Re: It simple words
"First, Mr. Dag, we need to elect people that believe in regulation and will actively enforce them."
What more could ask for Don? Your party controls both houses of Congress and the White House. Obama has been in charge for 17 months so if there are people who are not proerly doing their jobs of regulating he should remove and replace them.
You believe Repubs are always bad and Dems always good. I see very little difference in the two parties when the rubber meets the road. Sure they may promise different things on the campaign trail but in reality there is not much difference between the two parties when it comes to governing. Read up on what most experts feel about the Dem's propsed financial reform and you will find most feel the reform once again does not go far enough and allows for to many loop holes. Greedy politicians that willing carry the water (for a price) for special interest groups are a big part of our problems and both parties have and will always have their share of greedy politicians.
Re: It simple words
It's tougher than you think to get rid of high level govt. non-appointee employess, and the agencies have 30 years worth of regulatory employees in them that are, as I read it put best soemwhere, part of the cultures of the industries and institutions that they regulate. See: BP and the big mining outfits and MMS.
BP and the gulf are only showing us that in spades. A new administration can install new cabinet members and agency heads and it won't change much of how the agency or dept. works for a good time. We've got federal agencies chocked full of people who have been hired by pro-corporate "cultural partners" for 30 years of pro-corp administrations. The Democrat Clinton admin most likely the most so among them across the board, seeing as the Democratic party was so happy to have someone in the Whitehouse after 3 terms of GOP that the watchdog progressive or environmental (or whatever Craig wants to call them today) forces didn't want to question him. His background as an opportunistic shoulder rubber coming out of a place where if it weren't for unbridled corporate subsidization and next to zero regulation (WalMart, Tyson, franchise and business law that is almost non-existent, etc.) made him a natural for it..and the Democratic Leadership Council that represented these "new Democrats" was very anti-regulation and we just got more Reagonomics and military industrial complex (GHW Bush has it in his bloodstream) hands off government..
The right screams and hollers about over-regulation, but in reality, all we really have in place outside of food and drug safety is stuff put in way. way back...much of it in the Republican Nixon and Ford administrations. And much of that exceedinglywatered down since...SEE: Repeal of Glass-Stegal, under and signed by Clinton.
The Cheney energy bill fiasco, of course, is the ultimate pariaah in the entire mess, but it has a long set of precendents.
Views on regulation now are driven now mostly by the voices of the radical right.....mostly people who are radical right because of social and cultural issues, but it's an easy pickup issue for them and banks the corps know how to play them like a piano.
Obama is in a tough spot...if he were to decide to take on the populist stance that most of the beat down, remaining left wants him to..and possibly maybe more centrists than the echo chamber would let us believe could also...he'd get the next round of vitriol form the baggers and the cultural righties...the ONE big card they've been waiting to play.....the angry Black man.
He's tried to emulate Clinton...thought that would work and it hasn't...and as a result we got Geithner, Salazar, Emanuel etc.etc.. But, on th eother hand, if he'd have decided that along with health insurance reform he was going to tackle a whole bunch of issues that the left wanted right off, had put a bunch of suspected greenies and market regulaotrs in high posts, he'd be in a heck of a lot worse shape than he is now.
What people want is cheap gas, good cell phone and TV reception and police protection. And then, huge gobs of federal largesse when their ox happens to be the one that is gored. The Farm Bill conversation that is coming up before we know it in Congress is going to be a doozie, partiuclarily if commodites and land values do what they've always done a few years into a deep recession or depression. You'll see a bunch of self-made, keep your grubby gubmint taxing hands off of my hard earned "up by my own bootstraps" money looking for the ghosts of FDR to show up.
Re: It simple words
I realize it is tough to get rid of the bad apples that have been in place for some time. However as you say Obama can install new cabinet members and agency heads and he can instruct them to crack down on their employees and to start enforcing the rules more strictly and do a better job of over sight. Trouble is Obama does not want to upset big corps that give big political donations any more then a Repub president. I'm not saying Obama is better or worse then other presidents at this just trying to show others that there is little differences between the two parties politicians. It is only after the sh!t hits the fan with some major accident or disaster that we see politicians start getting tough.
Re: It simple words
No arrgument on that and for all practical purposes we haven't seen anybody really do much "cracking down" for some time. When somebody in the political arena does get mad, the media portrays them as rabid.
Ron Paul and Ralph Nader have been telling us for years that this financial situation was a house of cards. Portrayed as "outliers" and crackpots. Bernis Sanders..there isn't anybody who has worked any harder over the last year and a half than he has and understands what's happened better than anybody...says something and he gets discounted by the MSM because he represents neither of the 2 big parties....just a curiosity.
But I'll stand behind what I said about the handicap that Obama has. One cross or stern word and he's instantaniously superimposed on to H.Rap Brown, Stokely Charmichael, Malcom X , Louis Farrakahn, Jack Johnson, Bobby Seale...you name it...immediately.
Re: In simple words
Why do you always attribute motivations such as campaign contributions? Is it not possible that Obama has elected to "go slow" rather than upset the financial applecart. For one thing our economy and our financial markets are rather fragile at the moment. There are consequences for everything that is done.
You may well be right but I can't understand how you can be so **bleep** sure of why people do things. Everybody has motivations but perhaps it could be as simple as not wanting to make a huge mistake. Doing the right thing at the wrong time may punish you severely.
I would ascribe your motivations is to be politically critical and nothing more. Like you perhaps I am wrong.
Re: It simple words
I think there are many folks besides the Tea Partiers that have decided enough is enough and this might be a good year to dump some Congressmen and not automaticaly return the incumbents. I hope upset voters also decide this is a good year to dump some of the main stream press as well and opt for something a little more neutral and factual in their reporting. Watch or listen to PBS or BBC as opposed to Rush, FOX or MSNBC. Read reputable newspapers or web sites instead of party talking points or bulletins. I think you are right Bruce when you say "discounted by the MSM." Each party has their MSM freinds who attack the opposition as opposed to reporting fair and acurate news. I think that today's world of 24/7 TV and radio political talk / news shows has helped feed the growing partisanship we see in Washington.