More Acorn Voter Fraud Comes to Light

[4real]

"Democrats are split on how to deal with Acorn, the liberal "community organizing" group that deployed thousands of get-out-the-vote workers last election. State and city Democratic officials -- who've been contending with its many scandals -- are moving against it. Washington Democrats are still sweeping Acorn abuses under a rug."In recent days, ACORN has been at the epicenter of
reports on thousands of potentially fraudulent voter registrations across the
nation -- including many by ex-felons -- submitted by ACORN employees in the
presidential swing states of Ohio, Colorado, Missouri Pennsylvania, New Mexico
and Minnesota.

They get poor people to sign up voters, if they don't meet their quota, they will fire them, so the poor Acorn workers sign up Joe Blow from Kokomo and his dog as a voter to meet their daily quota. Isn't that nice, all with taxpayer money.


Acorn, Obama's old employer, group by the way, didn't Obama just give a few million to his old company/group? kind of like a nice kickback to his buddies and the union goons there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-53obYAjtgg
Glen Beck kicks Acorn spokesman off his set.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124182750646102435.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/politics/19395414/detail.html

[firstandten]

"Democrats are split on how to deal with Acorn, the liberal "community organizing" group that deployed thousands of get-out-the-vote workers last election. State and city Democratic officials -- who've been contending with its many scandals -- are moving against it. Washington Democrats are still sweeping Acorn abuses under a rug."In recent days, ACORN has been at the epicenter of
reports on thousands of potentially fraudulent voter registrations across the
nation -- including many by ex-felons -- submitted by ACORN employees in the
presidential swing states of Ohio, Colorado, Missouri Pennsylvania, New Mexico
and Minnesota.

They get poor people to sign up voters, if they don't meet their quota, they will fire them, so the poor Acorn workers sign up Joe Blow from Kokomo and his dog as a voter to meet their daily quota. Isn't that nice, all with taxpayer money.


Acorn, Obama's old employer, group by the way, didn't Obama just give a few million to his old company/group? kind of like a nice kickback to his buddies and the union goons there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-53obYAjtgg
Glen Beck kicks Acorn spokesman off his set.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124182750646102435.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/politics/19395414/detail.html


Whats your point ?

I think we went over the differences between voter registration fraud and election fraud ( you know the voting machine companies owned by the big republican donors)

Acorn was never Obama's employer

Since Murdoch purchased the WSJ I lost a lot of respect for that paper

Being a community organizer I would be shocked it Obama didn't have some kind of relationship with Acorn but I highly doubt that anything even bordered on being illegal.

Since you're so eager to talk about improper relationships how about checking up on the friendship of the Bushes and the Bin Laden family maybe you can shed some light that we didn't know beforehand.

[rb336]

republican groups do the same. the difference? Acorn routinely screens the registrations and flags potential problems. If you look at the paper trail for virtually any of these stories, the info "came to light" because ACORN notified authorities of potential problems.

[oldredfordette]

Beck kicked the guy off after it was obvious that the Acorn guy was holding his own. What a clown.

[rb336]

ALL of those guys are cowards. not one will debate in an open forum in the US where they don't get to run the show, although Beck seems to enjoy getting his arse handed to him on a platter overseas

[ghettopalmetto]

"Democrats are split on how to deal with Acorn, the liberal "community organizing" group that deployed thousands of get-out-the-vote workers last election. State and city Democratic officials -- who've been contending with its many scandals -- are moving against it. Washington Democrats are still sweeping Acorn abuses under a rug."In recent days, ACORN has been at the epicenter of
reports on thousands of potentially fraudulent voter registrations across the
nation -- including many by ex-felons -- submitted by ACORN employees in the
presidential swing states of Ohio, Colorado, Missouri Pennsylvania, New Mexico
and Minnesota.

They get poor people to sign up voters, if they don't meet their quota, they will fire them, so the poor Acorn workers sign up Joe Blow from Kokomo and his dog as a voter to meet their daily quota. Isn't that nice, all with taxpayer money.


Acorn, Obama's old employer, group by the way, didn't Obama just give a few million to his old company/group? kind of like a nice kickback to his buddies and the union goons there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-53obYAjtgg
Glen Beck kicks Acorn spokesman off his set.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124182750646102435.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/politics/19395414/detail.html


Why should "Washington Democrats" have to defend ACORN? ACORN isn't part of the party apparatus.

