Home | About | Donate

Advancing #BankLobbyistAct, 17 Democrats Decried for Sending This Clear Message: "I Work for My Bank Donors, Not My Constituents'

They get it. They just don’t give a shit. They know there are plenty of Democratic Party idiots
that will continue voting for them.

3 Likes

This is pure bullshit, bushwhacking, childish, food-throwing. There are many reasons for voting to proceed to consideration of a piece of legislation – only one of which (yours) can be cast as a senator working for his/her bank donors. Perhaps you’ll get your head out of the sand so you can ask these 12 senators for their motives rather than spray your evaporative suppositions in support of the right-wing fringe that will benefit from your insolence.

Rothschild bankers own America. The 99% can wallow in the muck while the NYT pushes war for Israel.

LOL! Given this particular legislation, can you inform us why corruption isn’t obvious? I know the damn issue and I can tell you it makes zero economic sense. The idea behind regulating large banks is that their activities can negatively impact others and the macro-economy. They do not have to calculate the systematic risk they pose. So, we heavily regulate them because of this, well we should. We dont thanks to the corrupt politicians you are here providing cover for. What the hell do we gain from hearing corrupt politicians feed us talking points? Do you realize how many financial crises there have been since this deregulation push began under Carter? The size of these crises are growing too, as is the financial sector itself and their product (debt). Tell me, when the next crisis hits, think there will be a debt write down? Do I need to ask Trump why he put Pruitt in charge of the EPA, and Mulvaney to head CFPB, or should I just use my fucking brain and apply some common sense? Corruption.

6 Likes

I’ve been informed that Clinton/Kaine are just going along with what “sells”. It’s nothing intentional or anything, their sucking at the tit of corporate cash.

Cluck.

4 Likes

No Labels or Correct the Record?

1 Like

Oh, and could you provide a rationale? I realize that you are a staffer of theirs or whatever, I hope your BS here isn’t pro bono. This makes sense because…

Go ahead, give some good reasons, and take systematic risk and externalities into account, like all rational people do when discussing these things.

4 Likes

The apologists for the Democratic flavor of oligarchy are out and about. Imagine how clucking irritating it is going to be approaching the midterms.

8 Likes

I get that these empty people are either paid to say their drivel or benefit from this, but I dont like being talked down to by someone saying something ignorant and poorly thought out. If someone is going to dismiss people, at least precede that with a logical and factual argument. Earn the arrogance.

1 Like

Evaporative suppositions? Oh my goodness.

I’m actually looking forward to how you will characterize my chicken scratch arguments.

3 Likes

The article you cite is a product of Kitco, a major gold and silver metal sales firm. Perhaps they left you with the impression that Dodd-Frank would be repealed by S. 2155, and that would be an erroneous assumption. What is it, explicitly, that you object to in S. 2155?

Your conclusion that “corruption is obvious” is a hasty and ill-evidenced statement worthy of celebration in the Trump White House. Since you “know the damn issues” so well, perhaps you could tell us something about what provisions of S. 2155 are objectionable to you and hazardous to all of us. Your generalizing and blow-torching the room isn’t very convincing. Incidentally, “common sense” as you describe it is nothing more than assumptions when it is not accompanied by evidence.

Ronald Reagan died 14 years ago. Too bad these Reagan Democrats didn’t join him in hell.

2 Likes

Naughty, naughty, naughty.

WHERE is the new Dem Party?

THIS IS NOT IT folks!

Still a former Dem who joined the Green Party - for now…

2 Likes

Can’t shame the shameless but a monkey wrench in their corporate plans might help to get their attention. Total, non cooperation.

2 Likes

Obama was/is a neoliberal so that makes sense.

Senator Bill Nelson D-FL voted the banker corrupt money duoparty also. He won’t get my vote, neither will gop gov Rick Scott running for that same senate seat. Rubio swamp continuing. Who am I kidding, voting is a complete waste of time. I feel like I’m in Dizzyland. This tourist sucking state has jacked the cost of living through the roof. I gotta get out of this state if it’s the last thing I ever do. Creeping fascism kicking into high gear. Where to hide and escape the madness?

1 Like

Remember, the Democrats have to run people like Joe Manchin and Mark Warner because they represent the people in their state so we can’t expect them to uphold liberal values. When you drive through the midwest there must be signs in every yard that say, “Support Big Banks!” I’m sure there are thousands of people who go to the polls thinking, “I’m voting for Bill Nelson instead of Ric Scott because Bill knows banks have my best interest at heart.” These DINOs would sit in a vegetarian restaurant eating a McDonald’s hamburger. They represent the true Democratic Party.

2 Likes

No, corruption is obvious and proven. There are multiple studies showing the gap between popular opinion and government policy, and government policy closely aligns with what the big money donors want. This is the case when large deals are negotiated, such as the TPP (where our own elected representatives had to fight just to see the deal, were barred from talking about its contents, but 500 corporate advisers had full access to the agreement), the WTO and NAFTA. We know that NAFTA and similar deals are instrumental in undermining environmental, labor and financial regulations. Investor-state disputes (chapter 11), government procurement (chapter 10), the intellectual property components of NAFTA. Do you have any idea how much contempt for the public and organized labor Clinton showed when NAFTA was released? I can give you the back story. We know that the WTO has similar resolutions, is highly protectionist in regards to things like intellectual property rights. These deals were written by corporate interests, with next to no participation from labor and environmental groups, and next to no input provided from consumer rights organizations. The same could be said of mass privatizations, which have a horrible record in practice, financial deregulation, among countless other things that your party has supported. Clinton was working with the right to privatize Social Security at one point, before the Lewinsky affair broke. Are you going to embarrass yourself and pretend that large donations from financial interests played no part in that? Beyond all of that, we know that inequality has exploded in recent decades, as has private debt. Piketty co-wrote an article that was published in late 2016 that showed that real wages for a majority of the population had not grown since the election of Reagan. Well, guess what has grown in real terms? The costs of everything from college education, to housing and healthcare, and the gap is growing over time. Then there is the top donors of the Clinton campaign, Obama’s campaigns, and the actual policies they chose. Surprisingly, their large donors (banks in particular) got far more than anyone else, and when it came time to ask different groups in society to sacrifice after the damn banks caused the crash, was it the banks or society at large that sacrificed? It’s a rhetorical question, if you haven’t caught on. Again, I can explain how, and I can back up by argument. You can’t.

This is called projection. I don’t aim to convince you, since you’re just a third rate propagandist. Isn’t possible to convince someone of something when their paycheck depends on being functionally stupid. The data isn’t debatable, you have no argument, and that is why your type of logic goes over like a lead balloon with 80% of the country.

I have the damn data, you idiot. You’re just sticking your fingers in your ears and going “la la la, can’t hear you.”

I will ask one more time. You provide the logic as to why a Democrat should support this atrocious bill. Please,if there are really good reasons, you should be able to articulate them, especially given that you are certain how wrong I am. Prove it, back up a single thing you are saying. Or don’t, and go back to Correct the Record to collect your check.

Hack.

7 Likes

So… let me think about this for a moment. How dare Democrats act like typical REPUBLICANS? I am dissatisfied with both parties. It is all about the lobbyist bribe money. I criticize both parties. But there is still a chance that Democrats will remember their roots.