Bill Clinton’s Legacy of Denial

[Donnachaidh]

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/clinton_in_deep_denial_20110621/

Does Bill Clinton still not grasp that the current economic crisis is in large measure his legacy? Obviously that’s the case, or he wouldn’t have had the temerity to write a 14-point memo for Newsweek on how to fix the economy that never once refers to the home mortgage collapse and other manifestations of Wall Street greed that he enabled as president.

Endorsing the Republican agenda of financial industry deregulation, reversing New Deal safeguards, President Clinton pursued policies that in the long run created more damage to the American economy than any other president since Herbert Hoover, whose tenure is linked to the Great Depression. Now, in his Newsweek piece, Clinton has the effrontery to once again revive his 1992 campaign mantra, “It’s the economy, stupid,” as the article’s title without any sense of irony, let alone accountability. But that has always been the man’s special gift—to rise above, and indeed benefit from, the messes he created.

His list of safe nostrums—painting tar-surface roofs white and seeking more efficient solar and battery production—to be featured at his lavishly funded Clinton Global Initiative conference in Chicago next week is vintage Clinton hype. All of those solutions are of the win/win sort that he loved to ballyhoo as president; who in his or her right mind would be against green job creation? But that hardly speaks to a crisis in which, as was reported Tuesday, the housing meltdown continues unabated as the toxic mortgages sold and packaged by the leading banks and investment houses clog the real estate market, destroying consumer confidence and hobbling job creation.

Conceding that the bailed-out banks are sitting on $2 trillion that they won’t lend, Clinton offers not a word about mortgage relief for swindled homeowners. With an all-time high of 44 million Americans living below the poverty line, Clinton once again brags of his success in ending the federal welfare program.

More at the link --

[RandomThoughts]

1. Your not going deep enough.

Clinton wanted housing for many people, then built that off of the flawed system of some people wanting much money for themselves, that took that good idea, added a way for them to make money, and created a bubble and evictions.

The idea is good, building it off of profit first speculators and banking, public or private, for profit, fails.

Here is the thing, housing for everyone, makes sense, and adds jobs as houses are constructed, but the problem still exist that there is more production then demand, and the deeper problem of how capitalism tries to fix that, planned obsolescent, people buying stuff becuase it is pushed in advertisements, and scarcity to make it more profitable.



If everyone should have a home, and that does make sense, There has to be a system that does not make money off people being homeless by scarcity, or set up to be evicted for a profit.

side note, when they tried to take my beer and travel money with smear, I lived in a car, and still am not at a home. So what did you expect.

I am due beer and travel money.


But here is the big picture, they say people will be lazy if they are not starving, or have to work 3 jobs to afford a roof over there heads, at the same time that production is above demand. <-contradiction.

The truth of it is they want people worried every day, and to busy to think about anything but there next meal, so they don't see how some are creating many problems.

If you can get a job easily, you are more likely to strike a company in 'race to the bottom mode' if you can start a business by secure healthcare, you are more likely not to work for the 'race to the bottom' lowest wage possible. If immigration is used to have a threat of deportation on workers, race to the bottom, those workers will do what ever they are told right or wrong.

It is about control.

[Dawson Leery]

2. Those tax incentives are being used for Hedge Fund managers

to profit off of charter schools.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/07/national/main5292291.shtml

http://modeducation.blogspot.com/2011/05/one-more-reason-to-hate-wall-street-and.html

"Gonzalez says that when investors put up the money to build charter schools, they can double their money in seven years through this 39% tax credit. Because it is a tax credit on money that they’re lending, they also get to collect interest on the loans. So it is immensely profitable to invest in charter schools. Investors can also piggyback the credit on top of other tax credits, like the historic building preservation credit. In a New York Daily News piece, Gonzalez reported that JPMorgan Chase is planning to take advantage of the New Markets Tax Credit by creating a new $325 million pool to invest in charter schools."

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/education/2010/05/07/2010-05-07_albany_charter_cash_cow_big_banks_making_a_bundle_on_new_construction_as_schools.html

[RandomThoughts]

6. At some point 'control' fails.

It requires more control, and more control makes conditions worse, requiring more control,

That is the downward spiral of the security state.

It is so simple, they don't even have any managerial experience. If you tell someone what they have to do, they will do the minimum, and only when you are watching, while stealing or sabotaging efforts. And you would have to discipline every time they did not, as you are yelling at them. Then they don't really care about your discipline, becuase they are not going to be yelled at wrongly.