In case you never bothered to notice, there are usually anomalies and ineligible registrants in *any* voter-registration drive or petition, whether ACORN is involved or not. It's not the job of the DNC to screen these lists to determine eligibility.

But we can't dare educated people to expect to remember these trivial matters from their 9th grade civics classes, can we?

[oldredfordette]

For the record,Acorn is anti union, they have fought against the IWW's organizing drives for years. Even in the very best of times,there is a very uneasy relationship between unions and Acorn.

Anybody in the Detroit area who wants to find out more about Acorn should visit their Detroit offices. Walk in and ask them yourself.

I know you won't. It's not in your orders to do real research, only to parrot what is given to you.

[MoparDan]

Cripes. The election is over. Go buy yourself some kleenex & Vagisil. :cool:

[oladub]

Would someone explain the need for ACORN to be a 'partner' in the 2010 census or the basis of the White House running the census instead of the Commerce Department as required by the Constitution. Granted, the Commerce Department might still rubber stamp it, but why should White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel even be involved in this?



"The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now signed on as a national partner with the U.S. Census Bureau in February 2009 to assist with the recruitment of the 1.4 million temporary workers needed to go door-to-door to count every person in the United States -- currently believed to be more than 306 million people.

A U.S. Census "sell sheet," an advertisement used to recruit national partners, says partnerships with groups like ACORN "play an important role in making the 2010 Census successful," including by "help[ing] recruit census workers."
The bureau is currently employing help from more than 250 national partners, including TARGET"

"ACORN spokesman Scott Levenson told FOXNews.com that "ACORN as an organization has not been charged with any crime." He added that fears that the organization will unfairly influence the census are unfounded.
"It will be the Census Bureau that determines the role and scope of its 300 national partners. ACORN is committed to a fair and accurate count," Levenson said." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/17/lawmakers-concerned-role-acorn-census/

[rb336]

there is nothing nefarious about ACORN "partnering" with the census bureau. instead of goinf off half-cocked, perhaps you should learn what is going on. The census bureau regularly enlists various community groups to get out the information that it is important to take part in the census. that is all this partnership is about

[Detroit Stylin]

Cripes. The election is over. Go buy yourself some kleenex & Vagisil. :cool:



LMBAO @ that one......

[Lorax]

This thread is nothing but a red herring.

ACORN does far more good than harm.

Registering people who are illigitimate voters means nothing, since they can't get into the voting booth to cast a vote without proper identification anyway.

There is no fraud here, only the Repugnican Reich trying to score points where there are none.

Furthermore we wouldn't need ACORN if the Repugnicans weren't notorious about REAL voter fraud, poll taxes, crazy rules and guidelines for voting, which are illegal- case in point- the Macomb County Repugnican Party was purposely trying to disenfranchise voters by claiming if your house was in foreclosure, you couldn't vote. These people are shameless liars and frauds.

Kenneth Blackwell, the former Ohio Secretary of State was in the bag for the Repugnican Reich by making sure heavily democratic counties had only a few voting booths, and purposely closed some of them early, or didn't open some at all.

The head of Diebold Corporation in 2004 stated publicly that they were going to "deliver" Ohio for George Bush, and they did. They are all frauds, cheats, liars, and should all be imprisoned.

[Detroitej72]

Clowns like Beck need some wild allegations to keep their loyal watchers tuned in, otherwise they loose ratings and ad revenue and then find themselves on the unemployment line.

[lilpup]

Clowns like Beck need some wild allegations to keep their loyal watchers tuned in, otherwise they loose ratings and ad revenue and then find themselves on the unemployment line.Someone should ask Beck about his posturing while working with his openly gay book editor.

[oladub]

there is nothing nefarious about ACORN "partnering" with the census bureau. instead of goinf off half-cocked, perhaps you should learn what is going on. The census bureau regularly enlists various community groups to get out the information that it is important to take part in the census. that is all this partnership is about

The article referenced did say that either 250 or 300 groups were 'partners' of the census bureau. One of the other partners was the NAACP. Unlike ACORN, the NAACP does not have a reputation for activities gone awry. My suggestion, if partners are necessary , would be to restrict partnerships to credible organizations. Of course, Mr. Levenson assured us that ACORN has not been charged with any crimes. I'm releaved. :rolleyes:

Lorax, you make a good point about Diebold but two wrongs do not make a right although I think you inferred that ACORN was a partisan organization - as if, perhaps, ACORN would somehow balance off Republican misdeeds.

