“…please don’t tell me the banks “oppose her.”

“A certain amount of opposition is a great help to a man; it is what he wants and must have to be good for anything. Hardship and opposition are the native soil of manhood and self-reliance.”

John Neal

You have to look at where the “power” to LIVE is being drained from the people and that is the “churches”.

“End Times” prophecy crap – if they don’t ALLOW themselves to be abused beyond reason, then they are not cooperating with God’s will and Jesus won’t come back to solve all their problems for them.

Hard to believe, but that’s the TRUTH. Why else would there be no SANE and LOGICAL response to obvious criminality?

And look at that lame-arse bill we ended up with.

Methinks those banksters do protest too much.

Why does everyone assume that, in dire circumstances, the wealthy will hide in castles and the rest of us will be reduced to dogs fighting over scraps?

WTH are we, if not evolved enough to know that no one determines our fate other than ourselves? Why would we have need for security, when we could find it in joining with our neighbors? There is civil strife, crime and gang wars now, so what are you so scared of?

I think this rampant fraud committed by our government has reduced everyone to a certain level of imagined powerlessness, a kind of pre-natal status, looking for a warm womb to inhabit in order to wait it out.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t let others determine my fate. I live for myself and no other man ever could own me. The fact is, we certainly don’t need a government, let alone this behemoth government, at the federal level anymore. They have only sought to destroy the Constitution and have outgrown their usefulness. Our elected officials at that level seem to be practicing nothing more than incestuous cronyism and petty thievery, using arms and laws to steal from us all. F**k ‘em.

Who needs any of ‘em?

There is only one way to get them out and that is to strike. Don’t vote. Don’t pay new taxes. Treat this government like the illegitimate sham it has become.

July 24, 2010 – NY Times

“President Obama should nominate Elizabeth Warren to head the new Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, and not only because of her credentials.

Ms. Warren — a bankruptcy expert at Harvard Law School, an Oklahoma native whose father was bilked of his savings by a business partner — developed the idea for the bureau in a 2007 article…

The banks don’t oppose Ms. Warren because she doesn’t get it. They oppose her because she does.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/opinion/25sun3.html

What an absolutely immoral statement. Just set your morality by the door would you, and let politicians decide your morality for you?

And yes, Obama’s integrity is in question, as the integrity of the “trash” surrounding him.

07-20-10

“The administration, though, could bypass the Senate entirely — without engendering the ill-will that would result from a recess appointment.

According to the bill’s language, the Treasury Secretary has sole authority to build the new agency before it’s ultimately transferred to the Federal Reserve. That includes anointing a person to head the effort on his behalf, and under his authority. The interim head would serve until the President’s nominee is confirmed by the Senate.

That person could be Elizabeth Warren.

And the legislation doesn’t appear to contain a deadline for a Presidential nomination, experts say, which means Warren could start the agency from scratch, put her people in, begin cracking down on predatory and abusive lenders, and initiate a culture that would put consumers’ interests above those of the nation’s most powerful financial institutions.

In short, she could set a tone the agency will follow for the next several years without the administration needing to fight a potentially drawn-out confirmation battle that could stall Obama’s pro-consumer agenda.

“The statute gives the Treasury Secretary the obligation to get it done, but doesn’t tell him how to get it done,” Gail Hillebrand, a senior attorney at Consumers Union and manager of the group’s financial services campaign, said about the Secretary’s role in creating the new agency.

Picking an interim head is one of the authorities Congress granted him in the legislation. Whomever Geithner hires would be serving that role on his behalf, and would ultimately be his responsibility.

So Geithner could, presumably, hire Warren on a contract basis to perform that role, Hillebrand said.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/19/elizabeth-warren-could-he_n_651759.html

It should be the straw that broke the camel’s back, because then the game plan will be revealed, forcing us to see Geithner’s real role as gate keeper barring Elizabeth Warren, and a watch dog guarding against meaningful reforms/regulations.

What is Obama afraid of and who is he trying to please? As President, Obama plays his cards close to his chest. This can alienate him from his supporters by being perceived as indecisive, uncertain, and worst of all weak. We need to see why he is betting so heavily on Wall Street playing nice.

Why is it that Republicans have “balls” and will ram Roberts and Alito onto the Supreme Court and yet the Democrats are all about bi-partisanship.

Obama and the Democrats need to get some BALLS and start representing “We, the People”. While I will contiue to vote a straight Democratic ticket, I am fast loosing hope that anything meaningful will change.

One of the direct consequences of Obama’s walking on egg shells pertaining to what Wall Street and the Republicans want, is that I have lost all enthusiasm in terms of working as an unpaid volunteer in the Obama campaign.

Obama needs to appoint Elizabeth Warren, if he wants to really create change in this country and level the playing field between Wall Street and Main Street.

Obama desperately needs to talk to Andy Grove, former CEO of Intel, and heed his advice for how to create jobs in this country; instead of 10 jobs being created in China and India for every 1 job created here.

My question is “Does Obama have the balls to do what is necessary to get this country back on track?”

One of the reasons that I supported Hillary right up until the end is that I knew she knew how to fight and go toe-to-toe with the Republican agenda.

Obama appears to be more concerned with appeasing Republicans than making bold decisive steps towards solving some of this country’s problems.

CEOs who are successful tend to focus on long-term objectives. Any politician, including Obama, who does so is doomed. Long-term for a congressman is 2 years, 6 years for a senator. In reality, a good portion of every day is spent trying to keep their jobs, not by achieving results, but by raising funds. Money will trump results every time.

When a CEO (Obama) and his Secretary of Defense decide that they DO NOT NEED more of a certain plane or helicopter, I find it strange that Congress can decide that they do–even if it is surplus or obsolete. But when we talk about reduction, we can only talk about non-military items.

Yes, we need Warren and lots of other principled politicians. We also need journalists who learn the details of the issues they are reporting on.

Ask people if derivatives are good or bad. If they’re old or new. You’ll get a large number who think they’re both bad and new. Then when you point out that everything ever traded at the Chicago Board of Trade or Mercantile Exchange as well as listed options are all derivatives, they seem very confused.

Can you think of a big bold move that would send a message, that this is an agency (CFPB) that is robust in your words and strong and to be contended with?

Elizabeth Warren:

“ The best that this agency can do, is to say to credit card companies, to mortgage companies, to banks, you can’t build a business model around tricking or trapping customers, it’s not going to work anymore. ”

“Having watched Prof. E. Warren for some time, I believe she is not only quite savvy in many ways…but has personal integrity. The latter is not compatible with the power brokers…

Sadly, I remain quite skeptical she will be appointed the leadership role for the consumer protection board. After watching the PBS “Need to Know”, I checked the transcript. I feel it holds clues as to why her appointment will likely not be successful.”

http://video.pbs.org/video/1545317019/

Funny, I see the glass half-full.