Oh really? Can you please post a list of people who have advanced this concept? I mean specific names, not sweeping pointless generalities. TBH, the only ones I've ever seen or heard refer to Sen Obama as any of these nonsense terms, is people that oppose him. So, have at it, prove your point with some real world names with quotes.

Thanks. I probably won't be holding my breath waiting for your documentation, though.

Nothing will keep speculation bubbles from bursting, and neither of these men by himself could keep the bursting of future speculative bubbles from being disastrous, but a recognition that deregulation was a bad idea and a return to sensible regulations on the banking industry and other industries to prevent a recurrence would solve that problem. We would still have speculators, and speculators would still lose money from time to time, but they wouldn't threaten to take the rest of the country down with them.

This would require cooperation from Congress. I do honestly believe that Obama would be more likely both to receive that cooperation, and to ask for it to begin with, than McCain, who seems to be a believer in deregulation still, and who in any case would be working with the opposition party rather than his own in control of Congress.

I think it's just hyperbole in response to a lot of the borderline-creepy adulation that Obama seems to attract (ironically, not unlike Sarah Palin during the honeymoon of her selection, but from the other side).

As someone who is relatively neutral, it strikes me as rather bizarre. What I'm referring to specifically, is people making claims that Obama is the greatest politician of the last 100 years or that he will "save" the US.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

I'm inclined to believe that we'll see a knee-jerk response and subsequent over-regulation regardless. Hell, even Republicans some who call everything that looks at them funny a "socialist" are clamoring for the socializing/nationalizing of various financial powerhouses in response to this.

I predict that, regardless of the POTUS, we will observe the time-honored American tradition of drastically overreacting to problems and creating legislation that seems preposterous in several years or decades or whenever things are more evened out.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

HE needed Bush to tell him when his role as US senator and presidential candidate would make his presence appropriate and necessary? Now thats leadership!

Huh? Me? Oh, you want me to come too? I'm kinda busy, but , umm, let me check my blackberry, OK, I guess I can come (try to) do the job I was elected to do. I guess this would be an opportunity to show America what I'm capable of instead of just running my head all the time. (inner thought) But if things get really really shitty, really really fast, America will really really want the FNG!
As for uncomfortable, all the deregulation boyz should be real fucking uncofortable.

__________________
Want government run healthcare? Join the military.

I don't think it's anything quite so mundane Dr G. What it more likely is, is redmeat coding for the "Left Behind" crowd of hardcore RRW fanatics. (I hope you are correct and I'm mistaken, btw.)

Clamp [back] down on lending standards. It's already happening, to a degree. I had a surprisingly hard time (in terms of the time it took) securing a simple $50k home improvement loan over the last few weeks - with a 800+ FICO, plenty of equity, and a superior debt/income ratio. I even demonstrated that I'd have it paid back in 36 months and it was still a multi-week ordeal.

The problem is/was the loans that were/are already out there - shit already out of the donkey, toothpaste already out of the tube. The government assumption of those bad loans should be enough.

If people want a pound of flesh, let it be of those individuals responsible for insisting on loaning to people who can't pay - people who insisted that welfare payments and unemployment checks were legitimate means of income in determining loan eligibility.

The pound of flesh taking the form of copious "regulation"? Fucking huge mistake.

__________________

"Compassionate Conservatism"?!?! That is a stupid phrase. Conservatism is inherently compassionate. It is liberalism that is cruel for the sake of maintaining a constituency.

If done with punitive motives in mind, I'd agree. However, a return to more regulation is a must. It's time to bury once and for all the romantic notion that an unregulated free market serves the public interest. The reversal in policy made under Carter and Reagan, and never reversed since, was a mistake. We need to admit that to ourselves.

It's true that the bad loans were "already out there." But if not for that deregulation mistake, they wouldn't have been, and unless we correct that mistake, in the future they will be once more.

I love your last sentence, Steve.

You ought to make it your new signature.

The people pushing new "regulation" and enforcing existing "regulation" were the same ones that forced relaxed lending criteria for the purposes of boosting "minority and low income home ownership".

Gee. Big surprise when those loans went bad, eh?

__________________

"Compassionate Conservatism"?!?! That is a stupid phrase. Conservatism is inherently compassionate. It is liberalism that is cruel for the sake of maintaining a constituency.

I defer to your obviously greater experience. In fact, I don't check out boys' assholes.

Something that's interesting about this stunt is that instead of talking about the issues within the bailout plan. Why is Shelby not supporting it for some reason? WHy does he claim there is no deal when others say a deal is fast approaching? We are talking about whether McCain's poliical stunt will pay dividends in the election even as its meant to depoliticize the current moment. Hilarious.

__________________
Yesterday, John McCain actually said that if he’s president he’ll take on, and I quote, 'the old boys’ network in Washington.' I’m not making this up. This is somebody been in Congress for 26 years, who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign. And now he tells us that he’s the one who’s gonna take on the old boys' network,” he said. “In the McCain campaign that’s called a staff meeting!- Obama, 9/17/2008

Hmmmmmm........I think you're doin it too, talkin' like one.


Urban Dictionary: paper asshole

__________________
Want government run healthcare? Join the military.

It may work in reverse and send more votes McCain's way, or more than likely the Dems will have enough force in Congress, to, as usual, give Bush what he wants.

But one thing i thought about after Imp's post that you quoted was Bush's stunning ability to practically bring this race to a halt for the mean, truly remarkable.

It's hard to campaign on a criminal agenda - If America is in McCains best interest, perhaps he should just drop out of the running or dump his neocon/gop hijackers and run under a third party association.

Me likes McCain minus the neocon hijacked GOP.

__________________
The bush administration and bank lobbyists proudly killing our economic system - 2003.