[ccbatson]

Democrats are not split over ACORN...only about how to avoid getting caught with them.

[Detroitej72]

Democrats are not split over ACORN...only about how to avoid getting caught with them.

Prove it, and I don't mean some propaganda from FauxNews or some neo-con's blog.

[ccbatson]

Proof? Listen to the public statements from Obama, and other politicians when they were trying (but failing) to distance themselves from ACORN during the last election.

[Detroitej72]

Proof? Listen to the public statements from Obama, and other politicians when they were trying (but failing) to distance themselves from ACORN during the last election.

So, you have nothing then? I accept your defeat.

[Lorax]

Democrats are not split over ACORN...only about how to avoid getting caught with them.


Repugnicans are not split over Dickhead Cheney...only about how to avoid getting caught with him.

[Lorax]

Proof? Listen to the public statements from Obama, and other politicians when they were trying (but failing) to distance themselves from ACORN during the last election.


Sort of like how John McShame tried to distance himself from Rev. Hagee who called the Catholic Church the "great whore"

Or how McShame tried to distance himself from one of the PNAC founders, Carl Lindner, head of Chiquita Banana, for his illegal arms deals with the Sandonistas in the 80's.

Or how McShame DIDN'T try to distance himself from G. Gordon Liddy, our only homegrown terrorist allowed a talk show by the fascist Clear Channel Communications.

Or how McShame DID finally, after the election, distance himself from Saracuda Failin' and her merry band of trailer trash, and wouldn't even acknowledge her as being dominant in the Repugnican party.

Geez- what a disaster that would have been with them in the White House.:eek:

[ghettopalmetto]

Would someone explain the need for ACORN to be a 'partner' in the 2010 census or the basis of the White House running the census instead of the Commerce Department as required by the Constitution. Granted, the Commerce Department might still rubber stamp it, but why should White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel even be involved in this?


And which paragraph of the Constitution requires the Commerce Department to conduct the decennial Census? Here's a hint: the Department of Commerce and Labor was created on February 14, 1903.

Of course, you recognize that, as a Cabinet-level agency, the Department of Commerce is ultimately accountable to the President, and always has been. Stop fronting with your manufactured outrage.

[ccbatson]

Psst..McCain did not win, and is not the President.

[rb336]

Proof? Listen to the public statements from Obama, and other politicians when they were trying (but failing) to distance themselves from ACORN during the last election.

never heard a public statement like that at all -- Obama (truthfully) explained that he did NOT work for Acorn (wich was needed against the barrage of lies your side spewed about him), but that was the extent of it

[oladub]

And which paragraph of the Constitution requires the Commerce Department to conduct the decennial Census? Here's a hint: the Department of Commerce and Labor was created on February 14, 1903.

Of course, you recognize that, as a Cabinet-level agency, the Department of Commerce is ultimately accountable to the President, and always has been. Stop fronting with your manufactured outrage.

Ghettopalmetto. Good point about 1903! I stand corrected. The Commerce Department conducts the census as required by statute rather than the Constitution. Now I feel better. The Obama administration is only violating a statute.

"Here's an argument that it's unconstitutional for the president to take over the Census from the secretary of commerce. It goes like this: Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution provides for an "actual enumeration" and a statute passed by Congress provides that the duties under this clause are to be performed by the secretary of commerce. Article I ... is about the legislative, not the executive branch. Hence, it is argued, the president can't substitute a sampling for the enumeration required to be done by the secretary.

However, it is undoubtedly true that the president can fire the secretary of commerce for any reason, including failure to conduct the Census the way he wants the Census conducted. An acting secretary could conduct the Census the way the president wanted, even if the Senate refused to confirm a new secretary of commerce who would.
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2009/02/09/white-house-census-power-grab-may-violate-the-constitution.html

Take your pick, the Obama administration is skirting the law. I am not feigning outrage. The more I see of this administration, the more closely it resembles that of Hugo Chavez.

[Lorax]

Psst..McCain did not win, and is not the President.

Nostradamus in a jock strap. I can get nothing past you. :eek:

[ghettopalmetto]

Ghettopalmetto. Good point about 1903! I stand corrected. The Commerce Department conducts the census as required by statute rather than the Constitution. Now I feel better. The Obama administration is only violating a statute.

