Comments on Progressive Historians: History For Our Future: Bill Clinton's Role in the Mortgage Crisis

That's an amazing story, although not unexpected. ...

2008-04-07T12:02:00.000-05:00

That's an amazing story, although not unexpected. The repeal of Glass-Steagall signified the takeover of the entire economy by the banking system. After the privatizations of the 1980's, deregulating the banks and allowing them to turn into debt-creating monstrosities with the Federal Reserve as bailer-out of last resort started us down the path to the subprime crisis and housing collapse.

It's impossible to tell any difference between big business and big government these days. Both are owned by the bankrupt banks at this point.

Ralph, thank you for writing this post. I knew Bil...

2008-02-03T15:09:00.000-05:00

Ralph, thank you for writing this post. I knew Bill Clinton had a role in this mortgage lending fiasco. Thanks for showing us the truth.

Yes Ralph, I am also interested in your book.I hav...

2007-12-03T22:41:00.000-05:00

Yes Ralph, I am also interested in your book.

I have become more interested in how the bankers operate. Especially after learning that today's money is printed out of thin air.

Banks have WAY too much power, and I see very little use for them.

Adam

==
I want to thank V, the #1 Pick Up Artist, for bettering my life
==

Jeremy, I am honored by your comment. The book is ...

2007-12-01T00:28:00.000-05:00

Jeremy, I am honored by your comment. The book is still taking shape, so certainly some of the research might go into it.

Lisa's comment echoes a few the piece has received, saying blame the Republicans not Clinton. I have a piece up now on my site that has the actual debate on the bill which makes for fascinating reading. If you like I could move it over here, but wondered if people had enough of this issue.

The vote was veto-proof, but as I say in the follow-up piece, party members tend to back their president, so if Clinton had actively opposed the bill the outcome might have been different.

Also, as Frontline's investigation pointed out, Clinton took an active role in getting the bill passed, intervening at a crucial point.

The piece could have been written from several angles: Clinton, the banks, the GOP. To me Clinton is the most interesting. The banks and the GOP behaved as you would have expected them to.

Clinton's behavior, on the other hand, represented a repudiation of all that the Democratic Party had stood for for most of the twentieth century.

I have some other pieces coming up on both Clinton and Reagan that will make the importance of this shift clearer.

I second Jeremy's comments. I've become more and m...

2007-11-30T00:45:00.000-05:00

I second Jeremy's comments. I've become more and more interested in how money grows and flows in our economic system, and the Glass-Steagall limitations sure made sense.

My only objection here is that it sounds like Clinton himself repealed this. While Clinton and his administration are certainly guilty of signing this into law, it was a Republican congress that passed the legislation. I'm not a big fan of Clinton's, by any stretch. But I've learned that a president's power is usually nowhere near as large as the media paints it to be. I'd be curious if there were enough votes to override a veto. Maybe Clinton considered it but would have lost that battle anyway, and so chose not to fight it. I think the facts of banking industry should be the focus, not Clinton, in this debacle.

God damn, Ralph -- this is big. Incredibly enough...

2007-11-29T00:24:00.000-05:00

God damn, Ralph -- this is big. Incredibly enough, I did not even know that Glass-Steagall had been repealed. Why have I not read about this anywhere else?

I sincerely hope THIS is going in your book, because your cogent analysis of Glass-Steagall -- and of the sheer depravity of Lloyd Blankfein's absolutely outrageous comment, which I also had not heard about -- is really path-breaking.

I see no difference between the Clintons and the B...

2007-11-28T02:00:00.000-05:00

I see no difference between the Clintons and the Bush family power is their god and death is their fruit and gift to mankind.

Quote:
"Cockburn notes that “US officials were fearful that Iraq would be officially certified as weapons-free.” The threat of alleged Iraqi WMD was the main pretext for devastating sanctions against Iraq that were a key element of US Middle East policy throughout the 1990s. These sanctions were, moreover, increasingly controversial inside the US, as their immense toll in Iraqi lives became known to a section of the public."

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/oct2007/ekeu-o18.shtml

Bill Clinton Rewrites History on Iraq?
November 27, 2007 7:19 PM

ABC News' Teddy Davis, Eloise Harper, and Nancy Flores Report: Former President Bill Clinton portrayed himself as having been against the Iraq war "from the beginning" while campaigning Tuesday for his wife, Senator Hillary Clinton, in Iowa.

"Even though I approved of Afghanistan and opposed Iraq from the beginning," said Clinton, "I still resent that I was not asked or given the opportunity to support those soldiers."

Clinton has long been critical of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and called it a "big mistake" as far back as November of 2005.

But like his wife, the former president supported giving President Bush the authority needed to go to war.

"I supported the President when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq," said Clinton in 2003 while delivering commencement remarks at Tougaloo College in Jackson, Miss.

Early opposition to the Iraq war is one of the sharpest dividing lines between Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who voted to authorize force in 2002, and Democratic presidential rival Barack Obama, D-Ill., who was not in Congress at the time but spoke out against it.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/oct2007/ekeu-o18.shtml

Bill Clinton Rewrites History on Iraq?
Email
Share November 27, 2007 7:19 PM

ABC News' Teddy Davis, Eloise Harper, and Nancy Flores Report: Former President Bill Clinton portrayed himself as having been against the Iraq war "from the beginning" while campaigning Tuesday for his wife, Senator Hillary Clinton, in Iowa.

"Even though I approved of Afghanistan and opposed Iraq from the beginning," said Clinton, "I still resent that I was not asked or given the opportunity to support those soldiers."

Clinton has long been critical of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and called it a "big mistake" as far back as November of 2005.

But like his wife, the former president supported giving President Bush the authority needed to go to war.

"I supported the President when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq," said Clinton in 2003 while delivering commencement remarks at Tougaloo College in Jackson, Miss.

Early opposition to the Iraq war is one of the sharpest dividing lines between Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who voted to authorize force in 2002, and Democratic presidential rival Barack Obama, D-Ill., who was not in Congress at the time but spoke out against it.

A spokesman for Bill Clinton tried to downplay the former president's comments by distinguishing between the authority to go to war, which both Clintons supported, and President Bush's decision to use that authority when he did.

"As he said from the beginning and many times since," said Clinton spokesperson Jay Carson, "President Clinton disagreed with taking the country to war in Iraq without allowing the weapons inspectors to finish their jobs."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/11/bill-clinton-re.html