindsight is always 20-20, isn't it?

                    Sometimes foresight is also 20-20.

                    Like when I asked the nice girl bussed into my neighbor to GOTV for Barack in '08, "What are you going to do after Obama wins, gets sworn in, and immediately starts doing the bidding of corporations? Will you be out door to door expressing your outrage?"

                    [Insert Beavis and Butthead reaction here.]

                    You saw this movie before, with Bill Clinton. This is Clinton 2.0, with the blowjob bug worked out.

                    ...you appear to be saying that Progressives and Liberals shouldn't re-elect Barack Obama, because he will be worse than a Republican, for the Democratic Party as a whole...

                    This is a strawman, I didn't say that.

                    I don't care about what's good or bad for the Democratic party. They are a slow burn, epic, Fail.

                    I'm saying that we don't have any more time to screw around. The fate of the United States as either a failed nation or a going concern may well depend on reforms we must make in the next couple of years.

                    I don't believe this nation has the time to wait out yet another destructive Corporatist Democratic regime. Clinton almost broke the world with his economic fuckups, which the Democratic tribalists insist on blaming on W. But W didn't do NAFTA or repeal Glass-Steagal, he just kept Clinton's gravy train for the 1% humming along nicely.

                    Our economy is too fragile to wait to see if Obama can be rehabbed. We are losing A FREAKIN' GENERATION. People die because of this kind of prolonged economic malaise. Re-elect Obama and guarantee a U.S. banana republic, and the functional failure of the U.S. Constitution.

                    FIND SOMEONE ELSE.

                    As long as the tribalists insist that Obama is our only hope, Obiwan, no one worth a damn will step forward. If Romney doesn't poll well after he wins the R nomination, expect Bloomberg to enter. If he wins, he'll be worse than Obama, and we'll be in a war with Iran almost instantly.

                    Progressives and Independents had better find someone better, fast, or it'll be doom and chaos.

                    •  OK, so I can kind of see what you're saying (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      3rdOption

                      On that note, I voted for Ross Perot in 1996, and believe to this day that President Clinton shamed himself and the Office the day he committed perjury while he was a sitting US President. Unlike most Democrats, while the reason the President committed perjury is irrelevant to me - the fact that he did is not.

                      The place I worked in 2000 saw a visit from then-candidate for vice-president, Joe Lieberman (when he was still an actual Democratic Party member in good standing). There was press from the NYTimes, the Wash Post and a variety of other print and online publications. The quip I gave the reporter who interviewed me was that I was still considering a third party ballot. He responded, didn't I consider that was no different than not voting, knowing in advance, any candidate besides the two on the D & R side was not going to be elected. I told him, well, my vote wouldn't be wasted if enough people voted 3rd party. He was sort of stunned, as though the idea had never occurred to him.

                      All of that is to establish to you my bona fides on the subject of 3rd Party voting and candidates to high office on the national scale in These United States.

                      With #OccupyEarth on the verge of going 'mainstream nightly news worthy' before the festive holiday season ends, I believe that we would be looking at a serious realignment of the national psyche over what is sure to be the most strident winter of discontent seen in over seventy years in America.

                      To say, "anything could happen", is not too far-fetched, so far as I can tell. After all, we haven't seen lines of riot-gear-garbed police baton-beating defenseless citizens since my own early childhood (the early 1960s). That's a half century.

                      It's also been a bit more than a half century since the income inequality between the 1% and the 99% has been so large - and it's side-effects have been so visible.

                      Add climate change into the mix, and the current generation round the world is becoming aware that a future for the entire human race is what is really, truthfully, at stake right now around the globe.

                      That without significant changes in energy production and usage, without a limit to human reproduction worldwide, without humane international laws on labor, ecosystem and trade - that there is no future.

                      But those things are all possible, if the will of the people is heard, seen and acknowledged by the ruling classes in every land. There is still time to leave a world worth living in to our children and grandchildren.

                      I think that #Occupy has found a way around the strictures that generally stifle any citizen-led movement in the modern age. Social media, for the first time, has made TV News obsolete when it comes to getting the Nuz out there.

                      When #Occupy is recognized around the nation and around the world... the wealthy are reminded that they live their lives of luxury because the working class works to put them there... the Elected remember that Electorates who vote in unison are generally not kind to those who ignored them previously...

                      So, if you've come this far, I have some advice for you.

                      Work to prevent a Republican from sitting behind the Resolute Desk, come January 2013.

                      Work to put more and better Democrats in the US House and Senate, starting in January of 2013.

                      The political capital of #Occupy can guide the conversation which the new 2013 Congress and President take up once in office.

                      It can be an entirely new and different sort of America which emerges from that spring. Your belief that the actions of President Obama and the US Congress cannot and will not change, no matter what, is mis-guided. I assure you, once a President sees the power of his people made plain to him, he listens and acts accordingly.

                      Hence the missing dictator of Libya, amongst others.

                      I feel bad for you, that you seem to have no hope left in you for something good to happen. That the barriers to a good future seem to be so high as to be insurmountable.

                      Perhaps I am merely no more than an overly-optimistic grandmother, still holding out hope for a future more like Star Trek than Star Wars.

                      Can you see where I am coming from?

