Obama: 'Culture of irresponsibility': The Swamp
The Swamp
Chicago Tribune
Posted June 17, 2009 12:30 PM
The Swamp

by Mark Silva

President Barack Obama, arguing that Wall Street created "a culture of irresponsibility,'' is calling on Congress today to create a new framework of federal financial regulation.

Obama on regulation.jpg

"A culture of irresponsibility took root from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street,'' Obama plans to say in an address from the East Room soon. "And a regulatory regime basically crafted in the wake of a 20th century economic crisis - the Great Depression - was overwhelmed by the speed, scope, and sophistication of a 21st century global economy. ''

The president, (pictured here today by Pablo Martinez Monsivais of the AP), is calling on Congress to subject "all financial firms that pose a significant risk to the financial system'' to strong supervision and regulation. The goal will be to "increase market discipline and transparency to make our markets strong enough to withstand system-wide stress.'' He also is seeking to create a Consumer Financial Protection Agency " to focus exclusively on protecting consumers in credit, savings, and payment markets.''

"Since taking office, my administration has mounted an extraordinary response to an historic economic crisis,'' the president plans to say. "But even as we take decisive action to repair the damage to our economy, we are working hard to build a new foundation for sustained and lasting growth.

"This will not be easy. We know that this recession is not the result of one failure, but many. And many of the toughest challenges we face are the product of a cascade of mistakes and missed opportunities which took place over the course of decades. ''

Here is more on the president's plans and here, from the White House, are the president's planned remarks:

"As part of this new foundation, we are seeking to build an energy economy that creates new jobs and new businesses to free us from our dependence on foreign oil; to foster an education system that instills in each generation the capacity to turn ideas into innovations, and innovations into industries; and, as I discussed on Monday at the American Medical Association, to reform our health care system so that we can remain healthy and competitive.

This new foundation also requires strong, vibrant financial markets, operating under transparent, fairly-administered rules of the road that protect America's consumers and our economy from the devastating breakdown we've witnessed in recent years.

It is an indisputable fact that one of the most significant contributors to our economic downturn was an unraveling of major financial institutions and the lack of adequate regulatory structures to prevent abuse and excess. A culture of irresponsibility took root from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street. And a regulatory regime basically crafted in the wake of a 20th century economic crisis - the Great Depression - was overwhelmed by the speed, scope, and sophistication of a 21st century global economy.

In recent years, financial innovators, seeking an edge in the marketplace, produced a variety of new and complex financial instruments. These products, such as asset backed securities, were designed to spread risk but ended up concentrating it. Loans were sold to banks, banks packaged these loans into securities, and investors bought these securities often with little insight into the risks to which they were exposed. It was easy money. But these schemes were built on a pile of sand. And as the appetite for these products grew, lenders lowered standards to attract new borrowers. Many Americans bought homes and borrowed money without being adequately informed of the terms, and often without accepting their responsibilities.

Meanwhile, excessive executive compensation - unmoored from long-term performance or even reality - rewarded recklessness rather than responsibility. This wasn't just a failure of individuals. This was a failure of the entire system. The actions of many firms escaped scrutiny. In some cases, the dealings of these institutions were so complex and opaque that few inside or outside these companies understood what was happening. Where there were gaps in the rules, regulators lacked the authority to take action. Where there were overlaps, regulators lacked accountability for inaction.

An absence of oversight engendered systematic, and systemic, abuse. Instead of reducing risk, the markets actually magnified risks being taken by ordinary families and large firms alike. There was far too much debt and not nearly enough capital in the system. And a growing economy bred complacency.

We all know the result: the bursting of a debt-based bubble; the failure of several of the world's largest financial institutions; the sudden decline in available credit; the deterioration of the economy; the unprecedented intervention of the federal government to stabilize the financial markets and prevent a wider collapse; and most importantly, the terrible pain in the lives of ordinary Americans. There are retirees who have lost much of their life savings, families devastated by job losses, small businesses forced to shut their doors.

