Oldtimer said:I definitely agree with #1 Gramm and #2 Cox...My # 3 would have been Alan Greenspan, followed by#4 being all the GREED over ETHICs WallStreet Bankers and #5 being GW and #6 Clinton.....
TexasBred said:Oldtimer said:I definitely agree with #1 Gramm and #2 Cox...My # 3 would have been Alan Greenspan, followed by#4 being all the GREED over ETHICs WallStreet Bankers and #5 being GW and #6 Clinton.....
OT you left out YOU, ME and the rest demanding high returns on our investments. We share the blame as well. Oh and Graham was not #1.. that was 'Slick Willy".
TSR said:TexasBred said:Oldtimer said:I definitely agree with #1 Gramm and #2 Cox...My # 3 would have been Alan Greenspan, followed by#4 being all the GREED over ETHICs WallStreet Bankers and #5 being GW and #6 Clinton.....
OT you left out YOU, ME and the rest demanding high returns on our investments. We share the blame as well. Oh and Graham was not #1.. that was 'Slick Willy".
My computer says it was GW Bush with ~ 160k votes
Sandhusker said:TSR said:TexasBred said:OT you left out YOU, ME and the rest demanding high returns on our investments. We share the blame as well. Oh and Graham was not #1.. that was 'Slick Willy".
My computer says it was GW Bush with ~ 160k votes
Your computer isn't aware that Bush tried several times to put more regulations on Fannie and Freddie - only to be blocked by the Democrats.
Sandhusker said:TSR, "But I am aware that if Mike's post was correct that Bush hired more regulators than any president in recent history. And again, Did those regulators do their job? What was their job? To regulate or turn their backs and probably take in a little lobbyists' money themselves? Why didn't Bush go on national tv and plead his plight with the American people? (Seems like Obama is adept at doing so, maybe a little too often) Why didn't he use his veto power to get what you and others say he wanted so badly? Was he that poor of a politician/Pres. ?"
Veto what? He couldn't get the regulations even passed because the Democrats said they would fillibuster it if it reached the floor for a vote! That is documented, TSR.
Interestingly enough, it's also documented that the Democrat leading the Senate Banking Committee, Chris Dodd, was on the take from the very people he was supposed to regulate! Do you think that had anything to do with the threat to fillibuster?
TSR said:Sandhusker said:TSR, "But I am aware that if Mike's post was correct that Bush hired more regulators than any president in recent history. And again, Did those regulators do their job? What was their job? To regulate or turn their backs and probably take in a little lobbyists' money themselves? Why didn't Bush go on national tv and plead his plight with the American people? (Seems like Obama is adept at doing so, maybe a little too often) Why didn't he use his veto power to get what you and others say he wanted so badly? Was he that poor of a politician/Pres. ?"
Veto what? He couldn't get the regulations even passed because the Democrats said they would fillibuster it if it reached the floor for a vote! That is documented, TSR.
Interestingly enough, it's also documented that the Democrat leading the Senate Banking Committee, Chris Dodd, was on the take from the very people he was supposed to regulate! Do you think that had anything to do with the threat to fillibuster?
Shusker I think you're missing my point. Are you saying that the Dem's didn't have any bills they wanted passed? I am sure they did during Bush's tenure. He could have easily said he would veto those bills even if they passed, without him getting what he wanted.
And again had Bush gone on national tv (to the American people) with this financial mess hit, then the Dems would have been up that proverbial creek it seems to me. Smething just isn't adding up here Shusker. I just don't believe Bush had the desire or he really didn't know just how big a mess was on the horizon.