                      * * *
                      I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization
                      * * *
                      "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy."
                      THEODORE ROOSEVELT

                      by Angie in WA State on Fri Nov 11, 2011 at 02:24:53 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Thanks for the conversation (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        3rdOption

                        I've had to endure the slide of democratic values, having reached voting age in 1973. As too many people have pointed out ad infinitum, much of today's "left of center" was the 1970s "radical right." I am saddened to find the most compelling reason for re-electing Obama to be Supreme Court nominations even as I recognize it's validity.

                        While I sympathize with 3rd party advocates, it's really up to them to advance their cause. It may sound harsh, but it's the truth. I think where we might find some common cause occurs during state and local primaries. The idea of electing "better" democrats also translates to voting for an independent at the local level if there is no democrat to choose. I believe a "democrat" who votes like a republican IS a republican. In these cases, advancing an independent candidate seems to be a sign of intelligence ... :).

                        I like the passion and I encourage anyone who believes this democratic party to be a shill for corporate power get out there and make the opposition happen. This is where I differ from many democrats who wail that this is what will cause repeats of the Gore candidacy. Gore lost because of the supreme court. Gore lost because he was an outstandingly inept campaigner. Gore lost because he walked away from the fight for constitutional integrity, citing bullshit concerns for god, blah blah blah, country blah blah blah, healing the divide, blah blah blah. He walked away from a fight which should have taken place in order to uphold the integrity of the political process. To my way of thinking, he was a coward and took the cowards way out, wrapping himself in the emperor's cloak of god & patriotism.

                        I agree with those who see the occupy movement as the most effective approach to changing the conversation in Washington and promoting actual progressive values and solidarity among people who really do share common cause. The party of democrats is failing miserably in this cause. I balance this against the successful efforts democrat organizations have undertaken to push back some of the most egregious attempts to foist a business driven, christian fascism upon America.

                        To my way of thinking, we need both approaches. To try to force people to choose one or the other is to miss this point. We should be able to work together where we can and try to minimize vituperative discourse as much as possible. While this seems almost impossible on the pages of Kos, it is being demonstrated in numerous occupy movements across the land.

                        In a democracy dissent is an act of faith. Like medicine, the test of its value is not in its taste, but in its effects. J. William Fulbright

                        by crescentdave on Fri Nov 11, 2011 at 04:25:27 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  #Occupy is shutting down the tribalists... (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          gustynpip

                          ...on this site.

                          I notice a change in tone here, but I could be only seeing my own slice of the pie, perception-wise.

                          We should be able to work together where we can and try to minimize vituperative discourse as much as possible. While this seems almost impossible on the pages of Kos, it is being demonstrated in numerous occupy movements across the land.

                          The Corporatist Democrats can't stand the shining light of scrutiny that's pointed at them by #Occupy.

                          What #Occupy is really doing is drawing a line in the sand between the 1% and the 99%, and forcing politicians to stand on one side or the other. If they oppress, they're Corporatists. If they denigrate, Corporatists. If they excuse corruption, or refuse to prosecute it, Corporatists.

                          You can wave a rainbow flag and cheer gay rights 'till the cows come home, but if you're in the pocket of Pharma, health insurers, big gas, oil, & coal, defense contractors, job exporting manufacturers, or Wall Street banks, you are vermin.

                          Corporate D's are scrambling like roaches in the kitchen when the light comes on.

                          Corzine, Cuomo, Schumer. Nowhere to hide.

                          Further, now we can see that the only thing Lieberman and Bloomberg are independent of, is the 99%. When Bloomberg defended the Banksters this week, he showed his hand and all the cards up his sleeve.

                          This is a really good thing.

                          Another dilemma; FOXNews is trying to figure out how to keep themselves wrapped in the flag and shit on the #Occupy-ers at the same time. Solution? Denigrate the service of the veterans who protest. Yikes. That's going to blow back in their faces in a most satisfying way. Result?

                          FOXNews --> 1% propaganda, exposed

                          The longer #Occupy continues, and maintains its non-violent stance, more and more national healing will occur.

                          #Occupy is the conscience of our nation.

                          •  While I disagree with your stance of not (0+ / 0-)

                            voting because there's no difference between the parties, I couldn't agree more with everything you said in this post.

                            "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

                            by gustynpip on Fri Nov 11, 2011 at 10:52:14 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Not: "No Difference" (0+ / 0-)

                            There are significant differences. Both parties use their stances on social issues to pull the wool over the eyes of their base on economic issues.

                            I have an acquaintance who votes R specifically because of the 2nd Amendment.

                            If you're for gay rights, how could you vote R? If you hate gays, how could you vote D?

                            This scam then goes on ad infinitum, allowing the interests of the 1% to run roughshod over the middle class and poor.

                            How do you break that cycle? If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you never will.

                            Further, there are genuine Progressives lurking in the Democratic party, but they are a persecuted minority.

                            On the issues that determine the viability of our nation and our Constitution, however, both parties are lockstep Corporatists, because they are paid to be.

                          •  You also don't break it by not voting. You break (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Angie in WA State

                            it, IMO, by something like OWS combined with voting for the lesser of two evils, so that the most evil doesn't make it even worse.  As OWS changes the conversation and more honest people are encouraged to enter politics, there will then be real choices to make when voting.  