Millions of Americans who have worked hard and behaved responsibly have seen their life dreams eroded by the irresponsibility of others and the failure of their government to provide adequate oversight. Our entire economy has been undermined by that failure.

The question is, what do we do now? We did not choose how this crisis began. But we do have a choice in the legacy this crisis leaves behind. So today, my administration is proposing a sweeping overhaul of the financial regulatory system, a transformation on a scale not seen since the reforms that followed the Great Depression.

These proposals reflect intensive consultation with leaders in Congress, including those here today: leaders like Chairmen Dodd and Frank, who along with Senator Shelby and Representative Bachus met with me earlier this year to jumpstart the discussion of reform. They also draw on conversations with regulators, including those I met with this morning; consumer advocates; business leaders; academic experts; and the broader public.

In these efforts, we seek a careful balance. I have always been a strong believer in the power of the free market. It has been and will remain the engine of America's progress - the source of prosperity unrivaled in history. I believe that jobs are best created not by government, but by businesses and entrepreneurs who are willing to take a risk on a good idea. I believe that our role is not to disparage wealth, but to expand its reach; not to stifle the market, but to strengthen its ability to unleash the creativity and innovation that still make this nation the envy of the world.

That's our goal. To restore markets in which we reward hard work and responsibility, not recklessness and greed - in which honest, vigorous competition in the system is prized, and those who game the system are thwarted.

With the reforms we are proposing today, we seek to put in place rules that will allow our markets to promote innovation while discouraging abuse. We seek to create a framework in which markets can function freely and fairly, without the fragility in which normal business cycles bring the risk of financial collapse; a system that works for businesses and consumers.

There are those who will say we do not go far enough, that we should have scrapped the system altogether and started again. I think that would be a mistake. Instead, we have crafted reforms to pinpoint the structural weaknesses that allowed for this crisis and to make sure that these problems are dealt with so as to prevent crises in the future.

There are also those who will say we are going too far. But the events of the past few years offer ample testimony for the need to make significant changes. The absence of a working regulatory regime over many parts of the financial system - and over the system as a whole - led us to near catastrophe. We do not want to stifle innovation. But I'm convinced that by setting out clear rules of the road and ensuring transparency and fair dealings, we will actually promote a more vibrant market. This principle is at the heart of the changes we are proposing.

First, we are proposing a set of reforms to require regulators to look not only at the safety and soundness of individual institutions, but also - for the first time - at the stability of the system as a whole.

One of the reasons this crisis could take place is that while many agencies and regulators were responsible for overseeing individual financial firms and their subsidiaries, no one was responsible for protecting the whole system from the kinds of risks that tied these firms to one another. Regulators were charged with seeing the trees, not the forest. Even then, some firms that posed a so-called "systemic risk" were not regulated as strongly as others; they behaved like banks but chose to be regulated as insurance companies, or investment firms, or other entities under less scrutiny.

As a result, the failure of one large firm threatened the viability of many others. The effect multiplied. There was no system in place that was prepared for this kind of outcome. And more importantly, no one has been charged with preventing it. We were facing one of the largest financial crises in history - and those responsible for oversight were mostly caught off-guard and without the authority needed to address the problem.

It's time for that to change. I am proposing that the Federal Reserve be granted new authority - and accountability - for regulating bank holding companies and other large firms that pose a risk to the entire economy in the event of failure. We will also raise the standards to which these kinds of firms are held. If you can pose a great risk, that means you have a great responsibility. We will require these firms to meet stronger capital and liquidity requirements so that they are more resilient and less likely to fail.

And even as we place the authority to regulate these large firms in the hands of the Federal Reserve - so that lines of responsibility and accountability are clear - we will also create an oversight council to bring together regulators from across markets to coordinate and share information; to identify gaps in regulation; and to tackle issues that don't fit neatly in an organizational chart. We're going to bring everyone together to take a broader view - and a longer view - to solve problems in oversight before they can become crises.

As part of this effort, we are proposing the creation of what is called "resolution authority" for large and interconnected financial firms so that we are not only putting in place safeguards to prevent the failure of these firms, but also a set of orderly procedures that will allow us to protect the economy if such a firm does in fact go under.