"Here's an argument that it's unconstitutional for the president to take over the Census from the secretary of commerce. It goes like this: Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution provides for an "actual enumeration" and a statute passed by Congress provides that the duties under this clause are to be performed by the secretary of commerce. Article I ... is about the legislative, not the executive branch. Hence, it is argued, the president can't substitute a sampling for the enumeration required to be done by the secretary.

However, it is undoubtedly true that the president can fire the secretary of commerce for any reason, including failure to conduct the Census the way he wants the Census conducted. An acting secretary could conduct the Census the way the president wanted, even if the Senate refused to confirm a new secretary of commerce who would.
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2009/02/09/white-house-census-power-grab-may-violate-the-constitution.html

Take your pick, the Obama administration is skirting the law. I am not feigning outrage. The more I see of this administration, the more closely it resembles that of Hugo Chavez.

So let me get this straight. Is Obama proposing that members of his administration, and not the Census Bureau are going to conduct the Census? If the Census Bureau is conducting the Census, that falls under the auspices of the Department of Commerce, does it not? Where's the crime?

Now you're just grasping straws. It's the CENSUS, for crying out loud. I wish people got this worked-up when we got lied into an unnecessary war or had our financial system completely deregulated.

[Lorax]

So let me get this straight. Is Obama proposing that members of his administration, and not the Census Bureau are going to conduct the Census? If the Census Bureau is conducting the Census, that falls under the auspices of the Department of Commerce, does it not? Where's the crime?

Now you're just grasping straws. It's the CENSUS, for crying out loud. I wish people got this worked-up when we got lied into an unnecessary war or had our financial system completely deregulated.


It's just the same phony umbrage from the fasicst right. Where was the outrage over the illegal wiretapping, illegal war, illegal firing of attorneys, jailing of journalists, murder of Iraquis, black site prisons in Angola, world financial collapse?

Guess the Repugnican Reich would rather sweat the small stuff.

[oladub]

So let me get this straight. Is Obama proposing that members of his administration, and not the Census Bureau are going to conduct the Census? If the Census Bureau is conducting the Census, that falls under the auspices of the Department of Commerce, does it not? Where's the crime?

There is no crime if the Commerce Department oversees the ennumeration. There is probably no crime if the White House rides herd on the Commerce Secretary. There would be a crime if the Obama administration was careless enough to claim that the White House was overseeing the census . The Obama administration, like the Bush administration, seems intent on politicizing the results. Bush, as I recall, did a lot of gerrymandering in Texas. The Obama administration seems to also be intent on fudging the results by guesstimating in addition to ennumerating the population before carving up new districts. Guesstimating would be unconstitutional.

"The Obama administration is downplaying how closely the White House will oversee the Census Bureau. But Press Secretary Robert Gibbs insists there is "historical precedent" for the Census director to be "working closely with the White House."
It would be nice to know what Sen. Gregg thinks about all this, but he's refusing comment. And that, says Mr. Chapman, the former Census director, is damaging his credibility. "He will look neutered with oversight of the most important function of his department over the next two years shipped over to the West Wing," he says. "If I were him, I wouldn't take the job unless I had that changed." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123423384887066377.html


Now you're just grasping straws. It's the CENSUS, for crying out loud. I wish people got this worked-up when we got lied into an unnecessary war or had our financial system completely deregulated.

It sounds like the Obama administration is pretty worked up about this census. The numbers, whether ennumerated or guessed at, represent representation and spending. I, for one, did get worked up when the Democrats and Republicans got us into unnecessary (and unconstitutional ) wars and destroyed our nation's economy. Those are among the reasons I didn't vote for McCain or Obama.



Lorax, "Where was the outrage over the illegal wiretapping, illegal war, illegal firing of attorneys, jailing of journalists, murder of Iraquis, black site prisons in Angola, world financial collapse?"


It came from Nader, Paul, and Kucinich but they had not earned their corporate sponsorships so we werent allowed the hear much from them.

[Lorax]

I was referring to the REPUGNICAN outrage? Where was it?

Dare I say they drank the KoolAid and really liked it.

So I don't have much use for Repugnicans and their bullcrap.:eek:

[ccbatson]

Lorax...you need to replace the word illegal with legal in your soliloquy...then it makes factual sense.

[oladub]

Lorax: "I was referring to the REPUGNICAN outrage? Where was it?"

You inferred but didn't specify "Republican". No matter. I already specified that Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, as well as progressive candidates Kucinich and Nader expressed their outrage toward all the things you mentioned. Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, and their supporters continue to do so. Otherwise, I haven't heard much outrage from mainstream Republicans - or Democrats for that matter.