                            It just seems to me you think there's a cause and effect that doesn't exist.  Voting does not cause the basic dishonesty that currently exists in politics and not voting won't stop it.  Getting people to understand, such as through OWS is the key.  But then it has to be followed up with voting.  Just remember, we wouldn't have corporations now being able to donate unlimited funds to get their political speech out there had it been up to the Justices appointed by Democrats.  That, to me, tells me I have to keep voting, if only to have some impact on the Supreme Court.  It is truly the last bastien and the last possible hope for this country.  If they get another rethug on that Court, it truly becomes hopeless.

                            "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

                            by gustynpip on Fri Nov 11, 2011 at 12:13:14 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Who said "don't vote"? (0+ / 0-)

                            I just said stop voting for known evil, lesser, greater, whatever.

                            Keep voting for the lesser of two evils and you keep getting evil, ALWAYS AND FOREVER.

                            You can't keep voting for Democrats or Republicans and expect that to change.

                            Voting does not cause the basic dishonesty that currently exists in politics...

                            Correct. Voting doesn't cause corruption.

                            Voting for a known corrupt individual (in this case, Obama) DOES.

                            Keep voting for evil, keep getting evil.

                            How is that not painfully obvious?

                      •  I was with you right up to... (0+ / 0-)

                        ...the part about "more and better" Democrats.

                        First, a quick aside.

                        Perot was right. About everything.

                        Anyone who mocks Perot, or who spews the nonsense that Perot got Clinton elected (exit polls contradict this), I lose substantial respect for them instantly.

                        They mock an SNL-generated caricature of Perot, thus side-stepping the fact that he was right about everything, and was doing what he did for exactly the right reasons. You won't find a billionaire alive today who has the capacity to do what Perot did.

                        The political capital of #Occupy can guide the conversation which the new 2013 Congress and President take up once in office.

                        This is true, and it's already happening. #Occupy is forcing both parties to change their talking points. But that's all.

                        All #Occupy is to the Democrats is a guidebook for their '12 marketing plan. That's all Obama is doing, marketing himself using the fake Jobs bill. It's a sham. If he was going to do a jobs program, and the Democrats were behind him, it would have been done before the '10 debacle, and the '10 debacle wouldn't have happened.

                        Obama is not on the side of the 99%, and he's never going to be on the side of the 99%, but he will "message" to the 99%, just like his mentor Bill Clinton did. Remember, "Ah feel youhr paihn"?

                        It's a lie. The soul of the Democratic party is fully corrupted, and there will never be a come-to-Jesus moment for these criminals.

                        There are a few good (as in, minimally corrupted) Democrats, but they are a tiny, ineffectual, persecuted minority. Rahm was one of their persecutors. And who chose Rahm to be his chief of staff? That's right, the false-Reformer, Barack Obama.

                        When you think Democrat, you should think Joe Lieberman. He is the prototypical Corporatist Democrat. When you see a wonderful Obama stump speech, and you're feeling inspired, go off to the left of the stage, pull the curtain back, and you'll find Joe Lieberman.

                        If you are loyal to the Democratic party, you are loyal to Joe Lieberman. Copy/Paste this next sentence:
                        When Lieberman finishes his Senate term, Obama will appoint him SecDef.

                        When this comes true, please write a diary here at dkos and include my quote from this date. Then, explain your continuing support for Obama and the D's.

                        If Bill Clinton is the heart of the Democratic party, Joe Lieberman is its soul, and its conscience.

                        Do you really think #Occupy can save Lieberman's soul?

                        I feel bad for you, that you seem to have no hope left in you for something good to happen.

                        You're mis-reading me. I simply have no hope that actual Reform is going to come from either the Republican or the Democratic parties, because they are both owned, lock, stock, and barrel by the 1%.

                        You cannot save the Democratic party, you're going to have to go to war against it.

                        The D's and the R's are two wings of the party of the 1%.

                        We need a party for the 99%.

                        I believe #Occupy is the first step toward unshackling good Progressives from the Corporatist Democrats, those sincere, non-racist Tea Baggers  from the R's, and a good share of Independents from their sofas.

                        If Homeland Security doesn't lower the boom first.

                •  Don't you get it? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  3rdOption, gustynpip

                  The system is entirely rigged.  We could come up with a sterling 3rd party option, have the vast majority of the people vote for him/her, and a corporatist would still win the election.

                  Our democracy has already been stolen.  It's in their pockets, off the table, nowhere to be found.  Few realize how really bad it is, nor how hard those in power are willing to play in order to stay in power.

                  There is some hope.  Obama is feeling the pressure over Keystone.  Delaying his decision is hardly the ideal, but it is a decision that is going to cost someone a lot of money.  We do still have some modicum of power, when we unite and stand up.  It is important to them to at least maintain the illusion that this is a government by, for and of the people.  Because when people see through that, they will all be joining up with Occupy.

                  Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth - Abraham Lincoln

                  by Gustogirl on Fri Nov 11, 2011 at 05:03:03 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  don't worry (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            3rdOption, Aspe4, divineorder

            Wall St doesn't want the freak show in power when they can get everything they want from the much saner Obama.