Think about this: if a bank fails, we have a process through the FDIC that protects depositors and maintains confidence in the banking system. This process was created during Great Depression when the failure of one bank led to runs on other banks, which in turn threatened wider turmoil. And it works. Yet we do not have any effective system in place to contain the failure of an AIG and the largest and most interconnected financial firms in our country.

That is why, when this crisis began, crucial decisions about what would happen to some of the world's biggest companies - companies employing tens of thousands of people and holding trillions of dollars in assets - took place in emergency meetings in the middle of the night. And that is why we've had to rely on taxpayer dollars. We should not be forced to choose between allowing a company to fall into a rapid and chaotic dissolution or to support the company with taxpayer money. That is unacceptable. There is too much at stake.

Second, we are proposing a new and powerful agency charged with just one job: looking out for ordinary consumers. This is essential, for this crisis was not just the result of decisions made by the mightiest of financial firms; it was also the result of decisions made by ordinary Americans to open credit cards, take out home loans, and take on other financial obligations. We know that there were many who took out loans they knew they could not afford, but there are also millions of Americans who signed contracts they did not always understand offered by lenders who did not always tell the truth. Even today, folks signing up for a mortgage, student loan, or credit card face a bewildering array of incomprehensible options. Companies compete not by offering better products, but more complicated ones, with more fine print and hidden terms.

This new agency will change that, building on credit card reforms I signed into law a few weeks ago. This agency will have the power to set standards so that companies compete by offering innovative products that consumers actually want - and actually understand. Consumers will be provided information that is simple, transparent, and accurate. You'll be able to compare products and see what is best for you. The most unfair practices will be banned. Those ridiculous contracts - pages of fine print that no one can figure out - will be a thing of the past. And enforcement will be the rule, not the exception.

For example, this agency will be empowered to set new rules for home mortgage lending, so that the bad practices that led to the home mortgage crisis will be stamped out. Mortgage brokers will be held to higher standards; exotic mortgages that hide exploding costs will no longer be the norm; home mortgage disclosures will be reasonable, clearly written, and concise. And we're going to level the playing field so that non-banks that offer home loans are held to the same standards as banks that offer similar services, so that lenders aren't competing to lower standards - but to meet a higher bar on behalf of consumers.

The mission of this new agency must also be reflected in the work we do throughout the government. There are other agencies, like the Federal Trade Commission, charged with protecting consumers, and we must ensure that those agencies have the resources, and the state-of-the-art tools, to stop unfair and deceptive practices as well.

Third, we are proposing a series of changes designed to promote free and fair markets by closing gaps and overlaps in our regulatory system - including gaps that exist not just within but between nations.

We've seen that structural deficiencies allow some companies to shop for the regulator of their choice - and others, like hedge funds, to operate outside the regulatory system altogether. We've seen the development of financial instruments, like many derivatives, so complex as to defy efforts to assess their actual value. And we've seen a system that allowed lenders to profit by providing loans to borrowers who would never repay - because the lender offloaded the loan, and the consequences, to someone else.

That is why, as part of these reforms, we will dismantle the Office of Thrift Supervision and close loopholes that have allowed important institutions to cherry-pick among banking rules. We will offer only one federal banking charter, regulated by a strengthened federal supervisor. We'll raise capital requirements for all depository institutions. And hedge fund advisers will be required to register with the SEC.

We are also proposing comprehensive regulation of credit default swaps and other derivatives that have threatened the entire financial system. And we will require the originator of a loan to retain an economic interest in that loan, so that the lender - and not just the holder of a security, for example - has an interest in ensuring that a loan is paid back. By setting common-sense rules, these kinds of financial instruments can play a constructive - not destructive - role.

