Replies

The SEC is changing the rules on how an illegal activity may be conducted? The crooks on Wall Street have had a hayday under GWB's administration.

Your implication is that the situation is Bush’s fault.

Just a few questions for you:

Did the rules under which you assert that crooks on Wall Street have had a heyday exist prior to the Bush administration?

If the same rules existed, was the enforcement of them any stricter under any other administration?

Did Bush nominate all of the regulatory officials who have had authority to change the situation under which crooks on Wall Street have had a heyday?

Did Congress provide advice and consent, i.e., approval of, the officials Bush nominated who have had authority to change the situation?

Could Congress have passed legislation that would have changed the situation?

If Congress could have passed legislation that would have changed the situation, but was blocked a single political party, which was it and did Bush control it?

Not at all. I expect business to have a freerer hand under a Republican administration than a democrat one.
However, the President has many tools at his disposal to address an issue. In this case the FTC hasn’t been anything business compliant.
The President could have ordered the Attorney General to investigate the sub-prime mess. Now he could order the same AG to investigate naked short sells and their effect on the economy.
It’s a very good thing to prosecute criminals even if they do contribute to a political campaign and wear three thousand dollars suits.
I hope you don’t posit that the President didn’t know about the naked shorts. I live in a burg in the middle of nowhere and I’ve known about naked short selling for years.
President Bush has been a dead hand on the rudder of the nation for years.
The President should have gotten off of his lazy ass years ago and realized Wall Street is a dagger at the heart of America.