HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Elizabeth Warren SHOULD N...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:26 PM

Elizabeth Warren SHOULD NOT be on the Senate Banking Committee

Today we read that Professor Warren, despite her alleged status as one of the nation's top banking experts, may not be appointed to the Senate Banking Committee.

Thank goodness!

Professor Warren is a well-known agitator who only expertise is on the subject of how banks destroy economies and lives. She knows nothing of the manly business of making money. Sure, banks destroy economies and lives - but that's not their purpose. Their purpose is to make money, and any destruction that they leave in their wake is merely a necessary part of making a living. A really, really good living. Really enormous, bigger than you can possibly imagine. Huge. Ginormous.

And that's what government's here for, isn't it? So that bankers can make even more money, so eventually they'll make enough to create a job.

We need sensible Democrats on the Banking Committee, folks who know how the world really works. Not Krugman-firebagger types like Professor Warren. As Occupy-crushing NYC Mayor Bloomberg said, if Warren gets a lick of power, she'll "close the banks and get rid of corporate profits, and we’d all bring socialism back, or the U.S.S.R.”.

Well, we don't want the U.S.S. of R. here in the US, no sir. We'll keep our precious bodily fluids to ourselves.

I hope you'll join me in putting pressure on our elected representatives to keep Professor Warren away from anything important. Our precious bodily fluids are just too precious to put at risk.

Sincerely,

Third-Way Manny

72 replies, 7763 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 72 replies Author Time Post
Reply Elizabeth Warren SHOULD NOT be on the Senate Banking Committee (Original post)
MannyGoldstein Nov 2012 OP
pa28 Nov 2012 #1
dragonlady Nov 2012 #68
L0oniX Nov 2012 #2
AtheistCrusader Nov 2012 #52
joshcryer Nov 2012 #3
MannyGoldstein Nov 2012 #6
joshcryer Nov 2012 #9
MannyGoldstein Nov 2012 #31
argiel1234 Nov 2012 #48
Egalitarian Thug Nov 2012 #65
RomneyLies Nov 2012 #4
ProudProgressiveNow Nov 2012 #23
Bonobo Nov 2012 #5
JaneyVee Nov 2012 #7
joshcryer Nov 2012 #15
SidDithers Nov 2012 #33
joshcryer Nov 2012 #34
one_voice Nov 2012 #36
JaneyVee Nov 2012 #43
joshcryer Nov 2012 #50
Hutzpa Nov 2012 #58
JoePhilly Nov 2012 #60
Egalitarian Thug Nov 2012 #66
Autumn Nov 2012 #8
BouzoukiKing Nov 2012 #49
idwiyo Nov 2012 #10
randome Nov 2012 #11
Egalitarian Thug Nov 2012 #12
Oilwellian Nov 2012 #13
bvar22 Nov 2012 #14
woo me with science Nov 2012 #16
MannyGoldstein Nov 2012 #22
Fuddnik Nov 2012 #39
Hutzpa Nov 2012 #59
progressoid Nov 2012 #17
SidDithers Nov 2012 #18
Bucky Nov 2012 #19
gravity Nov 2012 #20
Agony Nov 2012 #24
Shining Jack Nov 2012 #21
JI7 Nov 2012 #25
SidDithers Nov 2012 #26
Liberal_Dog Nov 2012 #69
SidDithers Nov 2012 #71
joshcryer Nov 2012 #28
Autumn Nov 2012 #29
amborin Nov 2012 #27
Oilwellian Nov 2012 #62
amborin Nov 2012 #63
UnrepentantLiberal Nov 2012 #30
Raine Nov 2012 #32
Gidney N Cloyd Nov 2012 #35
fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #37
Change has come Nov 2012 #38
jsmirman Nov 2012 #40
AlbertCat Nov 2012 #41
99Forever Nov 2012 #42
OnyxCollie Nov 2012 #44
myrna minx Nov 2012 #45
AverageJoe90 Nov 2012 #46
argiel1234 Nov 2012 #47
Bozita Nov 2012 #51
a2liberal Nov 2012 #53
cui bono Nov 2012 #54
MichaelSoE Nov 2012 #55
druidity33 Nov 2012 #56
Hutzpa Nov 2012 #57
Bohunk68 Nov 2012 #61
Doctor_J Nov 2012 #64
MannyGoldstein Nov 2012 #72
stevenleser Nov 2012 #67
ornotna Nov 2012 #70

Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:31 PM

1. Lobbyists are telling senior Democrats that Warren might be “more effective” on the Judiciary.

Telling. Not arguing or suggesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pa28 (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 01:14 PM

68. She could be on both n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:31 PM

2. Did u forget the sarcasm tag?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:12 PM

52. Really?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:37 PM

3. Still support NAFTA?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:38 PM

6. Fifty bucks if you can find a post where I do

Good luck!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #6)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:48 PM

9. "NAFTA caused a modest drop in the incomes low-skilled-workers" - Manny, 2012

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:32 PM

31. So what's your point? And perhaps

you'd care to post my entire post, for context.

