Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
17. Is that
Thu Dec 19, 2013, 08:51 AM
Dec 2013

"Warren and Sanders want to stop giving our cash to bankers. Obama dines regularly with Jamie and Lloyd.

One set of actions garners trust. The other, the opposite. "

...really a correlation: "giving our cash to bankers" vs "dines regularly with" them?

What does dinner have to do with policy?

SEC Will Require Companies To Report CEO-To-Worker Pay Ratios
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023694931

Regulators Finalize Stricter Volcker Rule - Reuters/HuffPo
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024158305

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau gets busy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023372682

NLRB to Prosecute Wal-Mart For Violating Workers’ Rights (updated)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024053560

Elizabeth Warren is doing great, and she is the first to acknowledge the progress made thus far to rein in financial institutions.

<...>

When I worked to set up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I pushed hard for steps that would increase transparency in the marketplace. The crisis began one lousy mortgage at a time, and there is a lot we must do to make sure there are never again so many lousy mortgages .

CFPB made some important steps in the right direction, and I think we’re a lot safer than we were .

There is no question that Dodd-Frank was a strong bill—the strongest in three generations. I didn’t have a chance to vote for it because I wasn’t yet in the Senate, but if I could have, I would have voted for it twice.

Even so, the law is not perfect. And so it’s important to ask: Where are we now, five years after the crisis hit and three years after Dodd-Frank?

<...>

Powerful interests will fight to hang on to every benefit and subsidy they now enjoy. Even after exploiting consumers, larding their books with excessive risk, and making bad bets that brought down the economy and forced taxpayer bailouts, the big Wall Street banks are not chastened .

They have fought to delay and hamstring the implementation of financial reform, and they will continue to fight every inch of the way .

That’s the battlefield. That’s what we’re up against. But David beat Goliath with the establishment of CFPB and, just a few months ago, with the confirmation of Rich Cordray .

David beat Goliath with the passage of Dodd-Frank. We did that together – Americans for Financial Reform, the Roosevelt Institute, and so many of you in this room. I am confident David can beat Goliath on Too Big to Fail. We just have to pick up the slingshot again .

Thank you .

http://www.warren.senate.gov/files/documents/AFR%20Roosevelt%20Institute%20Speech%202013-11-12.pdf



Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Then I trust it was the best alternative MannyGoldstein Dec 2013 #1
"And Obama signs 'em... with gusto" Cali_Democrat Dec 2013 #2
Damn! You bet! nt MannyGoldstein Dec 2013 #4
Do you think Obama should veto the bill? Cali_Democrat Dec 2013 #12
I'm guessing not if Warren and Sanders voted for it. nt MannyGoldstein Dec 2013 #13
You seemed to be going after Obama on the budget prior to the Warren and Sanders votes Cali_Democrat Dec 2013 #15
Warren and Sanders want to increase Social Security MannyGoldstein Dec 2013 #16
Is that ProSense Dec 2013 #17
One trillion dollars a year. To Jamie, Llloyd and the rest of the gang. MannyGoldstein Dec 2013 #20
Ah, so ProSense Dec 2013 #22
"“I know both those guys; they are very savvy businessmen." MannyGoldstein Dec 2013 #23
Again ProSense Dec 2013 #24
So Presidents fill the White House with people they disagree with MannyGoldstein Dec 2013 #25
I didn't ProSense Dec 2013 #26
Warren and Sanders may be in a position where they hate this deal, but see no better alternative yeoman6987 Dec 2013 #28
Warren & Sanders hare my overall perspective. Jackpine Radical Dec 2013 #29
I think what you say about they want another bill: KoKo Dec 2013 #34
Face it, Manny. woo me with science Dec 2013 #32
I hadn't seen your linked post before. It's dead on. MannyGoldstein Dec 2013 #35
Can you do it? woo me with science Dec 2013 #39
I didn't see it either. Jackpine Radical Dec 2013 #36
I think you or Manny should do it. :) woo me with science Dec 2013 #40
you were bashing Obama "with gusto" over this budget... scheming daemons Dec 2013 #37
The purity police will look the other way on this I think. JoePhilly Dec 2013 #3
The purity police eventually have to deal with the fact that votes are taken and recorded Cali_Democrat Dec 2013 #7
Well said. JoePhilly Dec 2013 #8
Yes...they refer to Obama as a corporatist lackey doing the bidding of the 1% Cali_Democrat Dec 2013 #10
+100 JustAnotherGen Dec 2013 #31
Somewhere, a nativity scene is missing its straw. n/t winter is coming Dec 2013 #5
Oh, for something this size it must be several. n/t Egalitarian Thug Dec 2013 #14
- quinnox Dec 2013 #6
Doesn't this deal mean that there will be no "hostage taking"? panader0 Dec 2013 #9
No it doesn't. former9thward Dec 2013 #38
On the other side of that coin, both Fischer and Hagel voted against. LiberalAndProud Dec 2013 #11
Fischer and Hagel jamzrockz Dec 2013 #18
I should have already edited this. It was Johanns, not Hagel. LiberalAndProud Dec 2013 #19
Predictable. LWolf Dec 2013 #21
The use of "purity police" really really CMSU. djean111 Dec 2013 #30
+1. I'm beginning to think there's a minimum number of threads per day that must be started winter is coming Dec 2013 #33
Is this the deal that doesn't include extending long term unemployment? Nt abelenkpe Dec 2013 #27
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Both Sanders and Warren j...»Reply #17