Bernie vs. Fed Conflicts of Interest

It would be very interesting (0.00 / 0)

to hear your comments, Sue, about the other half of the latest developments -- where (just as we sadly saw with his lack-of-stance on health care reform) Bernie has apparently decided to cave to WH pressure and watered down significantly the bill's mandate to genuinely provide oversight and accountability. See http://firedoglake.com/2010/05... and http://fdlaction.firedoglake.c... for more, and please let us know how you interpret Bernie's stance in light of his most recent actions.  

---

by: thingwarbler @ Sat May 08, 2010 at 17:53:58 PM UTC

Save your dog whistles for someone who responds to them, TWarbler. (0.00 / 0)

Ron Paul?  Pu-leese!  He may be a nice fella, but he still suffers from the delusion that he's a Republican.

---

by: Sue Prent @ Sat May 08, 2010 at 23:07:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

heh (0.00 / 0)

I'll give you the time of day, thing ;)

I'm sympathetic to what you're saying and I'm not going to fault you for it. On the other hand, I can't bring myself to fault Bernie so much either.

Unlike on the health care issue, where I felt he unilaterally disarmed at the worst possible moment, what's going on here is less clear, and as such, I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt.

But you go right on questioning - and dissenting, when appropriate - and don't let anybody harangue you out of it, even if they do so with the best of intentions, as Sue and Doug certainly have.

Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Sun May 09, 2010 at 01:27:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm sorry, thingwarbler, for the tone of my response yesterday. (4.00 / 1)

It wasn't proportionate; and I don't think the arms-length opportunity for exchange that happens on a blog is any excuse to be rude.  It's just that conflicts of interest are a particular stone in my shoe; and I really get excited when I see an attempt at dismantling them.

You addressed your question to me directly, and you deserve a thoughtful response.  It's like this: I expect a measure of pragmatism from a Senator I trust.  Without it, he or she might just as well holler down a rainpipe, for all the effect it will have.  I choose to trust Bernie, and so far, although I may have occasionally disagreed with his position, I believe there is ample evidence that he was acting in good faith, and in the best interests of the people of Vermont.  If I were in his position, with the rare opportunity afforded by a seat in Congress, I would want to do whatever I could to nudge the country in the right direction on whatever the issue (banking, healthcare, military draw-down, etc.) In order to do that, I believe it is necessary to take the long-view, two steps forward, one step back;  building on small victories and concessions to move the country, in the long run, to where it should be going

I followed Bernie's efforts on behalf of single-payor very closely.  As far as I am concerned, he didn't "cave."  He fought hard (harder than most) for a healthcare bill that would be everything we could ask for.  In the end, one man could not make it happen; but one man's vote could have scuttled any minute progress that was represented in the flawed bill that was finally passed.  Rather than see the whole thing dropped for another eight years, and even then possibly get no further; Bernie accepted that minute measure of progress as something that could be built upon in the future.  My sense is that something similar is happening with the banking reform effort.

---

by: Sue Prent @ Sun May 09, 2010 at 14:40:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

thx (0.00 / 0)

Sue, that was a very thoughtful response and exactly what I was hoping to hear. I'm not a Ron Paul acolyte, and I don't necessarily think he's right to stand firm if Bernie thinks there's reason to compromise. But it's also not at all clear to me why what Bernie thinks he's gaining by allowing the WH to strong-arm him into making concessions given that Bernie's  electorate and a vast majority of voters apparently want full accountability within the Fed. I agree that he's fought hard to at least get this far -- but it would be helpful to know what he thinks he's gained by holding back at the last minute.  

---

by: thingwarbler @ Sun May 09, 2010 at 15:08:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

please (2.50 / 2)

Bernie has to live and function in the Senate

what he does to gain supporters and votes is not the same as his "stance"

what you call "caving" is no such thing; I hate it too but - as you may have noticed - progressives are not a majority, so they have to do the best they can

to diss Bernie is a joke and waste of time

if you can get elected to the f___ing U.S. Senate, perhaps you can do better; until then, lighten up

---

by: Doug Hoffer @ Sat May 08, 2010 at 22:19:04 PM UTC

yeech (0.00 / 0)

if you can get elected to the f___ing U.S. Senate, perhaps you can do better; until then, lighten up

I really can't let that statement sit there, as saying its anathema to every political activist cell of my body is the understatement of the century.

