Debate was lame, but some fact checks

[DarrinS]

From http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080927/ap_on_el_pr/presidential_debate_factcheck_7


I thought this one was interesting.



OBAMA: "We're also going to have to look at, how is it that we shredded so many regulations? We did not set up a 21st-century regulatory framework to deal with these problems. And that in part has to do with an economic philosophy that says that regulation is always bad."

THE FACTS: Some of the abuses that occurred stemmed from the 1999 repeal of a Depression-era law that separated banks from brokerages. In legislation supported by former President Clinton and Robert Rubin, now a top Obama adviser and treasury secretary in the Clinton administration, this separation was ended — allowing banks and insurance companies to sell securities.

But while regular banks were strictly regulated by the government, Wall Street banks and other non-bank institutions — many of the same institutions whose abuses led to the current crisis — were allowed to operate with less regulation.

[Mog]

Is there anyone in Politics that doesn't put their foot in their mouth?

[DarrinS]

I also thought it was lame that neither of them would say how they would change their planned policies based on the current financial crisis.


You have a gifted thespian up there and a wooden robot -- and after 5 minutes, neither of them said jack shit.


Did anyone actually think it was a good debate?

[Ricardo Romo]

I also thought it was lame that neither of them would say how they would change their planned policies based on the current financial crisis.


You have a gifted thespian up there and a wooden robot -- and after 5 minutes, neither of them said jack shit.



That is lame. BTW where you get your quote from?

[DarrinS]

That is lame. BTW where you get your quote from?

I put a link in the original post.

[boutons_]

"1999 repeal of a Depression-era law that separated banks from brokerages."

Still sliming Clinton with that single law, are we?
Did Clinton write that that law?
Which party dominated Congress in 1999?

Absolving Repugs from all responsibility and accountability for the sub-prime crisis?

Has Clinton been in power since Jan 2001? And why didn't whoever was in power do ANYTHING to rein in the housing bubble and sub-prime predations?

Here's an amazing history of the various acts and players that led us to the sub-prime crisis

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2008/07/where-credit-is-due-timeline.html

"Nov 1999: Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act guts Glass-Steagall, setting off wave of megamergers among banks and insurance and securities companies. Driving force is Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas), who has received $4.6 million from fire sector over previous decade"

Dec 14 2000: As Congress heads for Christmas recess, Sen. Gramm attaches 262-page amendment to an omnibus appropriations bill. Commodity Futures Modernization Act will deregulate derivatives trading, give rise to Enron debacle, and open door to an explosion in new, unregulated securities"

Phil Gramm as McWorse's Treasury Secretary?

http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/post_140.php?page=all&print=true

[Mr. Peabody]

From http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080927/ap_on_el_pr/presidential_debate_factcheck_7


I thought this one was interesting.

Didn't McCain support the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act? IIRC the act had 100% Republican approval.


The legislation in question, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, was sponsored and pushed through by Phil Gramm, who was John McCain's chief economic advisor until he announced that America was a "nation of whiners." John McCain supported and voted for the bill.

[scott]

For some more Fact Checking:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_debate_no_1.html

[spurster]

There's those damn Democrats Gramm, Leach, and Bliley mentioned again.

[PixelPusher]

There's those damn Democrats Gramm, Leach, and Bliley mentioned again.

Stop whining.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Both parties are responsible for the mess we are in. Anyone who won't acknowledge that is a partisan hack. Obama does seem to have no problem distorting the truth to make himself look good, but that's been his campaign platform in its entirety so far.

[boutons_]

"There he goes again"

Yes, both parties are whores of corps and capitalists, and democracy really doesn't exist anymore.

But just as dubya was (ir)responsible for NatSec from 1/11 to 9/11 and did absolutely nothing to stop WTC attack, dubya, along with dominant control of Congress for 2000-2006, the real estate bubble years, has been responsible for NOT holding the bubble down.

In absolutley no way do the Dems, while not innocent, share the SAME, PRIMARY responsibility for the real-estate bubble.

Defending the Repugs by sliming the Dems down to the Repug level is really a dishonest, desperate tactic, that fools nobody, even the perpetrators.