Regards,

First-Way Manny

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #9)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:54 PM

48. uh, thats not support of NAFTA

 

are your confused

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #9)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:59 PM

65. Where's the link? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:38 PM

4. LOVE THIS POST!

 

You didn't even need the sarcasm thingie to make your point.

Well done, sir.

Bravo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #4)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:13 PM

23. +1 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:38 PM

5. Third-Way Manny...

Were you ever banned from Kos?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:38 PM

7. I don't get it. This place gets trolled by Third-Way?

Edit: OK I see some posters are saying its sarcasm. Still new around here. Funny stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #7)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:02 PM

15. DU goes through cycles where the "liberals" accuse other DUers of Third Way shit.

This is the second thread, by the usual suspects, on this matter today. They thrive on that shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #15)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:37 PM

33. Election season is over. The shackles are off...

the anti-Democrat crowd now has free reign once again.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #33)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:46 PM

34. It's annoying that we can't have substantiative discussions now.

Otherwise they're more a nuisance than anything (since the apparent false flag efforts to make Obama lose didn't work).

I mean, look at Warren. A while ago Obama was being thrown under the bus for "firing" her (when she had long stated that she didn't want the position permanently, and furthermore when those in her inner circle said she was moving on to greener pastures; the Senate).

Anyone could've done substantiative political analysis at the time (which I did do) and find that Warren was wanting to go on to the Senate (and may even have aspirations for the White House). But, nah, it had to be hyperbole, and bickering, pathetic bullshit. From the same people who credited the Republicans for ending DADT (really), to saying Bush got us out of Iraq (really), to saying Obama should be impeached (really!), to saying the end of ACA = single payer (really!!!). All the while adopting quotes from right wing sources (you Better Believe It) and driving the right wing narrative right down our throats.

It's a joke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #34)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:00 PM

36. +++++++++



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #34)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:44 PM

43. So you're saying that this place was infiltrated by RW operatives that posed as

progressives to bash Obama from the Left in order to disenfranchise voters and score a RW victory? Anything is plausible, I've been subjected to similar scenarios in my activist life, some of it, at best, tore apart groups of friends, taking sides, at worst dismantling months/years of grassroots coalitions. I don't know the dynamics of this forum to even speculate, but many people have many different versions of utopia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #43)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:05 PM

50. If the root of the sources are right wing, red flags go up for me.

I don't trust one iota people who side with the right wing on issues like that. Driving the right wing narrative is exactly what the right wing wants. In fact, I would argue that if they drive it home enough, then the people become complacent and won't fight back against certain right wing policy changes. A case in point was how the teabaggers got out 9% more votes than the liberals in 2010. Talk down enough and people just become disillusioned.

I hope to hell and back Warren gets the gig on the banking committee just so I can show the blatant hypocrisy when she is thrown under the bus for potentially compromising or whatever. She won't even have to compromise, all that has to happens is that there are rumors of a compromise. Then pow, under the bus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #34)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 07:38 AM

58. ^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #15)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 07:56 AM

60. Yup ... another Manufactured Outrage Widget hits the shop room floor.

The Manufactured Outrage Machine was broken for a while. But it looks like its sputtered back into operation.

But its widget count has slipped considerably.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #7)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 01:04 PM

66. There is a small but vocal contingent of corporate Democrats that are fun to play with.

 

The small but vocal contingent of people before profits Democrats are the most common players.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:43 PM

8. K/R for third way Manny

cause no one cuts to the heart of third wayism better than Manny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #8)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:01 PM

49. And from me...

...K & R for the Dr. Strangelove reference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:51 PM

10. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:51 PM

11. Geeze. What a broad brush.

Banks, like any corporations, only care about the bottom line. To paint them all as conspirators in some kind of destructive plot is ridiculous.

Banks also help people buy houses and start businesses, you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:54 PM

12. My God! How could I have been so blind? Of course you are absolutely correct, Mr. Thirdway.

 

Now that I've had my blinders lifted, I really don't even know what the hell those fools in Massachusetts thought they were doing, voting for this agitator.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:00 PM

13. LOL...It's for our own good Manny...

and a sacrifice we'll have to make.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:01 PM

14. You "3rd Way" people make a lot of sense.

We need to keep Fringe Leftists like Warren completely away from ANY positions of power.

We need "moderates" who can compromise with Republicans to make all the decisions.
After All, Republicans still have a slim majority in The House, so they are in the Power Seat and we must respect that.
Like the last four years, there is really nothing else we can do except give them everything they want.
THAT is the only Sensible, Pragmatic approach.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:08 PM

16. What?! Elizabeth Warren OFF Banking, and Michelle Rhee TO Education!?

What a day for articles on possible picks!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021786390
It's a veritable Third Way EXTRAVAGANZA of possibilities!







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:13 PM

22. Hadn't heard about Rhee

We can only hope it's true; Lord knows we need to kneecap the Unionistas who want a "living wage".

Sincerely,

Third-Way Manny

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #22)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:24 PM

39. Maybe they could appoint Chris Dodd as her Chief of Staff.

Just to keep an eye on her!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuddnik (Reply #39)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 07:43 AM

59. NOOOO

what you talking bout Willis? give it to Karl Rove he knows how to spend money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:08 PM

17. Sensible Woodchuck agrees!






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:10 PM

18. Weak sauce...nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:10 PM

19. Is there a Tea and Homemade Cookies Committee she could serve on?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:12 PM

20. Nice straw man

I consider myself a Third Way Democrat and think that Elizabeth Warren should be perfect on the Senate Banking Committee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gravity (Reply #20)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:18 PM

24. Wow maybe you are right! Her expertise would be helpful to fine tune the austerity!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:12 PM

21. Fuck that noise. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:19 PM

25. "Wall Street gadfly Warren stands good chance of Senate banking seat"

The chances are good, but not guaranteed, that Elizabeth Warren will secure a highly coveted seat on the Senate Banking Committee, a move that would dramatically elevate her campaign against Wall Street excess.

Senior Senate Democratic aides, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Massachusetts senator-elect is a logical fit for the committee, even though it is rare for a freshman senator to get such a plum assignment.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid likely won't start considering committee assignments until the new year. Still, one Senate Democratic aide predicted that if Warren wants to be on the banking panel, the odds are good she'll get it.

"The leadership and committee chairmen usually work together to try to accommodate incoming senators' preferences, within reason," the aide told Reuters.

"If Senator-elect Warren indicates she'd like to serve on the banking committee, given her prominent work on those issues, she would certainly have a very good shot."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/09/us-usa-senate-warren-banking-idUSBRE8A804R20121109

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #25)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:20 PM

26. Facts are good...nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #26)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 01:28 PM

69. Speculation About What Will Happen In January Is Good Too. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Dog (Reply #69)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 02:21 PM

71. Outrage based on speculation, however, isn't...nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #25)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:24 PM

28. I hope she gets it.

I'll be so amused as she's thrown under the bus here for not nationalizing the banks and turning the US into the USSR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #25)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:27 PM

29. I can see why they would call her a gadfly

she would annoy the shit out of those horses asses on the committee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:21 PM

27. only those who've received big donations from JP Morgan should be permitted;



The Center for Responsive Politics notes that committee members, on both sides of the aisle, have benefitted from donations by Dimon personally and by bank's PACs. Dimon has personally contributed to committee members Bob Corker (R-TN) and Mark Warner (D-VA). Dimon has also contributed to the top Republican Richard Shelby (R-AL) and the top Democrat Chairman Tim Johnson (D-SD).



http://www.propublica.org/article/charting-the-cozy-connections-between-jp-morgan-and-the-senate-banking-comm

One current staffer on the Senate banking committee, Dwight Fettig, is a former lobbyist for JP Morgan . In 2009, the bank hired him to work on “financial services regulatory reform.” Meanwhile, JP Morgan is stacked thick with former committee staff.

· Naomi Camper – Currently a lobbyist for JP Morgan. Prior to that, from 2001-2004, she was an aide to Senator Johnson.

· Kate Childress –A JP Morgan lobbyist since 2008 , she is also a former aide to Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who sits on both the Senate Banking and Finance committees.

· Steven Patterson –A JP Morgan lobbyist and formerly a staff director for economic policy for the Banking committee.

· Nate Gatten— A JP Morgan lobbyist based in London who was reportedly called back to Washington recently to help with the company’s damage control. He is a former lobbyist for Fannie Mae, and, in the 1990s, was a banking aide to former Senator Robert Bennett, R-Utah, who also sat on the committee.

· P. Michael Nielsen – A lobbyist with a firm run by former Senator Bennett, he has been retained by JP Morgan for help with federal probes, according to Bloomberg. He was also a senior policy adviser to the committee from 2007 to 2010.

American Banker also reported that three other outside lobbyists currently working for JP Morgan were once affiliated with the committee:

· Jason Rosenberg – A lobbyist at The Glover Park Group and formerly an aide to Jon Tester, D-Mont., who sits on the committee.

· Jenn Fogel-Bublick – A lobbyist at McBee Strategic Consulting and formerly a Democratic counsel on the committee.

· Mike Chappell – A lobbyist for Fierce, Isakowitz & Blalock and a former press assistant to Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., another committee member.

A former senator on the committee, Mel Martinez, R-Fl., is also now the JP Morgan exec in charge of Florida, Central America, and the Caribbean. Martinez was elected to the Senate in 2004 and went to the bank in 2010. Bloomberg reported that he was called to Washington after the losses were reported.

Lobbyists for JP Morgan appear to be keeping busy. The bank spent $7.6 million on lobbying last year , according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to amborin (Reply #27)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 09:50 AM

62. It's such a given!

I'm certain all of these aides slash banking lobbyists are giddy with excitement over the possibility of working with Senator Warner and cracking down on banking corruption!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Oilwellian (Reply #62)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:49 AM

63. hilarious!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:31 PM

30. Third-Way Manny is in the house!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:34 PM

32. Democrats better get with it, they got my vote now I want a return on it. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:59 PM

35. I love you, man(ny)!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:03 PM

37. 'Manly Business' of Making Money?

'Manly Business' of Making Money?

WTF does that mean.....and tell me how have the good old boys been doing making the rules for how men make (or don't make) money?

Maybe it's time to change the rules.
Maybe it's time to change who makes the rules.

Body fluid? Good grief.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:10 PM

38. Well done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:33 PM

40. I'm going to be beyond incensed if she doesn't get it

I want to believe that would be so dumb and self-defeating that it's not going to happen.

Wall Street was bent over a table and from that commanding position was allowed to dictate terms. And for that they told Obama to piss up a rope.

To bow to them again would be inexplicable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:36 PM

42. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:45 PM

44. Elizabeth Warren is not pragmatic. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:49 PM

45. I guess we'll see how inside the beltway *DC* views strong, qualified woman as well.

We women are still here and we're STILL WATCHING! I have Sen Warren's BACK!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:50 PM

46. Plz don't forget ur sarcasm tag, thanx.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:52 PM

47. This is great

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:12 PM

51. I can just picture the banksters applying for food stamps. ... Great post, Manny!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:30 PM

53. K&R

It's funny to see all the backlash from the 3rd way-ers on this thread who can't silence everyone with election scares anymore. I suppose saying this makes me a right-wing troll in their eyes though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 01:42 AM

54. I don't understand this thread.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 06:27 AM

55. YES ... Purity of essence

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 06:50 AM

56. How do you chew Manny?

With that tongue firmly placed in your cheek?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 07:34 AM

57. "Manly business of making money"

You had me there until I read that sentence, what the guacamole is that? If you were my son I'll slap the shit out of you if it helps to wake you up from your slumber or drunken stupor, how can you make such egregious argument, a statement such as that tells me you haven't learned a thing.

Basically the only reason why you don't want Warren as head of the banking committee is for the simple fact that she was born a WOMAN, not because she is the best person for the job, but because she is a woman and women cannot do manly jobs. So she needs to step aside and let men continue the demise of the country in these dimly lit rooms fill with cigar smoke and the smell of brandy in the air, how out of touch can you get.

What are the banks afraid of?

With all the blow back from the banks, I won't be surprise to see Harry Reid use some steel by showing the banks whose in charge. Instead of moving the country FORWARD we dress shit up with new clothes and pass it off as change. IMO this will be like throwing down the gauntlet by the Obama administration if they do decide to put her as head of the committee, it will send a message to the corporations of this country that the Obama administration means business.

The base is waiting in the wings to see what the Obama administration is going to do, they will be looking to see if the Obama administration is going to live up to its own expectations that they set during the campaign, are they going to stand by their campaign motto of FORWARD or are they going to let some jerkass blue dog democrat dictate or advocate their agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 09:12 AM

61. Infucking incredible how so many

don't get that this is pure sarcasm without the sarcasm thingee. And, some have 1000's of posts!!! DUHHHHHHHHH

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 12:57 PM

64. Welcome back, 3rd-way

You were too serious leading up to 11/06. Time for us far lefties to start applying pressure to the DINO's

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #64)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 03:21 PM

72. Thanks! Yeah, Romney as President would have been catstrophic...

so I mostly stayed away from any criticism of Democrats for a while. But now that the time of the Grand Bargaining of Working America has come, it's time for me to restart my pathetic attempts to inform and provoke.

Best,

First-Way Manny

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 01:05 PM

67. Post #25 speaks for me. Facts matter. Making sense matters.

I think she should probably get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Nov 12, 2012, 01:32 PM

70. I got a little moist reading this.

Leaky fluids.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread