If anyone can say "Yes" with a straight face, please get some therapy, you need help.  In addition to the above, we are in 2 wars with no end in sight.  Our military is weakened due to incompetence.  Respect for America is steadily dropping worldwide.

Individually, I am in a much better position than I was 8 years ago.  That had little to do with Bush though.  Or at least I think it didn't... ;)

The country as a whole?  Not better than before Bush.

The financial market is a complicated place.  It would be worse if we did not have the small, but effective staff at the SEC and the CFTC.  There are a myriad of regulatory agencies for the financial markets and they prevent things from being worse.  For example, without the SEC and SIPC, people who hold brokerage accounts at Lehman would be shit out of luck.  So, I wouldn't pooh-pooh regulation.

Regulation is a great thing.  You just have to understand what the agencies do and the important role they play in the functioning on the market.

As for tax credits, the Bush Administration and Republicans habe been big on those, just not for individuals.  And McCain wants to create a huge tax credit for healthcare and then tax the healthcare benefits you receive from your employer (now tax-free).  How do you like that idea?

As far as having what it takes to reform our financial market regulation, I think Obama is in a much better position to negotiate that with a Democratic Congress than McCain with his silly ideas of reducing financial market regulation.

I think you just need some more information and then your opinions would be different.

Make so mistake, I am completely with you on the need for regulation.  It was the wild, wild west atmosphere that got us where we are today and complete lack of personal responsibility/restraint.

I have read Obama's proposals...carefully....and I do not like them nor agree with them.  Perhaps this "crisis" will mean a change in direction for the approach team Obama takes.  I don't know.  

I sense a little paternalism in your post tho, which is off-putting.  Perhaps it is because you can't read tone or facial expressions in a blog.

I am just trying to share information and maybe change your opinion.  And really encouraging you to gather more information before making a final decision.  

On financial market regulation, what about Obama's position do you think will not work or what won't he do that you want to see?  And what from McCain's speeches and other material on his positions leads you to believe he is a better choice in this regard?  

Personally, I get the sense that he does not hold any respect for market regulations or the institutions that perform that function.  And a lack of respect indicates to me that he would either neglect those institutions (to their detriment) or reduce their roles.  

and the reason the market is in meltdown is because the investment banks are not subject to the same oversight as commercial banks.

Which allowed them to take huge risks, and huge profits when the market went their way.  It also involved huge amounts of deceit, particuarly with the packaging of loans.  Nobody cared about the quality of the notes, just as long as they could peddle them and push them along to the next guy.

Let me be clear:  I am NOT a McCain fan, but I am NOT an Obama fan either.  I do not trust either of them, which creates a dilemma.

Both have backtracked and twisted and changed their position so often, it's hard to keep up.

I am really struggling with this.

Furthermore, it doesn't matter how much regulation you have if you don't have people of integrity in the system.  And that is probably our biggest problem -- integrity is out, greed and winning at any cost is in.

We are in big trouble as a country and a culture.  

Two words: Supreme Court.

McCain=Scalia/Alito/Thomas court forever, goodbye right to choose, goodbye civil liberties, goodbye environmental protections, goodbye checks and balances on presidential power, etc.

Obama=Mainstream justices who will not be radical right-wing activists but will interpret the constitution and legal precedent in ways that actually conforms to American values.

End of story.

How about this for being asleep at the switch?

The book's opening anecdote tells of an unnamed CIA briefer who flew to Bush's Texas ranch during the scary summer of 2001, amid a flurry of reports of a pending al-Qaeda attack, to call the president's attention personally to the now-famous Aug. 6, 2001, memo titled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US." Bush reportedly heard the briefer out and replied: "All right. You've covered your ass, now."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

On this critical issue.  Please, please, please don't go there.

Next you're going to make excuses for Sandy Berger.  Anyone else would be in jail.  

I'm not covering for Clinton; in fact, I voted for Perot in 1996.  I'm not emotionally invested in Clinton.  The question is are we better off today than we were eight years ago.   You can't address that without noting that Bush was "asleep at the switch" on counter-terrorism issues prior to 9/11, which happened on his watch.  Please don't go there?  That's not an option, because we are where we are. We've got about 4000 dead and 26000 wounded in the military, we've gone from a huge surplus to a huge federal deficit, and we've got combat operations still going on overseas with no end in sight. We've financed two wars with debt.  The consequences are now plain to see.      

Position said in a nice manner. We can discuss it.

You may be better off, but can you seriously say that our nation is better off?

9/11, Iraq, and Katrina make 1st WTC, Cole, and embassy bombings look like child's play.

We are way more vulnerable to terrorism NOW that Bush stirred up the middle eastern hornets nest in Iraq.  And economically things are looking very dire now.

Stop kidding yourself.  You are not more secure now than you were 8 years ago.  You are probably more naive now than 8 years ago.  Bush has had 7 years to CAPTURE OR KILL the mastermind of 9/11.  Where is Osama Bin Laden?  Where!

