Skip to comments.Boehner Calls Opponents To TARP "Knuckledraggers"
Posted on 08/14/2012 5:29:21 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
VAN SUSTEREN, FOX News: People think of him as hawkish on the budget, on expenses, but he voted for TARP. He voted for the auto bailout, voted for two stimulus in '08, voted against the '09 -- February '09 President Obama stimulus. How does -- I mean, how does he explain those, or I mean, how does -- politically, how does he sell that?
BOEHNER: I mean, I think that he's a practical conservative. He's got a very conservative voting record, but he's not a knuckle-dragger, all right? He understood that TARP, while none of us wanted to do it, if we were going to save -- save our economy, save the world economy, it had to happen. I wish we didn't have to do it, either, but he understood that.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Mark Levin Has it right....
Bohner is an “Obstical” to Conservative Progress.
The only folks who are making a somewhat successful attempt to change it are the Ron Paul supporters. While I personally sympathize with them, they are not supported by most traditional conservatives.
All of this is just so sad. If you try to come up with solutions to change the outcome, those, even on FR. laugh and name call. If you say, “Fine, i’m not voting for your guy”, the same name calling.
How do we put up a fight when so many like minded individuals have given up. That is the loss that is America. Not the economic situation, or the gay agenda, but the fact that so many are not willing to try anything to change the current situation, while admitting they will be voting for the lesser of two evils.
They didn’t even use “TARP” for what they claimed it was going to be used for. What was it about TARP that he(and others) loves so much? The big banks would have surely survived without it, and if not, who cares. That’s what bankruptcy is for.... The entire thing was nothing but a massive theft of the American people, and given to those lowest people that are in the highest places.
Worst case scenario without TARP: Big banks would have failed and went away. Other smaller banks and or start-ups take their place to fill that market demand. Many homeowners would have been necessarily bankrupted, and the housing market would have cleared. It’s called a dammed free market! (for those of you in Rio Linda)
TARP didn’t prevent a recession, because we’re in a DEPRESSION as we speak, masked by continued cheap credit and government spending. As soon as interest rates return to their historical norm, at around 4-6%, this house of cards will blow away so fast, you would have never known it was there. We’ll be ‘Greece’, but with many more red ‘zeros’. It will be very difficult to get people back to work, because most of the jobs they would have taken to help a recovery get underway are now in the form of slave labor over in China.....
Bonehead has earned flogging and lots of it.
In fact, he deserves to be removed from his leadership post.
He is part of the problem, not the solution.
BTW Ryan(The so called Fiscal conservative) also voted for Tarp.
Bonehead calling opponents of TARP “knuckle draggers”
Christie calling opponents of traitorous muslims “crazy”
Newt calls Paul Ryan’s budget proposal “right-wing social engineering”
McCain defends H. Clinton’s muzzie collaborator, Huma Abedin, by claiming Michelle Bachmann has made “sinister allegations”
Ann Coulter slags conservative women.
The GOP establishment makes Christie their keynote speaker while putting Palin on the back of the bus.
Anyone notice a trend here? When it comes to being a “team player”, the RINOs never blink at disparaging conservatives.
Only wild-eyed conspiracy theorists talk about Bilderbergers and Illuminati.
If not, then along with many others, he let the investment banker/insurance conglomerate/market gambler/manipulators baffle him with their B.S.
There may be a simple solution. Bring back Glass-Steagull
Dodd-Frank has some decent sounding aims or goals...but aimed at reforming credit industry abuses. That can be all well and nice, but it does not address the more fundamental underlying problems. It ends up being smoke and mirrors, just a papering over of serious cracks and faults allowed to develop in the foundation.
Houses built of paper always fall. If they don't burn, first.
Tell the commercial bankers they can operate under the old laws, the Banking act of 1933, no Dodd-Frank etc. And they can have FDIC backing.
Here's the good part, the part that could make it work;
Tell the "conglomerate" big-boy bankers, no more FDIC for you! No more bailouts PERIOD.
But you're stuck with Dodd-Frank. And if you crash, well we'll just have to rely upon the bottom feeders and the vultures to come pick the carcasses clean. Manage your own risk.
I haven't quite worked out what to do with the Federal Reserve banks, but they better get small in a hurry,(commercial only, no insurance industry ties, no overseas investment arms, no market speculation with customer accounts) or lose their charter --- and have it sold off to some other entity. Not only no more FDIC for them, but no more Charter. If they don't like it, they can move to Canary Wharf. Don't let the door hit ya', and all of that...