Over the past two decades, we have seen - time and again - cycles of precipitous booms and busts. In each case, millions of people have had their lives profoundly disrupted by developments in the financial system, most severely in our recent crisis. These aren't just numbers on a ledger. This is a child's chance to get an education. This is a family's ability to pay their bills or stay in their home. This is the right of our seniors to retire with dignity and security. These are American dreams, and we should not accept a system that consistently puts them in danger. Financial institutions have an obligation to themselves and to the public to manage risks carefully. And as President, I have a responsibility to ensure that our financial system works for the economy as a whole.

There has always been a tension between those who place their faith in the invisible hand of the marketplace - and those who place more trust in the guiding hand of the government. That tension isn't a bad thing. It gives rise to the debates and dynamism that make it possible for us to adapt and grow. For we know that markets are not an unalloyed force for good or for ill. In many ways, our financial system reflects us. In the aggregate of countless independent decisions, we see the potential for creativity - and the potential for abuse. We see the capacity for innovations that make our economy stronger - and for innovations that exploit our economy's weaknesses.

We are called upon to put in place those reforms that allow our best qualities to flourish - while keeping those worst traits in check. We are called upon to recognize that the free market is the most powerful generative force for our prosperity - but it is not a free license to ignore the consequences of our actions.

This is a difficult time for our nation. But from this period of challenge, we can once again tap those values and ideals that have allowed us to lead the global economy, and will allow us to lead once again. That is how we will help more Americans live their own dreams. That is why these reforms are so important. And I look to working with leaders in Congress and all of you to see these proposals put to work so that we can overcome this crisis and build a foundation for lasting prosperity.''

Digg Delicious Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo

Comments

Nothing is more irresposible than the spending habits of the current White House.


What about all of the welfare recipients who have 3X more children than working parents.

Talk about irresponsibility.

Talk about irresponsibility... How about Timmy the tax cheat when HE was the New York Fed lobbying for Lehman Bros??

Talk about irresponsibility... When will Barry come clean with his college transcripts??

But this is the same liberal three card monty. It is always do as I say not as I do.


If he's serious let the house cleaning begin but let's start with the crooked politicians and all their crooked contacts. This is all BS that is aimed at us. Who created this problem? All the politicians who did nothing but sit on their hands for all the years they were in office. More hot air creating more global warming.


President Obama will need to include provisions that ensure the new regulators cannot be bribed or compromised...for example, a nonpartisan and non-industry board that appoints the regulators, and/or stiff penalties if regulators collude with the financial sector to help it get around regulations.


Responsibility?! OBAMA is talking about responsibility?

It's a valid point but Obama should set an example.

And, apply it across the board, from the top to the bottom not just to a few that he chooses.


If Obama wants to end the “culture of irresponsibility,” he had better clean his own house first. He can start by revising his economy busting, record breaking budget. He can then revise all the nonsensical make-work programs that have gone into his so-called stimulus program. He can then get out of the automobile operating business. He can then allow more banks to pay back TARP money. After all this, he can conduct a government audit to survey the multiplicity, wastefulness, fraud, corruption, and misappropriation going on in the federal government - and then do something to change it. Once he has done all of this, then maybe he will have cleared the log in his eye so that he could remove the specks in everyone else’s.


What is he going to do, fire Barney Frank? That would certainlly go a long way in ending irresponsible behavior.


Seriously!?!?!?!

This president has the nerve to bemoan the "culture of irresponsibility" while he is printing money and running up TRILLIONS in debt and expanding federal government interventions like there's no tomorrow?

Really.


To the post by bluesky, what you are asking for looks a lot like the Inspector General position and the legislation co-sponsored by Obama that protected those in that role.

But I guess the expiration date must have passed on that (promise/law) too if you are to understand how the Obama administration is handling the situation of Gerald Walpin.

If you want responsibility, start by reducing the role of the Federal Government or better yet, hold the politicians personally responsible for the disasterous consequences that result from their actions.


Who, exactly, was responsible for that $300,000 date night in NYC for the Obamas a couple weeks ago? Who, exactly, is responsible for the zero-equity mortgages a lot of borrowers asked for, and who *was* responsible for paying back the money they borrowed? If we don't hold them accountable, then 'responsibility' is an empty word. The bankers gave us what we asked for. They shouldn't be the only ones accountable for what they did. And now, if you borrow too much, lose a job, etc., you won't have to be responsible for health care because other people will absolve you of further consequences? Please, enough of this beggar-thy-neighbor philosophy.