[Lorax]

Lorax...you need to replace the word illegal with legal in your soliloquy...then it makes factual sense.


I guess it would, if it were true, but sadly, the actions taken by the Bush Crime Family have been judged as illegal, not just in the court of public opinion, but by the very statutes we supposedly live by.

The only question now, is, does our justice department feel the crimes committed warrant investigation and prosecution?

Congress last year investigated numerous alleged crimes, concluded there were crimes committed, then asked Tush's justice department to weigh in on them, and they said, sorry, not interested. :mad:

[rb336]

Lorax...you need to replace the word illegal with legal in your soliloquy...then it makes factual sense.

"if the president does it then it is legal!"

[Lorax]

"if the president does it then it is legal!"

Yes, according to Batty, his hero Nixon must have it right. :eek:

[ccbatson]

I never said that...you did. Legal is legal regardless of the person/persons involved.

Why do you suppose congress was briefed on the LEGALITY of the enhanced interrogations? If it were just a matter of "who", there would be no need for that type of briefing, would there?

[Lorax]

Wrong again, Batts.

Congress was not briefed on the legality of so called "enhanced interrogations"- they were made aware that they were being considered, and waterboarding was not one of the "enhancements" mentioned.

Congress was told by the White House that they would be made aware IF and WHEN such tactics would be used. Funny how it came out that they were ALREDY being used, months before any meeting Pelosi had with the White House, so all of this is moot anyway.

The Bush Crime Family at work- not only thugs and sycophants, but liars as well.

[ccbatson]

Per Pelosi, and the CIA director, briefings from legal counsel as to the legality of the enhanced interrogation techniques were held and documented. In addition, briefings as to the actual intelligence gained, and what techniques were used were held and recorded...Pelosi being in attendance.

[Lorax]

Yes, and Pelosi has requested a full throttle investigation, and airing of the CIA documents, just as Cheney has proposed.

We'll see.

[ccbatson]

Check again...she wants nothing of the sort. She wants a "Truth committee", or some such nonsense. The purpose of which is to deflect her own complicity and guilt to the "lying" CIA as she refers to them (well, misleading is the term she uses...same thing).

[Lorax]

Check again...she wants nothing of the sort. She wants a "Truth committee", or some such nonsense. The purpose of which is to deflect her own complicity and guilt to the "lying" CIA as she refers to them (well, misleading is the term she uses...same thing).


Not really. No deflection, since her repugnican counterparts who were also in on meetings will be hauled in to testify as well.

As will Cheney, Rumsfeld, Condi Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, Ashcroft, the Torture Attorneys, etc.

[ccbatson]

Frank is, in fact, albeit in hindsight, the person most responsible for an economic collapse the likes of which we have never seen...trillions lost, millions of lives destroyed and to be destroyed.

[Lorax]

Keep believing your lies.

Let me guess, today it must be Fascist Flavored KoolAid? :eek:

[ccbatson]

Lies? Did he not/does he not push for "affordable housing" (socialized housing) via the CRA and Freddie/Fannie) repeatedly defending them in light of very valid concerns raised by conservatives (while taking lots of donation money from them)? Is the burst housing bubble not the root of this economic crisis? No lies my friend...denial on your part.

[Lorax]

Lies? Did he not/does he not push for "affordable housing" (socialized housing) via the CRA and Freddie/Fannie) repeatedly defending them in light of very valid concerns raised by conservatives (while taking lots of donation money from them)? Is the burst housing bubble not the root of this economic crisis? No lies my friend...denial on your part.

The burst housing bubble slipped from between George Tush's asscheeks. Not a pretty sight or smell, for that matter.

Seriously, you know the truth here, don't try and pass off blame to yet another Democrat, it's getting stale and no one's buying it.

It was Tush's retarded domestic policy, specifically the deregulated banking/lending industries that led the way down this primrose path. I remember him on the TV encouraging banks to lend to everyone, how home ownership was the "American dream" and was within reach of everybody, and to go for it- leading people into the arms of loan sharks and miscreants.

It was a planned ideology designed to snooker people into accepting loans they didn't understand and couldn't afford, especially if they were to lose their jobs due to Tush's economic collapse, which most of them did.

Couple that with the 1st piece of legislation the Tushies passed in 2001, which gave more power to corporations, banks in particular with regard to bankruptcy. Can't discharge all debt anymore, so you're on the hook for a portion of it, seemingly forever.

All Bush Crime Family doings, all the time.

[ccbatson]

We have video and audio tape of conservatives warning against the bubble in the form of Frank's (and Dodd, and Shumer, and other liberal's) "affordable housing" scam. More importantly, we have lots of audio/video and paper trail evidence showing them (the libs) defending the bubble and reassuring us that it was not a problem.

[Lorax]

Who controlled congress? Who controlled the White House? Who controlled the justice department?

The Bush Crime Family.

[Detroitej72]

Frank is, in fact, albeit in hindsight, the person most responsible for an economic collapse the likes of which we have never seen...trillions lost, millions of lives destroyed and to be destroyed.

And what was your neo-god, Bush doing while that was happening, playing his fiddle?

[Detroitej72]

We have video and audio tape of conservatives warning against the bubble in the form of Frank's (and Dodd, and Shumer, and other liberal's) "affordable housing" scam. More importantly, we have lots of audio/video and paper trail evidence showing them (the libs) defending the bubble and reassuring us that it was not a problem.

We also have video and audio of real, non-partisan economists explaining that the major players in the current Republican Recession were companies like Country Wide Mortgage, Bear Sterns, and the like. Of coarse the right chooses to ignore those facts, as their cronies and policies were leading them into financial ruin.

[ccbatson]

Players? perhaps...Who set up the entire corrupt game? See my earlier posts for the answer.

[mjs]

It was Tush's retarded domestic policy, specifically the deregulated banking/lending industries that led the way down this primrose path. I remember him on the TV encouraging banks to lend to everyone, how home ownership was the "American dream" and was within reach of everybody, and to go for it- leading people into the arms of loan sharks and miscreants.

It was a planned ideology designed to snooker people into accepting loans they didn't understand and couldn't afford, especially if they were to lose their jobs due to Tush's economic collapse, which most of them did.

Couple that with the 1st piece of legislation the Tushies passed in 2001, which gave more power to corporations, banks in particular with regard to bankruptcy. Can't discharge all debt anymore, so you're on the hook for a portion of it, seemingly forever.

All Bush Crime Family doings, all the time.

You really need to take a Civics class. The community colleges offer them at an affordable price. The government deregulates with laws. The laws are passed by Congress because the President lacks the authority to pass laws. House versions of laws on banking start in the House Financial Committee. The committee is responsible for banking regulation. Barney Frank has been a long standing member of the committee.

Glass-Steagall regulated banking and Gramm-Leach-Bailey deregulated it. When Glass-Steagall was repealed by Gramm-Leach-Bailey in 1999, the Democrats controlled the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. The House voted 343-86 with Democrats voting 138–69. Banking deregulation was a bipartisan effort over several Presidencies. Its final push in 1999 was lead by a newly created entity called Citigroup.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/wallstreet/weill/demise.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citigroup

[ccbatson]

Deregulation? Not a good term. Deregulation as a part of a bid to insert government into the business of banking and finance is deregulation of whom? It unfetters government from making a power grab, so, in a sense, it is a deregulation of itself (government) but a increase of restriction on the private sector.

[mjs]

Deregulation is not a good term, as in you don't like it as an act, or that its an improper description of what Gramm-Leach-Bailey accomplished? I'm not understanding your post, but I sometimes have to look up the terms you use so explain it in a simpler or different way.

[ccbatson]

Not a good term if government expansion is thwarted by deregulation. Why? Because if any problems could result from deregulation (and very little would), it is nothing compared to the harm associated by the surge to socialism that is "excused" by invoking the evils of "deregulation".

[mjs]

I'll take the Glass-Steagall period over the Gramm-Leach-Bailey period any day of the week and twice on Sunday. The law eventually lead to the largest government intervention in history and government ownership of banks which is about as close to socialism as I want to get.

[ccbatson]

Not far too close? It is for me...and it is a juggernaut that likely will not be stopped until the Marxists in charge are voted out (ASAP).

[rb336]

Why? Because if any problems could result from deregulation (and very little would), it is nothing compared to the harm associated by the surge to socialism that is "excused" by invoking the evils of "deregulation".


bats, you really do have blinders on. deregulation, virtually total, on these unsecured securities is so clearly what has caused the current mess one would have to be an idiot or totally blinded by some half-baked dogma to not understand it.

[ccbatson]

Deregulation of??? You've got it...Freddie/Fannie.