When we make such statements, we should consider whether we would have them as axioms. Consider, then:

if you can get elected to f___ing Governor, perhaps you can do better; until then, lighten up

if you can get elected to f___ing President, perhaps you can do better; until then, lighten up

if you can get elected to the f___ing Vermont House of Representatives, perhaps you can do better; until then, lighten up

Doesn't work. In fact, it's a rather epic failure as an axiom.

We must not beatify our leaders. I don't know how many times we need to have that lesson demonstrated to us over and over and over and over again.


Nullius perfectus est

---

by: odum @ Sun May 09, 2010 at 15:02:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bernie (4.00 / 1)

is pushing the issue; that's good
moving the bill requires compromise; no fun but necessary

so when I hear people say he "caved", it just makes me crazy; as for firedoglake, I just have to wonder how trashing Bernie helps advance the cause

should all elected officials be held accountable? of course
but I've been listening to people say Bernie is not perfect for over 20 years and it's tiresome (and it's not the same as asking for accountability)

I'm not one to beatify Bernie; I'm just willing to give the guy more room than any other politician I've ever known or known of; in my view, anyone who doubts Bernie's commitment has not been paying attention; there's a big difference between assuming Bernie can do no wrong and suggesting that some Bernie bashing is silly and a waste of time

having said all that, there was no need for my final remark

BTW - to Sue's point: if this bill becomes law, the GAO will no doubt find & publish some provocative stuff; firedoglake says it's not good enough; but hey, if there's no law, there's no audit at all; but if there's a first audit that smells, it creates pressure for more; this is not rocket science and those who complain that Bernie is caving should take a breath and a longer view  

---

by: Doug Hoffer @ Sun May 09, 2010 at 16:52:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

oh, please yourself (4.00 / 1)

that's the same sad s**t we hear from the Obama groupies when some of us dare to question his motives and actions. "Don't be critical, he knows what he's doing, it's the best we can get, and your asking questions about it is wrong/disloyal/strengthens the opposition/shows you don't get it/etc. etc."

So, "to diss Bernie is a joke and waste of time" -- really, now? If you're content simply assuming that he just does everything right, then the joke is on you. It's never a waste of time to hold an elected official accountable, no matter how much you agree with him or think he's the best thing ever.

And "progressives are not a majority, so they have to do the best they can." Uhm, duh. But I assume you're not implying that if they were the majority they could get away with doing less than their best and then you'd be okay with that? Either way, it's the "the best they can" part that is really open to interpretation. It's your loss if you elect to blindly accept at face value everything politicians (progressives or otherwise) say and do.  

---

by: thingwarbler @ Sun May 09, 2010 at 15:25:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I just wanted to add this link (0.00 / 0)

to the Economist, which in turn links to a New York Times piece.  Together, they give a broader picture of the  political machinations surrounding the issues raised by thingwarbler.

This wasn't exactly the point of my diary, but it is of course  a legitimate topic for discussion.

---

by: Sue Prent @ Sun May 09, 2010 at 02:36:36 AM UTC

Insider bailouts by the Fed, but no insider trading in the market crash? (0.00 / 0)

Please, check out my update to my diary on May 7, "People who don't like free markets control the markets!"

We can govern ourselves better than they govern us!

---

by: govt4all @ Mon May 10, 2010 at 14:13:49 PM UTC

A diary worth reading (4.00 / 1)

on another site [emphasis mine]:

When the stock market plunged 1,000 point in half of an hour on Thursday, the immediate rumors were of a "fat finger" trader who punched in $16 billion instead of $16 million. It's a disturbing idea, that a single trader could cause such financial destruction, but its better than the alternative - that the stock market plunge happened while the markets were functioning the way they were supposed to.

Since the original rumor, the facts have been revealed - there was no "fat finger". The stock market crashed on Thursday because that is the way the system is set up to function. Thus was should expect this event to happen again in the not so distant future.

Beware the Everyday Brutality of the Averted Gaze

---

by: mataliandy @ Mon May 10, 2010 at 17:37:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bernie vs. Fed Conflicts of Interest (0.00 / 0)

What you call "caving" is no such thing; I hate it too but - as you may have noticed - progressives are not a majority, so they have to do the best they can.

---

by: User #1800 @ Thu May 13, 2010 at 16:27:37 PM UTC