The Exec. Branch and the cabinet, the Senate, the House along with the federal regulatory agency that government failed miserably however no long, bony finger is being emphatically pointed at these turkeys by Obama nor by this articles author. This is the irresponsibility that must be reigned in and stopped. This is the same irresponsibilty that is spending trillions on ill-thought out projects and now is considering taking on health care. The American people need to be yelling yeah screaming NO to all such Obama initiatives!


This is sick.

The guy spends untold trillions, then blames others for being irresponsible??

America is asleep and fascism has planted its roots.

There will be no salvation within the system.


Obama is only spending to stimulate the economy because the Bush administration took a budget surplus they got from Bill Clinton and blew it by doubling our national debt in only eight short years. And they did it by giving tax cuts to the richest 2% and starting an unnecessary war, among other things.


Obama is investing in AMERICAN JOBS FOR AMERICAN PEOPLE and he's only doing it because after the eight years of Conservative deregulated cowboy trickledown crap economics trashed our economy, he had no choice.


I know that the deadender wingnuts on here already know this but you figure you're going to con people into coming back to that train wreck you call the Republican party by lying. You're not, because most people in this country aren't as stupid as the average Republican is.
.
http://conservationreport.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/history-of-budget-surplus-deficit.gif



I see the Bush recession has claimed another victim....


Nevada Republican John Ensign busts himself over year-old affair because he can't afford the blackmail money.
.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/16/john-ensign-affair-gop-se_n_216451.html



And Obama's going to Cairo and making speeches implying he will bring freedom to the Islamic nations as if he is President of the World was not in any way irresponsible?

The guy's a clown.


The GOP has dug itself a deep hole with a hostility toward empathy that is shared by few outside its white male base . While Democrats see government as a way to improve people's lives (acting on empathy for the less fortunate or entitled), Republicans saw government as the enemy and sought its destruction, leaving people to sink or swim on their own.


It wasn't too long ago that, seeing their deficiencies on this front, that a presidential candidate named George W. Bush and his piece of crap swengali Karl Rove co-opted the concept of "compassionate conservatism". They had correctly surmised that Republicans were seen as heartless, selfish, and unconcerned with the plight of the less fortunate. Understanding that winning as the part of entitlement and privilege would be tough, they set out to pain themselves as empathetic, or "compassionate" (same thing).


9-11 spared them the trouble of having to reprise that approach in 2004, when the election focused on scary terrorists under everyone's beds. But it's probably a safe assumption that without Bush's adoption of the "compassionate" label, he probably would've never come close enough to Gore to have the Supreme Court select him president.


Now that the GOP is wildly out of sync with America on compassion, and losing the youth, women, and (ethnic and sexual) minority vote because of that value, their biggest hope would be to bring back the "compassion" thing and hope people fall for it again. Yet in a stroke of good luck for our side, Republicans seem to have universally concluded that Bush failed because of his attempts at "compassionate conservatism".


The GOP's "compassion gap" has put them in an electoral hole almost impossible to dig out without radically changing its core philosophy, yet the conservative base and intelligentsia blame 'compassionate conservatism" for Bush's failures, despite the fact that Bush likely got the White House in the first place because of his "compassionate conservative" campaign.


Expect former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman to return from China (where he is now serving as Obama's ambassador) wielding a variation of the "compassionate conservative" message for his 2016 presidential campaign. Whether Republican primary voters are ready to give electability another shot after eight years of Obama remains to be seen. I'd put my money on "no", not when they blame compassion/empathy for the biggest presidential failure since Herbert Hoover.


Rock On President Obama, we've got your back
.
http://www.pufferfishblog.com/weblog/2009/04/republicans-less-popular-than-venezuela.html



And Obama's going to Cairo and making speeches implying he will bring freedom to the Islamic nations as if he is President of the World was not in any way irresponsible?The guy's a clown.

Posted by: Ian Thorpe | June 17, 2009 3:27 PM
----------------------------------------


Little Ian,
I guess we should just do what the wingnut knuckle-draggers on the right always do in a time of crisis - start dropping bombs, invade, occupy and then declare "Mission Accomplised!" on an aircraft carrier off the coast of San Diego. That always works.....not!
.
http://www.altacocker.com/other_items/mission-accomplished-osama.jpg



Dodd & Frank are as responsible for this mess as anyone and he has them in charge? the big O doesn't have a clue.


The man who has never been responsible for anything is opining about resposibility?
.
The man who has had this job for over 5 months and still blames Bush for his incompetence is speaking about others being irresponsible?
.
And the sheep continue to blindly follow.


The GOP went hard to win over the 15,000,000 personality disorder Americans.


Angry White Males -- the original name tag.


Authoritarians VERSUS social conservatives -- the broader brush for this political phenomenon.


GOPer-built delusions are pumped out daily by the right-wing noise machine (Faux News, Rush etc) -- the infamous "talking points" -- to draw in paranoids, narcissists, borderline to psychotic, and more.


Rightie fanaticism is associated principally with serious mental flaws.


Limbaugh and hate-radio provide a setting that repeats the main fantasies, as though shared across a general community. "The Silent Majority" of Nixon, redux.


GOPer irrationality is a designed phenomenon, they're always looking for some Librul to blame for their own sad life circumstances -- GOPers are in all the way for this crazy stuff.



Kind of ironic that China would be the ones to bail the Republicans (and the rest of the U.S.) out of the mess that the GOP started, money-wise. And I always heard the Republicans slamming on China--"those evil communists!".


The Republican belief system, at its core, sanctifies the individual, elevating personal success and accomplishment over the well-being of society at large. It’s a selfish outlook, one proudly and openly hostile to empathy as a valid political value. One doesn’t have to look very far to see this hostility in action — witness the conservative talking points against the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court.


Yet young voters, like most human beings, wholeheartedly embrace empathy. When Gallup ran a poll recently asking adults nationwide whether “empathy” was a value they wanted to see in a Supreme Court justice, 18-to-29-year-olds responded in the affirmative by a stunning 63-17 margin. Even baby boomers lagged behind, at 55-26. Gen Xers, or (roughly) 30-to-44-year-olds, were the most hostile to empathy, clocking in at 47-34 — still a substantial majority [...]


That Millennials found a home in the Democratic Party is no surprise. Recent Gallup polling has also found that Democrats endorsed empathy as a valuable governmental value by a 73-12 margin. Republicans opposed it by an 18-56 margin.


Could Republicans become a more empathetic party? Could they put themselves in the shoes of gay Americans and realize the rank unfairness of anti-gay discrimination? Could they start understanding how innocent villagers might react to American warplanes and missiles? Could they begin to understand that George Bush’s heavy-handed foreign policy created more resentment and enemies than constructive engagement would have? Could they realize that marginalized minorities face challenges that white males often avoid?


Sure. Around the same time that young Millennials shelve their iPhones and Wi-Fi and start handwriting letters to National Review.



The GOP is fast retreating into the Sarah Palin crazy "base" land. At some point, they just don't care what other people think.


Republicans don't think they have to be internally consistent: They can run McCain/Pailn under the slogan "America First!" and six months later demand to seceded from the union.


Of course they're not empathetic. Of course they hate people who are.


The extremists who are currently running the Republican party are scaring away the sane ones, leaving a core of racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-Semitic tax dodging gun nuts.



Finally Obama will impose on the banks and Wall St. some of that responsibility the cons have been talking about since the Reagan admin.

And BBD,
BHO has not come close to the profligate spending of GWB as of yet.
Remember?
'Reagan proved deficits don't matter.' (DC)
' We hit the trifecta.' (W)

You cons have zero credibility.


Mr.Hussaine Obama should look in the mirror, there he will see the very best example of irresponsibility. The definition is right next to his picture.