            It will be either Obama or Romney, and probably it will be Obama.

            Being ignored is the difference between being a one percenter and an American.--sweeper

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 01:56:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I live in a very conservative region... (14+ / 0-)

            I tell people that I don't like Obama either.  

            The only difference is the people around here don't like him because they say he is a leftwing extremist, socialist and I wish he was.

            "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

            by Buckeye Nut Schell on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 02:04:00 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  You said it, Tasini: (9+ / 0-)
            The answer to Judge Rakoff's question is NO. The Administration, and virtually every elected official in both parties, has ZERO interest in finding out what the truth is--though, we know what the truth is--and even less interest in holding anyone in any  serious position accountable.
        •  Wall Street Wins Either Way. (7+ / 0-)

          And that's really depressing. Our two-party system is a joke. Michael Bloomberg just gave more evidence of that when he recently spread the big lie and blamed Congress for causing the financial crisis by forcing banks to make subprime loans. This asshole used to be a Democrat who turned republican and then turned independent. Party labels mean nothing and people need to remember that when they defend the Obama Admin.

          "The problem with posting quotes off the Internet is you never know if they're genuine."--Gen. George Washington at the Battle of Gettysburg, February 30, 1908

          by Aspe4 on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 03:41:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  So who is the 3rd option (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ricklewsive

          You seem to be advocating for an unknown candidate.  I've seen a mystery organization that wants money but won't or doesn't have a candidate.

        •  the mystery party (6+ / 0-)

          it's not dif than the "no Labels" sham. From my perspective, they are calling for "centrist" policies. But mainly much of it rests on the tiresome criticism that there is too much "division" or "bickering". Hell, I want MORE DIVISION. It doesn't have to be ugly or vicious. But it can clearly state a very dif vision of the world--meaning, for example, enough of this "free market" crap.

          Follow me on Twitter @jonathantasini

          Visit Working Life.

          by Tasini on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 10:15:16 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Anti-Corporatism is not centrism. (8+ / 0-)

            That's the tell right there.

            If a candidate doesn't advocate for public financing of elections and a constitutional amendment to eliminate corporate personhood, they're another shill.

            Corruption transcends ideology.

            So you fix corruption first, and fight over ideology once the system is cleaner.

            At this point, given the state we are in, and the growing level of public awareness of that state of abject corruption, any candidate arguing ideology right now is in on the scam, or stupid.

            And if you vote ideology, you're pwned.

            •  Most people don't have a clue what (0+ / 0-)

              "corporate personhood" even means....and the public may not understand about "public financing of elections" ("why should we taxpayers have to pay for campaigns?").  

              I agree that we have to choose which Democrats to support, because many cannot be trusted...but if we abandon "ideology"  we have nothing to offer. The big problem with the Democratic party, in fact, is that it has no ideology, which is what allows Democrats to do the bidding of finance.

              "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

              by Alice in Florida on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 11:34:20 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I didn't say "abandon ideology"... (3+ / 0-)

                I said fix corruption first.

                You entirely missed my point, because you are ego attached to ideology.

                CORRUPTION TRUMPS IDEOLOGY.

                If a party is corrupt (the D's are), then ideology is MARKETING, not a value set.

                So they say what you want hear, you swoon and vote for them, then they betray you, you are mollified by what they say, you vote for them again, they betray you again... rinse, repeat, since Clinton.

                Keep voting ideology in a corrupt system, and you're going to get "more and better" Obama/Romneys.

                •  We need Instant Runoff Voting (0+ / 0-)

                  And if DKOS gave a flying FUCK about this COUNTRY instead of the pathetic, corrupt Democratic Party, then this site would push grassroots activism to bring Instant Runoff Voting to EVERY locality.

                  It'd take a few years before it made a difference, but then WE THE PEOPLE would WIN.

                  And we'd never have to settle for this good cop/bad cop BULLSHIT choice again.

                  In spite of the pop-culture vampire revival, we're still missing the underlying social metaphor of the original Dracula: Those exotically beguiling aristocrats are sucking our blood. - Pericles

                  by citizendane on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 08:58:15 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

      •  Unless you're prepping for a revolution (0+ / 0-)

        You need to be prepping for elections - and the Republicans have made a very stark differentiation this year between themselves and the Democrats that you are (very unconvincingly) attempting to conflate with them.

        Personally, I'd give even the Tea Wees good odds against equally if not superlatively more cluelessness than themselves.

        Dems = Pubs. Sheesh. Now that's well and truly FAIL.

        •  What Stark Differences? (4+ / 0-)

          Could you please lay out all the so-called stark differences between, let's say, the policies of Bush and Obama?

          Frankly, they are as alike as two peas lying side by side in the same pod.  Sure, they don't share the exact same wrinkles, to claim they have stark differences is absurd.  

               

          •  The comparison is Obama v Walker/Snyder et al (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Larsstephens

            The year is 2011. The choices as presented in the year 2011 are absolutely clear.

            Maintaining that Obama = Walker, Snyder, Scott, Kasich... and, oh yes - CAIN.... that's going to be a heavy lift.

            Get help if you need help carrying that much weight.

            I can wait. :)

            •  Which party is going to jail banksters? (5+ / 0-)

              Neither.

              Which party is going to stop corporate-sponsored warmongering? Neither.

              If you think the national Democrats actually support unions, you haven't paid attention since NAFTA.

              Which President just said that three new "free trade" agreements would CREATE American jobs? Which party just ratified those agreements?

              Stark differences. Right.

              •  The Same Party That Will End the Afgan War, Drone (5+ / 0-)

                strikes, targeted killing, close Gitmo, reject austerty, raise taxes on the 1%, start a federal jobs program, bring all our troops home, ect.

                That party is called "not the Democratic Party."  The candidate?  "Not President Obama."

                   

              •  Re: Goes to credibility (0+ / 0-)

                One party wants to dismantle rule of law utterly - they block stronger regulation of banks.

                The other isn't with that.

                You say they are one and the same.

                I say otherwise.

                Which position is more credible?

                Strong Advocacy for OWS

                doesn't require parroting the false equivalency that Dems are just as bad as Pubs.

                Ask people in Wisconsin and Ohio and Michigan if they think Dems are just the same.

                Because... those that thought so in November 2010 don't think so anymore.

                It's not me you need to convince

                It's people who turned out Tuesday to say eff that noise to Republicans.

                I mean.. it's like they think there's a choice or something.

                Are you calling them all stupid dupes.. or just me? :)

                •  Brazen Corporatists vs Craven Corporatists (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  TimmyB, Laconic Lib, jsquared, citizendane

                  Such a distinction.

                  They don't have to be identical to be destructive.

                  Who is better, the burglar who breaks into your house and steals your stuff, or the relative that you love who's an addict who steals exactly the same stuff?

                  You say it's the trust-betraying relative, because they didn't kick in the door and break it. Hooray, you didn't have to fix your door.

                  I say it's the trust-betrayer because they are betraying you.

                  But the end result will be the same; a broken democracy, a toothless Constitution, and no middle class.

                  Oh, well. At least with your guys, a few states might allow gay marriage, so...Victory!

                  •  I've a friend who maintains (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    3rdOption, TimmyB, citizendane

                    that gay marriage is a social issues sop to buy special interest votes for Democrats.

                    Given that Andrew Cuomo is hardly a friend of OWS, yet was lauded as a champion of equal marriage rights, my friend's comment has stronger legs than it did two months ago.

                    Yet Cuomo's loyalties to the banks are hardly shy, and never have been.  And they're definitely not - just ask the OWS peeps in Albany.

                    I'm very much onboard with the message that the time for Democrats to make the strong choice between the profits and the people  is now - that time time of hedging is done.

                    I, too, see a lot of Dems making strong choices to stand with the banks.

                    Not all, however. Elizabeth Warren comes to mind. Rep.  Brad Miller another. Hardly a multitude.. but I'm holding hope that more leaders will come around as they see that doing the right thing is doing the winning thing - for the country, and for their own careers.

                    As for those, like Cuomo, who just aren't going there... so be it. Then we know. And if it's a lot or most of the party leadership, so be it.

                    They'll just have to figure out who is going to vote for them if the 99% don't.

                    •  A Social Issues Sop (3+ / 0-)

                      Yep.

                      I think it's worse than that though. I think the social issues are a sop to themselves, so that these officeholders can feel better about whoring themselves out to corporate interests. "At least I'm helping gays, even though I'm f*cking the whole country."

                      Sunday's 60 Minutes interview has several revealing bits, but notably, Abramoff talks about elected officials doing mental gymnastics to deny to themselves that they are the corruption problem. One reference to this is at 1:54, but the whole thing is worth the watch, for those who haven't seen it yet.

                      60 Minutes

                      Not all, however. Elizabeth Warren comes to mind.

                      How's she going to take dirty money from the DSCC and stay clean? I don't question her integrity, and that leads me to the conclusion that she'll have to leave the Democratic party after she's elected. Sort of an anti-Lieberman. (Unfortunately, like matter/anti-matter, bad things might happen if these two ever have to touch...)
                      They'll just have to figure out who is going to vote for them if the 99% don't.

                      The key for the corrupt is to keep playing the "But look how crazy those nutjobs are!!!" card.

                      As I said in a previous comment, the political "elite" know the Bill Parcells playbook. If the defense isn't stopping a play, KEEP RUNNING THAT PLAY until they do.

                      Elizabeth Warren is not going to de-corrupt the Democratic party. I think the corruption is too systemic, like massively metastasized cancer. This patient cannot be saved, certainly not with tiny blood transfusions and an occasional suppository.

                      Sadly, Barack Obama, who promised to be the cure, has turned out to be one of the most crippling tumors.

                      •  Here is the thing... (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        3rdOption, jsquared, TimmyB

                        Both parties are exactly the same on economics... They just pander to different crowds.

                        Sure they use social issues to separate themselves from their opponent but there is no difference on issues regarding the 1%.

                        Remember when the Democrats were given the House, the Senate, the White House and a mandate for change?  What did they do with it?  Sure, "MOST" of the democrats voted for change but not enough of them to actually change anything and what they did change (economically speaking) after their "Post-Partisan"negotiations was basically regurgitated Republican ideas proposed in years past that couldn't get enough support twenty years ago.  The Democrats knew who could afford to alienate their base a little and vote against the party so there was just enough cross over votes to prevent real change.  Do you remember that a big part of the stimulus was tax cuts? They are all plutocrats (at least the vast majority of them are) regardless of the letter the put in front of their name.

                        It appears you can vote for Dems or Repubs for the social changes there support but do not expect any of them to bite the hand that feeds them.

                        "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

                        by Buckeye Nut Schell on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 03:09:38 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                •  Which party's President signed into LAW (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  3rdOption, TimmyB

                  the REPEAL of Glass Steagall?

                  Which party's President signed into law the Commodities Futures Modernization Act?

                  Which party's President gave us NAFTA?  

                  In spite of the pop-culture vampire revival, we're still missing the underlying social metaphor of the original Dracula: Those exotically beguiling aristocrats are sucking our blood. - Pericles

                  by citizendane on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 09:01:37 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Walker and Snyder are NOT Running for President (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Laconic Lib

              Your stunning failure to even try contrasting Bush and Obama only highlights how similar they are.

              So does your need to conjure up GOP boogymen who are not even running for President.    

              •  But, state pols are harbingers of... (0+ / 0-)

                ...what's to come at the national level.

                All these Republican governors consider themselves as on deck for President '16. And they are the enacters of the policies the national Republican candidates only speak of to their base.

                They are legitimate bogeymen.

                The problem is that Democratic tribalists only want to talk about Republican bogeymen. This tried and true tactic is crucial in continuing the reign of the Corporatist Democratic bogeymen.

              •  The GOP clown car is even scarier (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                a2nite

                The lesson learned from 2010 is Republicans these days mean exactly what they say when they say they are going to tear down every good thing about the Republic.

                All kidding aside...Walker and Snyder are the shape of things to come - only with WMDs - if one of the Clown Car Candidates wins in 2012.

                None of this deterring the focused criticism that Democratic Party leaders dragged their feet supporting protest in the Midwest states this past spring and aren't doing much better in and around OWS this fall.

        •  One Party, Two Wings (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TimmyB, Aspe4, jello5929

          Corporatist Party
          Asshole Wing vs Liberal Wing

          War policies? The same.
          Wall Street friendliness? The same.
          Corporate Whoredom? D's are worse, because they claim to be progressive, and knowingly sell out the poor and middle class.

          The Democrats are a Fail, and you're not going to fix them.

          How long has dkos been live? Look at Obama's first two years, when the D's owned everything. They are worse than they've ever been. You have accomplished less than zero when it comes to cleaning up the D's.

          You're just a group of crying cheerleaders, rooting for a team that's been payed off to throw the game.

          Occupy has done more for this country in one month than dkos has done in its existence.

          •  re: the you of which you speak (0+ / 0-)

            It sounds plural.

            I was addressing just one clearly flawed bit of thinking. Not even an entire person - as I don't know you at all.

            Since you don't know me at all.. attributing views to me is .. heh.. just piling error upon error.

            Don't do that, or it's going to be a long, long afternoon for you. :)

            re: cheerleaders

            Oh I think my record on getting in fights with the core cadre stands for itself.

            Feel free to ask them. :)

            And .. I don't remember seeing your name in any of those furballs.

            Like I said - error upon error. :)

            •  I thought it was contextually obvious... (0+ / 0-)

              ...that I was referring to a collective "you", not a personal one.

              If you feel the need for useless, ego-based combat, go elsewhere.

              •  re: personal stake in a blog conversation (0+ / 0-)

                I'm here to confront a damaging meme that needs to be discredited aggressively and often - that Dems and Pubs are equivalent.

                If that falsehood ever had legs, it was before the Tea Wee Tsunami of 2010 showed exactly what the differences are between the parties.

          •  It's Worse Than That (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            3rdOption, Laconic Lib, northern spy

            It's really: Asshole Wing vs. Conservative Wing.

            "The problem with posting quotes off the Internet is you never know if they're genuine."--Gen. George Washington at the Battle of Gettysburg, February 30, 1908

            by Aspe4 on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 03:55:16 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  The Revolution will not happen (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          3rdOption, Rick Aucoin

          it is a perpetual dream of adolescents (I remember it well, for I was young once, too). It won't happen, because only a tiny portion of the population wants it.

          Most people want jobs...jobs they can count on, public services they can count on, the opportunity to raise a family and retire without fear of losing everything they've worked for to the machinations of Wall Street. We need a government that protects us from the destructive force of unfettered capitalism. The only way we'll get it is if everyone votes...the reason we have the current crowd is that most people don't vote, so politicians don't feel pressured to listen to them.

          "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

          by Alice in Florida on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 11:42:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  The SEC is in it up to their eyeballs. It's so (4+ / 0-)

      fucking bogus to have THEM doing these settlements.

      You can't have fraud, corruption and theft on as massive a scale as this is without full cooperation of the SEC.  They are not incompetent, they are complicit and were compliant so they could have their slice of the pie too.  Good grief.  The whole system reeks of the fix being in everywhere.

      When everybody talkin' all at once no one can hear the wise one speak, So just be still and silence will provide the wisdom that you seek - by Tori del Allen

      by Dumas EagerSeton on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 03:21:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Finally! (16+ / 0-)

    Maybe there is hope that the judicial system will at least hold up their end of the federal checks & balances bargain.  Thanks once again for covering this important issue Tasini ~ tipped & recced.

    Occupy is not fighting for the rights of a few to sleep outdoors, but for the right of millions to sleep indoors.(VanJones - I think from a tweet).

    by Actbriniel on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 06:51:26 AM PST

  •  So, what was the outcome...... (12+ / 0-)

    Was the settlement accepted?  Is the bank off the hook?

  •  Thanks! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    katiec, lastlegslaststand, Philpm, Matt Z

    good diary

    Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

    by greenbastard on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 07:59:19 AM PST

  •  You are in good company (22+ / 0-)

    From Taibbi:

    Federal judge Jed Rakoff, a former prosecutor with the U.S. Attorney’s office here in New York, is fast becoming a sort of legal hero of our time. He showed that again yesterday when he shat all over the SEC’s latest dirty settlement with serial fraud offender Citigroup, refusing to let the captured regulatory agency sweep yet another case of high-level criminal malfeasance under the rug.

    Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/...

    http://www.rollingstone.com/...

    Proud Socialist Whore.

    by Muggsy on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 08:21:56 AM PST

  •  Don't ya just love an activist judge?? n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sleipner, sc kitty, Matt Z

    "Now watch what you say or they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, a fanatical criminal" -- Logical Song -- Rick Davies & Roger Hodgson

    by Over50Lib on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 08:32:11 AM PST

  •  seriously, these fuckers are the cause of (19+ / 0-)

    the US and Europe's financial crisis and all they get is
    slapped with laughable fines.... All the SOB's should go
    to jail along with that fucker Geitner

    "It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment." Ansel Adams..............................................................."Even if you are on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there." Will Rogers

    by Statusquomustgo on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 08:37:30 AM PST

  •  Yup (13+ / 0-)

    This is what happens when you allow banks to operate as criminal syndicates instead of banks. Why did the SEC choose to settle these claims instead of having it out in court? $95 million on a deal where investors lost $700 million? I hope there's a class action or otherwise private lawsuit coming from investors.

    (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
    Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

    by Sparhawk on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 08:53:02 AM PST

  •  The only question is (17+ / 0-)

    whether the SEC is totally corrupt, criminally incompetent, or some blend of both.

    $95 million to settle claims of $700 million in fraud? Is this supposed to be some kind of joke?

    It sure isn't funny. The banksters are either guilty or not. If not, why pay anything at all? If they are, jail the perps and fine the company triple damages.

    I don't really blame the banks for being crooks, since the gov't lets them do it with impunity. If I could net $600 million for being a crook, I would be one, too.

    Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

    by drewfromct on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 09:29:46 AM PST

  •  It's pretty obvious that the SEC, the Fed and (4+ / 0-)

    other entities within the government, including MANY politicians--Obama among them---are in on this financial fraud machine.

    Not only that, but it is clear that most of the financial system is so hopelessly corrupt that if the government seriously investigated entities like Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, then the entire global financial network would collapse. That's why the administration isn't bothering to peek under too many of those rocks lying around.

  •  Awesome. I relish every little bit of sanity. (0+ / 0-)

    I hope Schneiderman, Biden and the other AG's, successfully bring to light the rest of the fraud.

    But seriously, its like last Tuesday's elections:  I'm left celebrating moments of mere sanity.

    People, not corporations. Democracy, not totalitarian capitalism.

    by democracy is coming on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 12:04:27 PM PST

  •  So when does the political class (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BradyB, northern spy

    become criminal for protecting the criminals? Oh, I forgot. Got to re-elect the lesser of two criminals...I mean evils.

  •  Honest jurists like Judge Rakoff need attention! (8+ / 0-)

    It's a shame that this courtroom dressing-down isn't getting more attention in the press. Outside the New York Times and a blip in WaPo, I'm not seeing many "news" results on my Google.  This is an important push-back on the part of the Court; according to the Washington Post, Judge Rakoff issued an order Thursday calling for the SEC and Citigroup to defend the settlement they negotiated:

    ... and he posed a series of questions. Among them:

    ●“How can a securities fraud of this nature and magnitude be the result simply of negligence?”

    ●“What reason is there to believe this proposed penalty will have a meaningful deterrent effect?”

    ●“What was the total loss to the victims as a result of Citigroup’s actions?”

    ●And, if the SEC was generally unable to identify the people culpable for the fraud, “why was this?”  

    This bears watching closely for when they respond to the good judge's challenge to defend their settlement as anything resembling a just result.

  •  What bankers have said about SEC (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    strangedemocracy, a2nite, Laconic Lib

    Bankers can dance circles around them, SEC people aren't as "smart" as the bankers, they don't ask the right questions, they don't suspect what's going on, and the SEC is too small to keep up.........

    "Too Big to Fail" doesn't mean what we think it means--to the bankers it means that politicians and the general public aren't equal to the task of reconstruction the economy if the big banks are allowed to fail.

    •  the bankers only think they're smarter (0+ / 0-)

      Seriously, the SEC isn't even trying. "sure, you don't have to admit culpability.... well, since it's only your fourth (or fifth, or sixth, or... ) time..."

      No wonder bankers think they're so smart, their "enforcement" is being deliberately dumb.

  •  Bob Rubin is a FOB. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laconic Lib, northern spy

    It is a coincidence that the new Democratic President just happens to have the same first initial as the last Democratic President.

    It is not a coincidence that Obama is giving us the same New Dem/DLC/Third Way policies.  The fix was in when he picked Rubin to put together his economic team: Rubin has nothing to worry about from the Obama Administration.

    While I don't hold Obama in high esteem, that doesn't mean I would say he's the Devil Incarnate and the lessor of evils. He is merely the lessee of evils.

    by xynz on Thu Nov 10, 2011 at 05:23:30 PM PST

  •  Thanks, JT! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tasini

    Making him one of my choices in tomorrow evening's "Who won the week?" poll in C&J.

    We need more like him.

    -

  •  Corruption (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tasini

    is the system.

  •  Will sell my organs to fund campaign for this man (0+ / 0-)

    for any higher office.

    Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. -Frank Zappa

    by TheGrandWazoo on Fri Nov 11, 2011 at 05:28:47 AM PST

JekyllnHyde, Angie in WA State, Bill in Portland Maine, mwm341, Marie, glitterscale, Don Quixote, Geenius at Wrok, dfarrah, Emerson, hyperstation, Aspe4, eeff, xynz, Bryce in Seattle, SallyCat, Creosote, Gustogirl, opinionated, fugwb, wonkydonkey, ask, boadicea, mikidee, themank, barath, vmckimmey, Nate Roberts, antirove, Alna Dem, revsue, Redfire, tidalwave1, psnyder, ManhattanMan, mrkvica, jsquared, dwahzon, Sychotic1, lcrp, Emmy, eztempo, Armand451, sawgrass727, ExStr8, maybeeso in michigan, radarlady, Tinfoil Hat, unclejohn, SherwoodB, democracy inaction, sc kitty, PBen, Alice Venturi, grimjc, kitchen sink think tank, dewtx, drewfromct, fixxit, LNK, HugoDog, where4art, markdd, peacestpete, kathny, Paper Cup, Philpm, third Party please, Nance, Kingsmeg, cybersaur, Mr Bojangles, cookseytalbott, victoria2dc, sleipner, dougymi, arlene, luckydog, blueoasis, DarkestHour, Remillard, philipmerrill, The Hindsight Times, lao hong han, real world chick, JVolvo, CTLiberal, Preston S, hlsmlane, Pilgrim X, onionjim, IL clb, ilyana, Sardanicas, democracy is coming, CA Nana, doingbusinessas, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, kurt, SD Goat, shaharazade, Statusquomustgo, bstotts, OHdog, DBunn, janosnation, One Pissed Off Liberal, out of left field, bluicebank, asilomar, dotsright, Russ Jarmusch, SpecialKinFlag, Mr K, jhecht, gailwax, puakev, Wino, Hafez of Shiraz, la urracca, HeartlandLiberal, Matt Z, gustynpip, terabytes, DWG, dissonantdissident, bnasley, artisan, millwood, pioneer111, GeorgeXVIII, madgranny, TexasTwister, homerun, South Park Democrat, TomP, Empower Ink, rmonroe, BustaVessel, JDWolverton, Clio2, zerone, poligirl, Youffraita, Laughing Vergil, mikeconwell, Yohannon, Calamity Jean, Lujane, tofumagoo, pickandshovel, envwq, mofembot, Seamus D, Horsefeathers, petulans, DixieDishrag, BYw, HarpboyAK, Robobagpiper, enufisenuf, shortgirl, legendmn, Celtic Merlin, Bule Betawi, Ripeness Is All, J M F, divineorder, nchristine, banjolele, Mislead, LeftOfYou, Methinks They Lie, h bridges, dalfireplug, haremoor, strangedemocracy, jfromga, Livvy5, deviant24x, Larsstephens, Amber6541, smileycreek, coppercelt, eXtina, NM Ray, cordgrass, pixxer, DiegoUK, Muggsy, Publius2008, elengul, science nerd, Oh Mary Oh, cany, Actbriniel, slice, gbinwc, xylonjay, pbgv23, Teiresias70, muddy boots, evilgalblues, merrily1000, essjay, LSmith, enhydra lutris, bluedust, Wood Dragon, jham710, Nightshade Q, big mouth, aerie star, Mentatmark, SouthernLiberalinMD, DEMonrat ankle biter, No one gets out alive, Mathazar, bearette, jacey, anodnhajo, Catskill Julie, greenbastard, IndieGuy, barkingcat, a2nite, FreeSpeaker, Horace Boothroyd III, Mr Robert, citizendane, TheGrandWazoo, Arahahex, qannabbos, ricklewsive, wxorknot, avsp, Kinak, ItsaMathJoke, dotdash2u, katiec, databob, BradyB, lastlegslaststand, Dumas EagerSeton, natfroiland, Lily O Lady, ocschwar, mmmcoreyos, quince, Praxical

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site