I'll vote for anyone who is serious about restoring order to our banking system. We really don't have to allow the bankers to be able to continue privatizing profits (right into the pockets of board members, chiefly) while they simultaneously are able to slough off losses onto the taxpayers, in the way of forcing the Treasury to assume more debt, just so they can keep playing derivative games.
Investing in business in the U.S.has become more difficult, more uphill, hard slogging than in years past (hence one reason for the real estate derivative stampede, that approached going over the cliff). Now they want to survive off of consumer credit profits? And fees? God help us...
Force the bankers to play square, and they'll soon be pushing for easing of restrictions holding back economic growth.
I would add that I'd like to see the albatrosses that FannieMae and FreddieMac have become, hung around the necks of the Democrat Party and left to stink and reek for years, but then perhaps I ask too much. I'd be willing to give that up, and let people walk away from all of that gracefully, if we could get the other, above changes.
We, The People, need to regain our own leverage. Whatever it takes.
Was that GWB’s hand up his a$$?
I swear, after 2010 and what I hope and think will happen in 2012 with more conservatives going to Congress, if the GOP puts this POS, worthless piece of human garbage back in as Speaker I’m done forever.
And I will actually put myself on all GOP mailing lists just to let their establishment, bad management, mentality keep sending me thousands of dollars of crap in the should-be-gone post office for my $5 donation.
Troglodyte - Jimmy Castor Bunch
WOW, I thought I was the only one who remembers this. Gotta find a woman Gotta find a woman gotta find a woman
Surprised the “It’s a TARP” photo with the fish guy from Return of the Jedi.
I don’t have it.
not exactly a surprise considering Boehner is an establishemt conservative who has spent many years in the DC bubble.
So he’s just another crook using the government to steal from the people to give to the aristocrats.
Actually the government made money off of TARP. I’d say that would make Ryan a genius. Save the economy and make money form the banks by doing it. Win Win.
In fact I’d agree with him.. it’s pretty boneheaded to go back now and say TARP was a bad idea. It may not have been a principled conservative position. But if the banks all failed then of course we would of had our 2nd great depression. In fact TARP was the only government program of all the money spending that actually did what it was suppose to do. The rest of it went down the drain but TARP was genius.
On the contrary, they have learned they can run a socialist against another socialist, and we will shout ABO.
Boehner just validated the scumbag left’s description of right-wing conservatives as “knuckle draggers”.
Boehner is pathetic and needs to turn his Speaker’s gavel over to a Republican with a clue.
What a moron.
That's not going to happen with Boehner as speaker. I don't care how many Tea Party candidates we put into the House this fall. He simply needs to go.
We also must consider the possibility that Obama could win.
If he’s not defeated in the GOP primary, the best strategic move is to vote for the Dem. Loss of one house seat is affordable. Vacating the House leadership big plus.
Hey, Weeping John, just being practical you know, the Constitution is just too big to fail. It’s that thing about omelets.
Ideally All the weak sisters should be TARPed and the carcasses hauled to the dump.
TARP money never was spent in the manner for which it was sold. That is a very strong argument that TARP was never necessary, that it was just another money scam, and that the cycle of using money scams to enrich and to cover the derivatives bets of the financial “industry” continues.
Savings and Loan: Bush 1
TARP: Bush 2
1819 - Only 43 years old, the US experiences its first major financial crisis.
1825 - London stock market panic from over-speculation in Latin American investments.
1836 - US real estate speculation causes stock markets to crash in the UK, Europe, then the US.
1847 - A credit crisis and bank panic ensue when railroad stock prices crash in France and the UK.
1857 - During the Civil War a US credit crisis crashes equity prices. All nations that trade with the US are affected.
1866 - “Black Friday” happens from railroad speculation. A bank panic starts which leads to lack of credit.
1873 - Vienna stock exchange collapses, causing the “great stagnation” on a global scale and lasts until 1896.
1882 - In France, Union Generale goes bankrupt causing banking crisis and market crash.
1890 - The UK’s oldest bank, Barings, nearly collapses from its exposure to Argentine debt.
1907 - US bank panic spreads to France and Italy after stock market collapse.
1921 - Commodity prices crash.
1923 - Hyperinflation in Germany starts monetary crisis.
1929 - “The Great Depression” begins after equity crash.
1931 - Financial crises experienced by the UK, Japan, Germany, and Austria.
1933 - Gold standard given up by the US, starting panic in the banking system.
1966 - US credit crisis creates deflation and huge economic slump.
1973 - World financial crisis begins after OPEC quadruples the price of oil.