Bush and the Republican "leadership" have been a disaster for our nation.  An absolute disaster.

that our nation is less secure, both economically and in terms of national security, than we were when Dubya and Dick took office. How anyone could even argue that we're BETTER off boggles my mind...simply can't process it.

I mean with a 400 billion dollar budget deficit, you are going to have to do more than cut down on paperclip orders from the agencies.  What to do?  Eliminate the Department of Education?  Oops, that is only 56 billion.  Wait!  Half of discretionary spending is Defense.  Does McCain seek "efficiencies" there?  Outside that, if you intend to not raise revenues, there are only OASDI (Social Security) and Medicare.  So, if you are a true fiscal conservative and intend not to raise taxes (but cut them), where shall you cut, lest interest payments on the debt absorb the DOD budget?

I am no fan of the Republican approach, anymore than I am of the Democrats on this issue.

I don't feel that just throwing money at a problem fixes it.  

And I feel that there is LOTS of room to cut through the waste.  Anytime there is government, there is waste and inefficiency.  Big spending cuts are necessary, and I am not sure that Obama has the stomach to wield the axe.

I am more of a proponent of returning more control to local governments and taxpayers.

Perhaps I am a heretic...but for example, the subprime mtg mess...

I agree with both Pres Clinton and Pres Bush that it is a laudable goal to increase the rates of homeownership in the minority community.  Homeownership has proven to provide stability, as well as the greatest opportunity for families to build real generational wealth.

However, the "anything goes" and ridiculous permissiveness of the subprime lending mkt was not only predatory but irresponsible.

I would have liked to see more short-term funding put into groups like NACA to provide budget and debt counselling to disadvantaged families to adequately prepare them for home
ownership, etc, to give these families are real shot.

What happened was, mtg brokers and loan originators got greedy and rich, and many families got taken advantage of.

And we are no closer today to the goal of real homeownership and the positive attributes within minority communities.

You have to make a choice, it is a binary decision.  Well, you can not vote or vote for a third party.  So, I guess it is a quadary decision.  

True you cannot throw money at a problem and solve it.  But effectively managed, money can help solve problems.  As far as local control, fewer people pay attention to local governments than the national one.  And that creates management risk.  I think a balance of control between local, state, and federal government is what serves us best.  Well, in my opinion anyway.

I don't know that I agree that there is LOTS of room to cut waste in the federal government.  There is certainly waste in terms of unneeded expenditures and earmarks (overrides of federal allocations), but that is a very small percentage of federal outlays.  As far as the federal agencies go, it is false to view the entire federal workforce as lazy and unproductive as John McCain and Republicans do.  There are certainly bad employees, but that is true of every large organization.  Is every large corporation, the most efficient it could be?  No, that is unachievable for most large companies.  You have to hire a completely stellar workforce and if you have over 10,000 employees you are really pushing that.  Not to mention you have to have stellar front-line and middle management.  It is not easy to say that there is a lot of efficiency that could be achieved.  I mean in the IRS alone the Republicans have stymied collection efforts at every chance they have had.  You want greater efficiency, you could get rid of tax payer advocacy and remove process steps to file liens and garnish wages, but do you really want that?

To the mortgage crisis, it is much more complicated than brokers and originators, I don't have time to do any justice on that topic at the moment.  I need to get to bed.  But I will say that it takes more than counseling agencies and state regulation to fix this problem.  Virginia, for example, can do little to regulate Bank of America, it is a federally chartered bank (well segments of the huge bank holding company it is).  You default on a mortgage with BoA and you will be in federal court under harsher bankruptcy rules than Virginia.  BoA can bury you.  So can Wachovia.  Name a bank (and if they have a federal charter), and they can make your life a living hell.  Ain't interstate banking a joy?

Virginia Democrats: McCain Comments Out of Touch
Democrats Respond to McCain's Claim that "Economy is Strong"

ARLINGTON - Standing outside the McCain for President headquarters in Crystal City, Virginia Democrats said McCain's comments this morning show how out of touch he is with Virginia middle-class families.

Democrats gathered outside of McCain's headquarters in response to the Republican candidate's statement this morning that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong." McCain made these comments on the same day that thousands of Americans saw their savings take a hit with a severe stock market plunge and the failure of two of the four remaining major investment banks.

"Across Virginia, middle-class families are feeling the squeeze of the Bush economy," said Jared Leopold, Communications Director for the Democratic Party of Virginia's Coordinated Campaign. "If John McCain still thinks our national economy is strong, he just doesn't get what Virginia families are going through. Our state leaders are working to take care of Virginia families, but they need partners in Washington who understand what Virginia needs. We just can't afford four more years of the same disastrous Bush-McCain economic policies."