Riley says;
"The guy spends untold trillions, then blames others for being irresponsible??"

Not true. BHO has not spent trillions yet. However, Bush did.

BTW, we are still paying for Reagan's deficits, but no complaints from the cons here.


"Dodd & Frank are as responsible for this mess as anyone and he has them in charge? the big O doesn't have a clue.
Posted by: Den C | June 17, 2009 4:09 PM
DC,
Some but not as much as the following 'axis of financial evil';
1. GWB
2. The Republican congress, 95-07
3. Alan Greenspan
4. The banks themselves

We leave it to you to figure out why.


No, Den. No, Sen. Dirksen.

This was a very important address. Which is saying a lot because the other speechs have been groundbreaking as well.

In today's address the President summarized in terms any literate American can understand, the causes of last year's financial debacle and the failures of the federal regulatory agencies which allowed it to happen.

Though I and many others disagreed with the way TARP was implemented, today's address shows that the President has a comprehensive understanding of what went wrong and sound ideas for new, more powerful and responsible regulatory structures which can prevent the abuses he identified in the address.

Cairo, the AMA address, today's regulatory reform address:

WHAT YOU VOTED FOR.


Socialism doesn't work. Government running private enterprise doesn't work. When you remove the profit incentive, you eliminate motivation. Big government is a travesty, riddled with incompetence, gridlock, and corruption. Next up, free single payer healthcare for all Americans. Is this a great country or what? Thanks Libs. Don't worry about the bill. We can always borrow from our Asian friends and print more government cheese! How do you reduce a deficit which is beyond comprehension? Hyper-inflation can cut it in half; then half again in no time. Change is good? That's all you'll have left after this administration. Remember all the Obama-bites insisting that only the rich will be taxed? Your healthcare benefits are now under consideration for taxation. Employers will also be called upon to share the burden. They will speed up layoffs and downsizing. More change we can use.


And this from the most irresponsible man to ever sit in the Oval Office!


The posing of so many fictitious straw man arguments by the republican sympathizers here shows a lack of respect for truth and logic that is destined to not convince any but their own.
On the other hand, I'm sure it makes them feel good. LOL!


Posted by: John D | June 17, 2009 11:47 PM


Another useless post from the most irresponsible person to ever post here in The Swamp.


John D -- give us an example of how responsible Bush was. Please. We beg of you. That man was the epitome of fiddling while Rome burned.


Ignorant-for-Life BC, spending trillions of dollars you don't have is not very responsible. If this idiot lasts eight years, his deficit spending will surpass the deficit spending from George Washington to George W Bush.

Unreal, here are just a few of the things Bush did that were responsible:
1. Defeated the Taliban, something every so-called expert said couldn't be done.
2. Lowered taxes on ALL Americans.
3. No Child Left Behind
4. Removed Saddam Hussein.
5. Treated the Oval Office and White House with respect and dignity.
6. Did more for Africa and to fight AIDS in Africa than any other world leader -- ever! This also is not my opinion but those of African country leaders, and even activists like Bob Geldoff and Bono.


Agree with "icebergslim" above that GOPer-Built Delusions are part of a deliberate tactic to attract America's paranoids and others in the 15,000,000 mentally disordered.

GOPer-Built Delusion -- same as "talking point."

Mental disorders are a terrible burden. The individuals are also unattractive -- given to ugly fantasies and such as grudges against normal people.

Selling hatred is what the GOP and Fox and Limbaugh are doing. Effects on patients with the main Personality Disorders can be devastating. Hatred becomes an artificial obsession.


Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)

Please enter the letter "h" in the field below:

Barack Obama
Want to see more photos? Click here

Play "Budget Hero"

Play Budget Hero

Latest polls

News, but funnier

Cartoon

Walt Handelsman

Cartoon

The Lowe- Down

Cartoon

Joe Fournier

Cartoon

Editorial cartoons

Quizzes

Rahm Emanuel

Know the real Rahm?

McCain

Presidential trivia