1982 - Global credit crunch prevents many developing countries from paying their debt
1987 - Bond and equity market crashes.
1989 - Japanese bubble.
1989 - Junk bond crisis.
1992 - French Maastricht Treaty sparks crisis in European Monetary System
1994 - Major bond market correction.
1995 - Mexican financial crisis caused by the peso’s peg to the dollar during excessive inflation.
1997 - Asian financial crisis creates exchange rate and banking crisis, created from stock market and real estate speculation, along with many Asian currencies pegged to the US dollar.
1998 - Russia defaults on payment obligations during major financial crisis.
2000 - Dot-com bubble pops, creating a massive fall in equity markets from over-speculation in tech stocks.
2001 - Another junk bond crisis.
2001 - September 11 attacks create risk by hindering various critical communication hubs necessary for payment on the financial markets.
2001 - Economic crisis in Argentina, resulting in the government defaulting on payment obligations.
2002 - Bond market crisis in Brazil.
2007 - US real estate crisis causes the collapse of massive international banks and financial institutions. Equity markets take a dive.
We did that to the Speaker once ~ 1994 - Tom Foley. That’s also the year we took over the House. Remember the MSM TV types crying and moaning over his loss.
Fundamentally there's no problem in letting a bank fail when you have depositors insurance ~ unless your government has a debt problem.
Still, only the really rich who keep more than $250,000 on deposit in a bank will lose their shirts ~ and so will the illegal aliens. FDIC only insures citizens!
Interesting that the bank the federales chose to defend at all costs was Bank of America ~ a California creation that's metastisized across the country and now holds almost everybody's credit card debt and a vast number of nonperforming mortgages.
That wouldn't have happened if banks had been allowed to fail on their own. Bet you could get a loan easier today though.
Time to wash, rinse, and repeat.
>> He needs to be primaried in the worst way.
How ‘bout if instead we primary him effectively, and remove him?
We’ve been doing stuff in the worst way far too long. :-)
(I know what you meant, just having some fun.)
Traditional conservatives are losing in spite of their vastly superior numbers. To use a nautical analogy, they’re a huge battleship without a rudder, with a mutinous crew, and a set of officers who openly sympathize with the other side and spend their spare time assembling circular firing squads.
For my part, I’m making my plans to find a better berthing. Probably with the small “L” libertarians who are actually doing something useful. While I agree with traditional conservatives more at a certain point its time to go for the 70% that might be attainable rather than the 100% that will never be attempted.
Boehner wasn’t saying Tarp opponents are knuckledraggers. He is saying conservatives in general are. (I guess anyone to the right of Lincoln Chaffee)
An exaggeration, but.... yeah.
I do tend to cut elected Republicans some slack since they are subjected to such vile hate and harassment, threats and vandalism by the intolerant Left. Would you want to run for office knowing the liberals would send a convicted sex offender to stand at your property line taking pictures of your children?
You mean conservatives are bad, Boehner just exaggerated?
I mean Boehner's knuckledragger comment refers to - what was it Mitt Romney called himself? - SEVERE conservatives. Whatever that means.
Indeed. Canada's banks made out better than America's, despite the fact that Canada's answer to Glass-Steagall was repealed in 1988. But...
One of the standard complaints in Canada's social-democratic Left revolves around "stingy banks." That's one of the reasons why the old-style soc-dems want to nationalize them.
And they're not the only ones, either. Canada's small-business lobby group, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, has been alleging for years that Canadian banks discriminate against small business when it comes to loans.
These two little vignettes from my own country should tip everyone off about what kind of complaints will emerge from America should American banks shy away from risky loan categories.
Like high-risk borrowers who'll yell "discrimination" if they don't get a loan from a "predatory lender."
Here's a secret for you - not real inside info, but a plausible guess: businesses stuck in a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation actually want to be regulated more tightly. It's the perfect way to say "no" without offending the other party.
"We'd love to sign, but regulations prevent us...Yeah, I know, those damned regulators like to control everything..."
I'd get flayed on a libertarian forum for saying this, but FR isn't - so here goes: Real deregulation will likely open up a real can of worms, because self-regulation means saying "no" on your own and taking the blame that goes with it. That means resigning oneself to losing business because hearing the "no" will offend some people, who'll badmouth in retaliation. Being tightly regulated means never having to say a real "no."
If you think the banks are hated now, it's a pale shadow of the hate they'll have to live with if they're dumped into a genuinely free-market environment. As Hayek said about inflation, it's a tiger by the tail.
bttt.... Boehner is a ‘practical conservative’, whatever that means....