Even as Americans struggle with decreasing incomes, mounting job losses, and rising costs - and now the consequences of the failure of Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers - McCain continues to offer the same out-of-touch rhetoric and failed Bush economic policies, Leopold said. McCain's answer is to do more of the same, with a plan to give away nearly $2 trillion in tax breaks for corporations over the next 10 years but provide no tax relief to 101 million families or to any small businesses.

Photos of the Democratic event are available at: www.flickr.com/photos/vademocrats/sets/72157607312580384/

at the end of the Hardball piece.

If you want to look at the cause and effect on the economy .... don't overlook MASSIVE federal spending on a misguided war of choice. The US Government borrows Astronomical Sums of money and it puts pressure everywhere else on the money supply - globally. And Dick Cheney says "Reagan taught us that Deficits Don't Matter".

Couple this with another type of HUBRIS among the elite nuevo Robber Barons (Enron anyone?) and you have a Banking Collapse my father use to talk about .... the run on banks prior to the on set of the GREAT Depression!

If we're lucky this will only be the onset of a Great RECESSION. Regardless Dubya will go down in History as the worst President since ... I don't know ... EVER. And a Republican Party of YES men aided and abetted this Disaster President while John McCain coddles Bush's Christo-facist Dittohead base.

My father's reaction to all this: "Throw the Bums OUT!!".  

Oh yeah, one more thought... I think Moonpie is from the other side.

Protectionism clearly helps small businesses.  It will clearly harm companies like Wal-Mart.  Her argument that protectionism will hurt small business is laughable.

The free trading Republicans call any measure to have FAIR trade "protectionism".  They want you to think that "protectionism" is a bad thing.  An extreme form of it would be bad, but nobody is advocating that we close our borders and stop global trade.  We are advocating for FAIR trade.

Anyways, I think that our middle class are worth PROTECTING from economic cheaters - like China which pegs its currency to the dollar or like Indian companies which snatch up all the H-1b visas for workers who help offshore high tech jobs.

Isn't your family worth protecting?  Unfair trade agreements hurt our families.  

The Chinese laugh at the Bush administration when his trade reps tell them to relax their currency manipulation.  They are thinking "or what - are you going to lower your tarriffs to punish us?"  George Bush actually believes that the way to get countries to move in a more favorable direction is to give them more of the carrot.  He is rewarding bad behavior.  That is why we are where we are today.

McCain is in favor of huge giveaways to massive corporate interests and his "free trade" cult is protecting large-scale American industries while leaving small business and American workers to fend for themselves.

See, for Barack Obama we're all in this together.  The power of the economy is measured at its base and the strength or pain trickles up.  For McCain the power is at the top (where McCain lives) and the yachts rise and the rest of the boats float or founder at the whim of inexorable forces until they drown the yachts too.

Legislation that helps the middle class: Class Warfare, Protectionism, wellfare.  See also: socialism, depression

Legislation that helps corporations: Trickle down economics, Economic stimulus package.  If criticized, see also: Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan.

Corporations good, individuals bad.  Can't say this directly, so find wedge issues: abortion, gay marriage, guns.  

New distraction from truth: War On Terrorism ((c), RNC 2002).  In case of emergency, remind voters of 9/11 ((c), RNC 2001).  

That will be a politically inspired bandaid on a stinking, bone-deep mess of corruption. The primary cause of this current little tempest on Wall Street, of our ballooning deficit, of the inflation which we have up to now been exporting overseas but which is coming home to roost, of job loss through outsourcing, and so on ad nauseum, is the basic philosophy or, if you prefer "rules of engagement" under which Republicans and most major businesses have been operating for two or three generations. Those rules of engagement are simply Friedman's Free Market Theory. I've talked about getting rid of that theory elsewhere on RaisingKaine ("Kill the Free Market Religion").

To moonpie, above, wrestling with distaste for Obama's policies but worried about McCain: do not trust McCain, he is an acolyte of the pure Free Market, it is bone deep with him. Do not trust the Free Market theories yourself, although you feel you may have benefitted so far from living in a society which tried to implement Free Market theories (but with safeguards and regulations originally).

The unfortunate fact is, that everywhere pure Free Market has been force-fed into a society, it has inevitably ended in cruel disasters, taking down all the little people and the hopeful middle classes who thought to profit from the Free Market---- while enriching outlandishly the top one percent, who emerge richer than ever upon the backs of the "under" classes. Look across the valley here (as they say on Wall Street) and see the end product.  

It drives me nuts that the smiling Nancy Mitchell Pfotenhauer appears on cable TV several times a day, serially lying for McCain, without anyone identifying her as a lackey for Koch Industries and its myriad front groups - not the least of which is George Mason University's Mercatus Center, at the corner of Fairfax Drive and 10th St in Arlington, a cancer on the reputation of a fine progressive community.

See here for the sordid details, including classic quotes like "They [Koch] don't care for any loss of human life" and "the jury found that Koch Industries did steal oil from the public and lied about its purchases '24 thousand times'" and "While peddling influence to energy tycoons, the White House quietly dropped criminal and civil charges against Koch Industries."