Or you can treat workers with respect, and they contribute to a mutual goal. But that is not profit first so that is pretended with 'cult tactics' like Walmart uses, while still in control and race to the bottom in secrecy.

And race to the bottom is not treating society with respect.

So what those companies are doing is setting up a 'better tier' if you are with them, but only if you oppress many other people, to set up a two tier society with the 'offer' of being on top some day.


The security state wants to isolate, or remove by 'minority report' false justice anyone that might challenge them, and only have those that will 'do what they are told' even if wrong, but as more of that is needed, like taking over schools, more people leave them, till more people are outside then inside, and those inside look around to see the charging of the Bastille.

Where they made a mistake, is not knowing that how they treat people, is how they can be treated, and by things that is more about most people, not a few that want control. So they release on themselves what they thought would help them, if it was unjust, and those that were just get help from that which is just.

Until all of existence is even fed up with it, and the whole thing collapses.

Because I am due beer and travel money.



Also why 'deals' and 'promises' make no sense, becuase if they are real, they don't have to be made. The 'promise' is enticement based on credibility. You don't need a promise, becuase, those deserving a promise, would not do for 'something' needed to be promised.

It all makes so much sense. And yea, is messed up, but at least it is easy to tell why.

And any promise from the supernatural is a promise while in the dark, unless you claim the knowledge of all things, which nobody has.

So anyways, I don't need promises, nor respect the bias of writings that would say that is a reason to do, the reason to do is becuase it feels and you think it is right.

Pat Benatar - Promises In The Dark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuPFhDQRKzw


Pat Benatar - Hit Me With Your Best Shot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JRgHol94Xc

There is plenty of resistance all over, and it is not resistance to better ideas, it is resistance against a world still not perfect. And those that don't want to correct things.

70's "I'd Like to Buy the World a Coke" Commercial
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfU17niXOG8


Or it might all be bad, it might be good, but that is not why you do what you think and feel is right. And you can't know anyways.

[DonCoquixote]

3. To be fair

Clinton was a product of his time. He was the most electable person we could get, and frankly, many of us on the left act like all we have to do is explain why we should have Dennis K. or Bernie, and the masses will all bow to our logic.

That being said, he and his wife should NOT be the current standard for the left, especially Obama. If anything, the Bush legacy should make the country lean farther LEFT than ever, nor right, and his current statements on everything from Libya to the Budget show that Bill (nor for that matter, Hillary) understand how much the world has changed since the 90's (mostly for the worse).

[gateley]

4. I think Reagan got the ball rolling, but Clinton did help it

stay in play and gave it some powerful kicks.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Here's the happyist picture I ever saw of Bill Clinton

Ever seen anything like it?

The event is the signing of the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Why do you think Bill is so happy?

[BlueCaliDem]

7. And that happy pciture makes me totally sad inside. eom

[pa28]

8. Bill Clinton always acted like a man with something to prove.

If I had to caption this it might be something like "I've been a probationary member of the club and now they are about to teach me the secret handshake. Awwwww Yeah."

Also; Why is Alan Greenspan there? WTF.

[Dawson Leery]

11. And he still defends his support of it.

Clinton was a good manager.
As for the long term health of the nation, the US would have been better off without Reagan, H.W Bush, Clinton and "Dubya".

[ooglymoogly]

12. There needs to be a balloon over his head

Whew, I'M IN!!!!! thought I'd never make it.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[izquierdista]

10. Clinton was a good 2 year President

In those first two years, he got the tax rate to where it was actually balanced. If he did a Palin and quit in '95, leaving Al Gore in charge, that's probably the best thing that could have happened.

[ooglymoogly]

13. I think Bill would have been one of the great presidents

If he had just said "get that fuckin camera out of my face, how dare you ask a personal question that is none of your god damned business at a meeting with international consequences. What are you a fukin retard? Get this fukin retard out of here, he is personal non grata wherever I am and that goes for any other ignorant reporter who is not here to report on the news. If you want the news I'm here for you, if you want tabloid get outta my face. Do you want to see my pecker or what?" and stormed off.

With that lie: "Ah hauv nevuh haud sexual relations with that woman" came the downfall of his presidency and the downfall of the democratic party.


Both he and the democratic party were hornswaggled and he never recovered from it; but instead became one of them; but the real tragedy is that we have never recovered from it.