Financial Reform Hits First Hurdle in U.S. Senate

By and | April 26, 2010

  • April 26, 2010 at 1:10 am
    Realist says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Liberal crooks (Barney, Dodd, Paulson,Schumer, et al)caused this and are now turning it around to make it look like it’s Capitalism’s fault-
    A shell game and JOKE on America all to bring Her down………

  • April 26, 2010 at 1:20 am
    tx agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I WODER WHAT IS IN THE BILL THAT WOULD MAKE DODD, SCHUMER, BARNEY, AND PAULSON LOTS OF MONEY?
    HOW CAN ANY AMERICAN WANT THIS ACT OF SOCIALISM??????

  • April 26, 2010 at 1:23 am
    TAR says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Isn’t it hysterical Christopher Dodd is now writing the legislaton for Financial Reform. He along with Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Barak Hussein Obama, were instrumental in one of the worst economical collapses in America. Barney got relected, Dodd (well nothing happened to Dodd) and Hussein Obama is elected President. Only in America can unethical irrepsonsible misfits benefit from their failures!

  • April 26, 2010 at 1:46 am
    Joe, BFF of phony libs says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    as old as gov’ts. Today, it’s the domain of mostly the DemonRats, but also of Repubs of Snowe & etc ilk. It’s what feeds (i.e., pays) these thieving commie punks.

    Vote out all of the phony libs and so-called ‘moderate’ Repubs.

    Hey, are my new monikers more friendly to the leftwing wacko freaks, aka, libs? Do think that the new monikers will make the libs what to hug me?

  • April 26, 2010 at 1:51 am
    Temblor says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Gee. The roots of the financial catastrophe were laid in the administration of Bill Clinton. Shrub did nothing to change the situation at all.

    Now wingnuts are blaming it on Senator Obama?

    And Tx Agent, another wingnut apparently, calls financial reform and better oversight of the banks “socialism”?

    I really wish wingnuts would learn the actual meaning of the words they throw around so casually.

    Missing in this article is the fact that AIG INSURANCE had nothing to do with the crisis, and did not have to be bailed out. It was the financial services division that had to be bailed out.

    In fact, after the debacle the insurance division was completely separated from the AIG umbrella, just to emphasize the fact that they were not in any way, shape, or form, involved.

  • April 26, 2010 at 1:55 am
    tx agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    DON’T YOU JUST LOVE IT WHEN LIBS GIVE YOU NAMES!!!

    I AM ALL FOR REFORM OF THE BANKS, I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT ELSE IS IN THE BILL!!!!

  • April 26, 2010 at 2:01 am
    Joe, BFF of phony libs says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Read the law you wacko, hippy, commie freak. It’d pretty much ensure the GS, MS, and other big banks get to run the table. The law would make it impossible for small start ups to compete with these banks.

    It’d also eliminate venture capitalists. Further, it’d over regulate derivatives and similar products needed by almost all industries, but in a structure unique for each such industry. All that’s needed for derivatives is transparency and a ‘skin-in-the-game requirement, but the law goes way beyond that. In other words, derivatives (CDS are such) would be posted on an exchange board and CDS may be purchased only by those who have an interested in the bond or other object of the derivative, whether vested or not. That’s it.

    As for short selling, merely re-institute the uptick rule, but don’t require that such a position mandates that the one shorting the stock have any interest in the stock.

    Any, now it’s time for you, Tremblor, the Bozo Bumblor, to get back to the circus. Come on, stumble and fall (some more – your last email was your first stumble and fall today) for our amusement.

  • April 26, 2010 at 2:12 am
    matt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I haven’t read the proposed text and probably am not sophisticated enough to understand all of the implications even if I did.

    But I do know two things.

    1) Given the makeup of the President’s administration, Goldman Sachs has nothing to fear from this bill, and

    2) Regulatory proposals such as this are often supported by the established players. They can afford and pass off any added cost. But just as SOxley made it extremely difficult to go public this bill would likely create a huge, expensive barrier to entry.

    So Joe I think you are probably right.

    This bill was written under the guise of “sticking it to Wall Street” by an administration stacked with the most pro-wall street players in US history, but the real effect will be to solidify Goldman and others’ positions in the market.

    Also the bill conveniently neuters the Ron Paul / Alan Grayson bipartisan proposal to conduct a one-time audit of the Fed’s emergency lending facilities. (a proposal which has a HUGE number of cosponsors in the House and nearly unanimous public support I might add). It loses my support based on this verbiage alone.

  • April 26, 2010 at 2:23 am
    Tom says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Tar,

    Tea = Kool-Aid for for the 2000s

  • April 26, 2010 at 2:46 am
    TAR says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Not sure what that’s supposed to mean Tom?

  • April 26, 2010 at 3:08 am
    tx agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    CAN NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO SAY—KOOLAID FOR THE 2000’S!
    YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING!!!!!!

  • April 26, 2010 at 3:42 am
    Realist says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    you’re for smaller Government and responsible spending……………….
    Note:
    There’s no organized “party”, no “leader”, no “dues”, just regular people who have played by the rules all their lives and who understand human nature who feel they must speak out for their country.

  • October 1, 2012 at 1:31 pm
    Lovely says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    You realize the fall sttraed on the previous Administration right? That’s important, because that initial slide turned into a snowball. And a big snowball is harder to catch then a small one. You must give it time. If after 4 years then sure, blame him. But for now remember the recent past because it matters.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*