HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » "Watch 'Inside Job,'...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:08 PM

"Watch 'Inside Job,' then convince me why Obama should have my vote..."

This was someone's FB post. I don't normally get into politics on facebook, but I couldn't help myself this time. I posted: "Everything you say is true, but he is the lesser of two evils. I`ll give you one reason to vote for him - the next Supreme Court nominee. Unless you`d like to see Roe vs. Wade finally overturned."

She didn't respond specifically to that, but she did "like" my comment.

21 replies, 3098 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 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply "Watch 'Inside Job,' then convince me why Obama should have my vote..." (Original post)
Flying Squirrel Apr 2012 OP
seabeyond Apr 2012 #1
Enrique Apr 2012 #2
Flying Squirrel Apr 2012 #6
geckosfeet Apr 2012 #7
Flying Squirrel Apr 2012 #8
geckosfeet Apr 2012 #9
Flying Squirrel Apr 2012 #10
alp227 Apr 2012 #12
davidpdx Apr 2012 #15
geckosfeet Apr 2012 #20
pennylane100 Apr 2012 #3
gateley Apr 2012 #4
alp227 Apr 2012 #13
gateley Apr 2012 #18
roseBudd Apr 2012 #5
alcibiades_mystery Apr 2012 #11
grantcart Apr 2012 #19
coalition_unwilling Apr 2012 #14
Hawkowl Apr 2012 #21
davidpdx Apr 2012 #16
Cosmocat Apr 2012 #17

Response to Flying Squirrel (Original post)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:10 PM

1. supreme court. i had my answer before reading your post

i still wanted to give my answer

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flying Squirrel (Original post)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:13 PM

2. has anyone seen this movie?

I didnt take her comment literally, I think she was saying that the movie implicated Obama in some way. I havent seen the movie so I dont know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:36 PM

6. I haven't, but it had something to do with

Wall Street and all the cronyism, and Obama's appointments such as Geithner, Bernanke etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flying Squirrel (Reply #6)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:48 PM

7. No. It was primarily about buSh appointees and their negligence and cronyism.

There was a slight implication of Obama appointees as well.

But is was primarily about the buSh mis-administrations of the economy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:51 PM

8. Well, that at least is good.

I don't guess that she was planning to vote Republican then, probably just saying she wouldn't vote for either. But we gotta pick our poison in this country, that's just the way it is right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flying Squirrel (Reply #8)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:54 PM

9. Perhaps you should amend you previous post? It is misleading. I am sure that was not your intent

but it is incorrect and gives the wrong idea.

I have no idea what the original complaint was regarding Obama. I suspect that person had not watched the movie either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #9)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 09:07 PM

10. I could, but

since I`ve already stated that I didn`t watch it and we need at least some context as to why someone would have said what this person said, I guess I`ll just leave it for now, with your correction as to the actual content of the piece noted. (And thank you for that!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 10:54 PM

12. i watched Inside Job, and it cited the repeal of Glass Steagall regulations in '99 as a factor.

so arguably it also targeted Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #12)

Sat Apr 7, 2012, 06:17 AM

15. Yes, the repeal of Glass-Steagall was the vehicle

The banks were the drunk drivers. The results were catastrophic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #12)

Sat Apr 7, 2012, 03:16 PM

20. Yep. Clinton signed it. But


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_financial_crisis

In November 1999, U.S. President Bill Clinton signed into law the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (R-R-R), which repealed part of the Glass–Steagall (D-D) Act of 1933. This repeal has been criticized for reducing the separation between commercial banks (which traditionally had fiscally conservative policies) and investment banks (which had a more risk-taking culture).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_financial_crisis

Bolded content is mine - added to emphasize partisan nature of the two acts of congress.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%93Leach%E2%80%93Bliley_Act - "Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999"

A year before the law was passed, Citicorp, a commercial bank holding company, merged with the insurance company Travelers Group in 1998 to form the conglomerate Citigroup, a corporation combining banking, securities and insurance services under a house of brands that included Citibank, Smith Barney, Primerica, and Travelers. Because this merger was a violation of the Glass–Steagall Act and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, the Federal Reserve gave Citigroup a temporary waiver in September 1998. Less than a year later, GLB was passed to legalize these types of mergers on a permanent basis. The law also repealed Glass–Steagall's conflict of interest prohibitions "against simultaneous service by any officer, director, or employee of a securities firm as an officer, director, or employee of any member bank."




