Comments on: Democrats crafting bill to shield big banks from tougher state laws

By: edward

edward — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 07:54:03 +0000

“Practical and less expensive” for big banks…ha. More D.C. whores.

By: Wednesday Reading « Out of Print

Wednesday Reading « Out of Print — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 05:12:38 +0000

[...] Dems to shield big banks from tougher state laws? from Raw Story [...]

By: edward

edward — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 03:54:03 +0000

“Practical and less expensive” for big banks…ha. More D.C. whores.

By: edward

edward — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 02:54:03 +0000

“Practical and less expensive” for big banks…ha. More D.C. whores.

By: judyinnm

judyinnm — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:36:32 +0000

It was because the federal government shielded sub-prime mortgage companies from state regulations that they were free to practice their predatory lending, at will. See how that turned out….

By: buckqjohnson

buckqjohnson — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:09:15 +0000

There doing this because the states are closer to the people who where screwed by the banks. And they know that the states would pass laws that more than likely will benefit the people instead of the banks. Another reason to protect them from state regulation is that the state might inadvertantly put light on the ponzi scheme that is going on between the big banks and the Fed. They want this game tightly controlled and don't want any outside actors coming in and blowing the lid off of the whole game.

By: markh

markh — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:49:13 +0000

If everyone keeps saying "No, we must help the Rich", then America is doomed and the public who keep electing these representatives and senators won't realize what they've done.

Why are there Dems who won't follow the leadership of their president? Money.
Why are there Dems, as this article says, which protect Corporations? Money.

Where is the public interest? Where is the nation's interest?

So, we have the Republican party which hates America and government and the Blue Dog Dems which don't mind using government for their own personal greed. What's not to like? /s

By: trevinla

trevinla — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:07:55 +0000

Now is the time to call their local DNC office and ask who is running against them and how you can help get new blood in that office

By: Savantster

Savantster — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:55:10 +0000

Any politician that spits on the public to pander to corporate interests should be voted out of office.. Instead, they only politicians that get enough corporate money to shout down their competition on election day are the ones that spit on the public to pander to corporate money. .. that makes them whores, right?

Politicians are Public Officials. They have a Constitutional duty to legislate in the interest of the public, not corporate donors. When they pass laws to protect companies while hurting the public, they are violating the Public Trust and should be impeached.

I know the idea of elected officials representing the people that vote disgusts some, but that's what both a Democracy and Republic is all about. When you stray from that, you have a fascism. Interesting that the right-wing is chocked full of people that want companies to make all the rules, and simultaneously talk out of the other side of their mouth about adhering to the Constitution.

The Constitution doesn't give rights to companies, it gives rights to human beings. Can't be a right-winger without showing your core hypocrisy.

.

By: Savantster

Savantster — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:45:24 +0000

“Moderate House Democrats”

Raw, start calling it like it is! Republicans that put a D behind their name to get elected! These people are NOT Democrats, period.