Yes Clinton signed it - but it was planned, hatched and executed by three R's. Clinton was a willing dupe - not sure how the impeachment mess played into this but I am sure it did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flying Squirrel (Original post)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:14 PM

3. Good for you.

That was the perfect answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flying Squirrel (Original post)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:19 PM

4. God, tell her to stop watching Hollywood movies and do some objective research into

what's been happening in Congress and with the Republicans. If she has any intelligence, she'll convince herself to vote for Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gateley (Reply #4)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 10:54 PM

13. Inside Job was a documentary not a fictional film.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #13)

Sat Apr 7, 2012, 10:33 AM

18. I know, but tweaked for Holllywood, I'm sure. It presented the picture it wanted

to present (as all documentaries do), and the message, although not UNtrue, may not be the WHOLE truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flying Squirrel (Original post)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:29 PM

5. The outrage is not that there was a bailout, the outrage is that we had to bail them out...

because the GOP majority deregulated Wall St.

Glass-Steagall stood until Newt's Contract with America gave them the majority Wall St. needed to get their way.

If I were prone to procreate, my first born would be named Bernanke

We narrowly averted Great Depression 2.0

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roseBudd (Reply #5)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 09:09 PM

11. Agreed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roseBudd (Reply #5)

Sat Apr 7, 2012, 10:51 AM

19. Except it would have been much worse


In the 30s there was still a vast thriving agricultural sector that allowed millions of people without jobs to migrate back to live with other family members on family farms that were still operating.

A similar collapse this time would have left tens of millions without work and no inexpensive alternative to go to while the situation normalized.

People don't realize that the whole enterprise is based on a common perception, that money is real, for example and that if the core of that perception is gone we would be back to exchanging food for clam shells.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flying Squirrel (Original post)

Sat Apr 7, 2012, 03:31 AM

14. Um, the choice is between (arguably) mildly offensive (Obama) and

 

batshit crazy\sociopathic (Repukes).

Q.E.D.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #14)

Sat Apr 7, 2012, 05:05 PM

21. Greedy militaristic bastards vs. Batshit crazy theocratic homicidal maniacs

 

That is the way I view it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flying Squirrel (Original post)

Sat Apr 7, 2012, 06:26 AM

16. I have seen it and it is a good documentary

It points out how the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 99 led to the large banks merging with investment firms, insurance companies, etc. In all fairness to your "friend" (I am not completely in agreement with them by the way) Obama did appoint quite a few Wall Street people, but it was after the fact. I do agree it is hard to defend Obama on those appointments.

As an aside, I actually teach business in China and showed my students the film. I (being the good teacher I am) went online and found the English subtitles and then went through the entire movie and picked out words (especially financial terms) that I thought were too difficult (some of which as a doctoral student even I didn't know, but I hate finance). My angle was that this effected everyone not just the US. There were some scenes from a factory in China and an interview with a Chinese woman who spoke pretty decent English. Needless to say most of them weren't interested, which is sad.

The Chinese in general take very short term views of things and don't look into the future. They believe they'll be able to sustain high growth, but it won't happen. Not with the world economy slowing for the last few years. Things are just starting to pick up again, so it will take time for people to buy things which means jobs everywhere will be hurting.

Ok, so I went way off topic. It's just that the movie did interest me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flying Squirrel (Original post)

Sat Apr 7, 2012, 08:48 AM

17. Obama is cozier with Wall Street than I would like

and I have known and said that even while he was still battling Hillary for the nomination 4 years ago today.

But, I like him A LOT. And, I think he has done a really good job.

It is the world we live in. IF we could get an even more progressive guy/gal who is not as tied to Wall Street, a Howard Dean, I would be behind him or her.

But, Obama is pretty darn good overall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread