What, is he like 3 years old?!?!?! What a blustery old fool...

I liked it. I thought it was fair and balanced; albeit really pissed off. ;-)

Aside from his anger though, is it meaningful to you at all that he was blaming Bush and the rest of the corrupt republicans as much as Dodd and Frank?

In my book, this is the kind of brutal honesty we need today.

Not really, because while he tried to spread the blame around he 1) still singled out democrats and 2) never mentioned Graham and deregulation. Bill says nothing on that subject, so in the end, it's just a carefully crafted piece that pushed the "everybody did it" meme while ignoring the specific drivers. That's not brutal honesty, it's just republican couching geared to try to change the minds of a few swing voters.

Snoopy woofed:

>>That's not brutal honesty, it's just republican couching geared to try to change the minds of a few swing voters.

Yes, that is exactly right. When your party screws up, try to deflect the blame by blaming both parties, knowing that Americans hate politicians. Or, if your party screws up, resort to meaningless generalites ("Everyone is guilty!" to try to hide it.

"I swear to God, if they were in this room right now, I would hit them. Dodd and Frank -- the House Finance and Senate Finance. They knew. Don't point a finger at anybody, I'll break that finger off."

"The next politician who gets up there and points a finger, I'm gonna go after them myself."

OReilly has a right to disagree in a disagreeable way, but he does not have a right to threaten anyone with physical harm. He has establised a clear pattern of criminal behavior with his bullying, intimidation and physical threats.

Bill OReilly is indeed a Domestic Terrorist. He should be immediately arrested and held without bail until his trial, hopefully many years from now.

Here in Boston, the resident right wing radio host (Severin) did not threaten any physical harm to Dodd or Frank for the few minutes I could bear to listen.

Instead, he went on a rant, embarassingly trying to imitate Frank's voice, personally demeaning Frank in ayway he can, and ending up concluding that this whole bailout episode is a plus for McCain.

This, from the same guy who claims to be a Libertarian and before McCain got nominated was very deep into Romney's behindand was frothing like a rabies infested dog about McCain.

Can we bail out talk radio from these hosts?

"This, from the same guy who claims to be a Libertarian"

Isn't it something...... all these rightwing lunatics that have been that way their entire careers are suddenly today..... 'libertarian'??

These sleezy rightwing crackpots (BillO, Rush, Severin, Boortz, Beck) are so not even close to being a libertarian..... its beyond hilarious that these people actually can convince themselves that they really are something that they are assuredly not!

If these clowns want to be a libertarian..... then they need to watch Jonathon Turley the next time he visits Olbermann so they can see how a real one acts like!

Well when they realize how poorly the Repubs have done, of course they are going to claim to be something else. So thats not really a surprise.

A few self proclaimed "libertarians" (possibly the first of those to leave the repubs) actually did seem to have a decent goal, they were unhappy with the far-to-close ties many republicans had with the religious right. I think that's not a bad thing.

But this current flock of defectors are the same old pro-religious right wing republicans, just with a new name. In a discussion in Political theory the other day several Libertarians are talking about renaming themselves again.

Snoopy woofed:... ;)

"I liked it. I thought it was fair and balanced; albeit really pissed off." ;-)

That's stupid coming from you, max. Especially after the way you acted like a little baby and cried when you were on the receiving end of a tirade similar in vehemence to O'Reilly's.

You're pretty much a raging faker, Max. 

   Another post off-topic? Are you worrtking also? He does the same thing, complain about others right to post, but only if you speak in favor of your opinion.

  Let's try some on-topic discussion, think you can handle that? Why wouldn't BOR be mad, Barney Frank (D-MA), as Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd (D-CT), Chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs Committee ARE the ones who should shoulder much of the blame. Ever since Bush/co came to power in 2000 he, along with Sen. McCain, have been spotlighting the need for a reform of the laws that govern SEC and Wall Street oversight. Their insistance to oversight reform has been consistent, loud and ignored. Let's not forget SlickWilley, whose "National Homeownership Strategy" firmly planted the beginning of our current financial quagmire.

   So, I wouldn't expect anything less from YOU than for you to continue drinking the kool-aid that you drink and try to pass the buck to someone else. You are, after all, a liberal. And everyone knows liberals are very weak on personal responsibility or accountability. So why would you blame Clinton who started this mess or Frank who oversaw rules and regulations that caused this mess or Dodd whose freinds are being bailed out by this mess?

Ol' Angry Bill. Sounds like he isn't even trying anymore. Poor guy.

He's really lost his bearings...

Complete buffoon.  The childish ravings of a corporate media elite.  Bill O'Dork.

Lost his bearings for sure. That and a whole bunch of money he had in Lehman's.

It's a shame he can't make his point without resorting to name calling (big fat toad) which he has in the past claimed he doesn't do.

And what's with his always wanting to do physical violence to those he hates? He's always wanting to choke, hang or punch somebody. Just goes to show you that someone can be as old as O'Reilly is but still act like a bullying 3rd grader.

In his mind, empty threats of voilence makes him genuine, patriotic, a tough guy, an every man, one of us, someone who relates to the working class.

He's an overpaid media blowhard who has no concept of what it's like to be involved in real physical confrontation.  He only knows what it's like to be witness to it and armed with a pen.

There is that temper we all love ;-)

Overlooking the timbre of O'Reilly's rant...he's mostly correct.

The same dumb bastards who failed in their duty as elected representatives...are now falling all over themselves to attach partisan blame and avoid responsibility...while all the while piously spouting that they're going to fix things.

And now we're faced with the choice of two candidates for president who have both pledged to increase the deficit...it's just a matter of how much...with their grand spending plans to suck up to all facets of the electorate.

Jeez mareez...on second thought...maybe O'Reilly's rage is appropriate after all...this is truly madness.

>>Jeez mareez...on second thought...maybe O'Reilly's rage is appropriate after all...this is truly madness.

Yes, if you are a moron and think playground threats are a substitue for debate. Yes, then stupid rage is appropriate.

The rest of your post is simply a rant. You make vague accusations without anything specific.

No no, Wesley is right. The same dumb bastards are falling all over themselves to attach partisan blame and avoid responsibility. McCain is exhibit "A"...

Right snoopy......I mean, we all know Obama did not take any money from FM/FM.  Both parties caused this, and we all know it.  The dems controlled congress, and encouraged FM and FM to approve loans everyone knows should have been rejected.  BO was over the top of course, but the point of his rant was dead on correct!!

Really? What piece of "evidence" are ya gonna post to prove that one? That some bill passed during Carter's admin was really responsible for this? Or that poor people were really responsible for the housing market collapse? Or that democrats fillibustered S. 190 even though the library of congress shows it passed committee and was never scheduled for debate by the republican controlled senate? What talking point will it be today, POV?

Carter admin....what are you talking about?  Reports were released just this week showing how much money BO got from FM/FM

I'm just responding to republican talking points. Good on you, you got some facts to show Obama got a few bucks from FM and FM too. But look at your points - the dems controlled congress? You already just proved your ignorance in suggesting the last two years under Dem rule somehow had a significant impact. Heck, ol' yeller only sponsored a total of 38 (?) votes, and not one had anything to do with banking. He's just going for photo ops because he pushed Graham's deregulation and has much more responsibility for this mess than even bush.

   Why do you spell Gramm's name wrong? Is there some hidden agenda in the way you spell his name?

"Both parties caused this, and we all know it."

Only the ideology of market fundamentalism is to blame and you know it.

   And what kind of proof do you have to support that statement? Do you even know what it means?

"And now we're faced with the choice of two candidates for president who have both pledged to increase the deficit...it's just a matter of how much..."---Wesley

------------------------------

"Senator Obama's plan as described by his economic advisers would increase the ten-year cumulative deficit by about $3.6 trillion to $5.9 trillion; Senator McCain's plan would boost it by $5.1 trillion to nearly $7.4 trillion. Adding to their plans proposals made in stump speeches but not confirmed by campaign advisors would lower the cumulative deficit over the decade slightly to $5.4 trillion for Obama and raise it to almost $11 trillion for McCain."---Tax Policy Institute (An Updated Analysis of the 2008
Presidential Candidates’ Tax Plans: Revised August 15, 2008)

>>>>11-5.4= 5.6 trillion more McCain would spend than Obama over ten years.  What you're doing is making the perfect the enemy of the (much) better.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411749_updated_candidates.pdf#page=5

careful, he's been in combat.

I had the audio file of Bill talking about his combat days and now I can't find it.

I searched and it's only available as an excerpt from the Al Franken Party album. available on iTunes.

I just bought it for ninety nine cents. It's well worth it to hear this blowhard talk about the firefights he's been in. 

   Most who talk about the wars they've been in are blowhards. Wasn't BOR a marine? He must have been, you sound quite jealous of his record in war. What were you, again, army? Is it tough peeling potatoes?

O'REILLY: And all of these ideologues, it gets me angry. I do talk radio and most of talk radio is conservative-dominated ideologues, Kool-Aid-drinking idiots -- idiots -- screaming at you, "This is socialism," this is this, this is that...

That's my favorite part... Maybe he's still mad at Rush Limbaugh for calling him Ted Baxter.   ;>)

Although I always disagree with him, I can at least usually understand the argument he’s trying to make. This, however, sounds like nothing more than the ranting of a crazy person. There’s no logic present, merely anger. I almost feel sorry for the poor guy. 

I wish you'd have been more specific.  What part didn't you understand?  This is one of the few times I can remember MMFA highlighting a right winger making sense and in at least my opinion telling the truth.  I guess it snuck in here to give context to the violent threats O'Reilly made which MMFA has consistently highlighted from O'Reilly.  Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

As usual, O'Reilly was directly on point. All the politicians are pointing fingers and playing dumb to the risks which they knew all along had abounded sub-prime mortgages. Dim-witted Maxine Waters was on Hardball last night passing the buck to the policies of the regulatory agencies, as though she's utterly oblivious to the fact that it's her job as a congresswoman, under the constitution, to be a watchdog over these executive agencies. Scarcely a peep was uttered over the last decade of the lurking dangers, of which it was the job of our elected officials to foresee and act on.

The after-the-fact blame game is sickening, particularly when there are numerous causes for this financial disaster, and when the failures are so widespread . . .

Kudos to O'reilly for his characteristic No Spin style. 

>>Dim-witted Maxine Waters was on Hardball last night passing the buck to the policies of the regulatory agencies, as though she's utterly oblivious to the fact that it's her job as a congresswoman, under the constitution, to be a watchdog over these executive agencies

What a bunch of arrant nonsnese! Maxine Waters is culpable how? She is culpable simply because she is a congresswoman! Are there specific actions she did or did not do that lead to this crisis? Was she for the deregulation?

And I'll repeat what I said to Wesley above. Yes, if you are a moron, and Archie Bunker is your hero, then you think O'Reilley makes sense. But the rest of us recognize his stupid rant for what it is.

I think I get his drift now.  The legislative branch was supposed to watchdog the executive agencies because the executive branch was too incompetent or too aloof to do it himself.

The executive branch has spent nearly 8 years claiming that the legislative branch has no right to oversee it.

Ok Funny man, explain why Obama took all the money he did.  Explain why his advisor made 90 million over 6 years.  Expalin why FM and FM were forced to make these loans to avoid charges of discrimination.  And finally, explain why they were made by congress to count welafre and unemployment checks as income. 

What advisor? Got proof he's an advisor? How about McCain's advisor, who continued to take money up until - uh, now?

Your right Snoopy.  How blind was I to assume having a former FM exec heading up the VP search for Obama would make him an advisor. 

>>Your right Snoopy.  How blind was I to assume having a former FM exec heading up the VP search for Obama would make him an advisor.

You are very blind, because this exec never actually served on the committee, and he never offered Obama any advice on the economy.

Deflect much? Oooh, the former FM exec heading up the VP search for Obama is proof of... something! But the current  FM exec for McCain is clean as baby bottom snow...

   Where did he say that "the current FM exec for McCain is clean as snow"? Where did he even imply that? What we have here, is a failure to communicate. POV pointed out that corrupt people are on O'bama's payroll also. So your arguement against this statement is that McCain hires crooks.

   Is it any wonder you won't say anything about James Johnson (member of the board of directors of Goldman Sachs and has been Vice Chairman of Perseus LLC) or Franklin Raines (book-cooker and CEO at Fannie Mae). Since you are living in denial about the crooks that O'bama hires.

>>Ok Funny man, explain why Obama took all the money he did.  Explain why his advisor made 90 million over 6 years.  Expalin why FM and FM were forced to make these loans to avoid charges of discrimination.  And finally, explain why they were made by congress to count welafre and unemployment checks as income.

What money? What advisor? When were banks forced to make loans to minorities? When were they made to count welfare checks and income as unemployment?

And my last question: you think that this rant by O'Reilley actually makes sense?

I dont get to listen to BO on the radio much, but I did hear him today.  Yes, what he said made sense.  I already said in another post that he was over the top, but his main points were that this mess was caused by both parties.  His point was that those who caused this mess are the same ones who claim they can now fix it.  His point that they all knew this was coming is very true.  I thought he might have a stroke he was so mad, but yes, it made sense. 

You didn't answer any of my questions except the last one. As I said below, the statement that both parties caused the problem is so vague as to be meaningless. O'Reilley resorted to name calling and stupid threats. I know he really is not threatening Dodd or Frank personally. But if O'Reilley really had a point to make, he wouldn't need such silly rhetoric.

"it's her job as a congresswoman, under the constitution, to be a watchdog over these executive agencies."

Which article and section are you referring to?

"Scarcely a peep was uttered over the last decade of the lurking dangers, of which it was the job of our elected officials to foresee and act on."

Barack Obama's Stop Fraud Act, introduced in Feb. 2006, read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, no action taken by the Republican controlled Congress.

Barack Obama's written appeal to Bernanke and Paulson on the need for action, March 2007.  Bernanke and Paulson's actions speak for themselves.

Peep!

thomp,

I don't care about O'Reilly...but your assessment was dead bang on the money. The wild-eyed partisans will turn this into an O'Reilly bash fest...while ignoring the real issue...the one concerning our derelict congress.

Well said!!

If he was dead bank on the money, then you can refer me to which article and section he was referring to.

Wow, surprise, surprise.  Both conservative constitutional professors are stumped.

Pete,  I had to sleep on your question.   I was referring more to the fact that if Waters and others did not like how the agencies were implementing legislative policy, then it was their job to more narrowly articulate that policy, through new legislation, and demand that it be followed.  That is their consitutional prerogative, and is what they're elected to do. 

She indicated she was a fervent supporter of the sub-prime mortgage initiatives under the BC administration.  But before now, did Waters speak out about the careless schemes through which banks had been issuing sub-prime mortgages, the schemes which she decried the other night? She didn't mention any ideas the other night, just passing the buck. She's on the house finance, and other related committees, so one has to give her the benefit of the doubt that she was in tune to the rising dilemna. Nothing personal against Waters; she was just the one I saw on television preaching bs. 

How did you know I was a constitutional law professor?

Maxine Waters celebrated "National Home Owners Month" in June 2006 and in her floor speech proclaimed:

"None of us like predatory lending. We don't mind having a subprime market, but it must be a subprime market that will allow people to buy a home and perhaps even sometimes start out with a little bit higher interest rate, but they must be reduced as those homeowners demonstrate their ability to pay for these mortgages.

We don't like our American workers to be taken advantage of. We don't want them to have high interest rates that are above and beyond what the average borrower would be able to get. We don't like the fact that Americans lose homes. We want everybody who enters into this business, this contract, of buying a home to be able to pay that mortgage and to be able to hold onto that home...."

Attempts to regulate the markets have consistently been thwarted by Republicans.  sorry but blame for this mess is not bi-partisan. 

I think Thomp's posting satire again, Wesley.  Never sure with him though....

Fried

Why dont you explain to me then how much of the balme for this mess you put on the dem controlled congress.

Let's assign one point for each year in control of a branch of government for the past 8 years.

Repubs-- 8 years executive, 6 years leg. = 14 pts

Dem -- 2 years Leg. = 2 pts

Dems - 12.5% of the blame.

Repubs - 87.5% of the blame.

Does that make you happy, or do you need more stuff explained to you?

Col

As usual, your total partian blinders show through again. 

>>As usual, your total partian blinders show through again

That's not really a counter argument at all.

The lack of a counter-argument isn't what saddens me, FMP. I had no expectation of that from Pointy, any more than I would from any of the other lost-cause wingnuts.

What hurts my heart is the lack of gratitude. I'm well aware of the psychological state of ultraconservatives these days, thrashing around trying to find some other reason than the failure of their gospel for our current economic situation.

I thought I was being generous, assigning the same value to a slight majority in Congress as to control of the Executive branch, especially considering the super-duper powers our current administration has given itself in that branch.

I was being kind, not even mentioning the past few decades of the deregulating, free market mad scientists who planted the seeds for this. And this is how he repays me?

Oh well, I guess I can only hope for the day when I cast off these partian blinders, and see the light.  ;0)

I should add, it's pretty funny that Pointy (without supporting it in any way) accused me of being "partisan" for doing simple math, which I fudged in his favor, in response to his question about quantifying blame.

And speaking of wingnuts and math, I'd like to share the latest bit of comedy I got through the right wing email loop I've shoehorned my way into. If you haven't seen The Birk economic plan, this is a beaut. It's another GOP mass email that's making the rounds, from T. J. Birkenmeier, a self-described"Creative Guy & Citizen of the Republic", with his brilliant proposal for distributing the 85 billion for the AIG bailout in a "we deserve it" dividend.

I let my chucklehead wingnut co-workers rail against the gubmint for a while, and discuss how they'd spend their 300k, or half million+ for a couple, (memories of the Iraq oil windfall plans) before I did my reply-all pointing out that the wingnut boy-genius' math was slightly innaccurate.

No, it doesn't work out to 425,000 dollars for every U.S. taxpayer (the number of taxpayers being another number the creative guy just made up). It actually comes out to $425 a pop.

I've Googled this bit of poo at several sites,and haven't seen the slight miscalculation (by a factor of 1,000) caught by any wingnuts yet. They're all too busy pretending that the people stealing their money might be thinking of giving it back to them.

I swear, Republicans embarrass me as a human. 

I swear, Republicans embarrass me as a human.
Republicans or their operatives? I still believe a lot of the flack thrown up at this site is professional.  But then you seem to believe the likes of Goodfella and POV are on the level and I don't. I think the typical non-professional Republican is more to be pitied than despised because the typical one is willfully misinformed.  But I suppose one could argue they are willfully misinformed to a large degree. 
I've heard it from real live humans, Eddy, Can't really blame the radio guys, they're getting a paycheck for spewing out this BS, it's our fellow Americans(Like Goodfella) who roll over and have their bellies rubbed with the stuff that are responsible for the mess.

Posted Monday September 22, 2008 1:36:51 AM EDT

In all fairness to The Creative Guy & Citizen of the Republic, who started the email, he did say he wanted to keep the math simple.

And it doesn't get simpler, or stupider, than wingnut math.

 CHS: "Let's assign one point for each year in control of a branch of government for the past 8 years.

Repubs-- 8 years executive, 6 years leg. = 14 pts

Dem -- 2 years Leg. = 2 pts

Dems - 12.5% of the blame.

Repubs - 87.5% of the blame."

w: "And it doesn't get simpler, or stupider, than wingnut math."

   Amen to that, brother. AMEN to that!!

Bill? Is that you? Please don't try to distract me with 'shiney objects'! There is no question about where the blame for this debacle should be. You cannot run from these republican policies just because they failed so miserably (as usual). The repubs can't govern and that is a fact! There is a reason why I read about Laissez-Faire capitalism in my history books...This is not new and it has never worked anywhere anytime! No Spin my behind. You can fool some of the people some of the time but...Oh, why bother. Prepare to reap!

I guess Bill iives up to his new title, "A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity".

He's a fresh piece of something alright!

O'Reilly is an angry man, that's for sure. But he's right about the blame game. Way back when, Bill Clinton decided it would be a great idea if low-income families could get mortgages they couldn't afford to pay back, and Barney Frank thought it was a grand idea, as well. That was the first bad step. But the present administration knew what kind of crisis was on the horizon a few years ago and did nothing to warn us about it. And now here we are. Plenty of blame to go around, but there is no sense in anyone pointing fingers. Like it or not, it's just time to suck it up, tough it out and do whatever is necessary to get through it.

Bill Clinton decided it would be a great idea if low-income families could get mortgages they couldn't afford to pay back, and Barney Frank thought it was a grand idea, as well

I don't suppose you have any actual facts that support this statement? 

Community Reinvestment Act of 1995 is a starter.   The bill encouraged the Federal National Mortgage Association, commonly known as Fannie Mae, to enable mortgage companies, savings and loans, commercial banks, credit unions, and state and local housing finance agencies to lend to home buyers. It also encouraged the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, commonly known as Freddie Mac, to buy mortgages on the secondary market and sell them as mortgage-backed securities on the open market.

In 2003, the Bush Administration recommended what the NY Times called "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." The proposal was to move governmental supervision of two of the primary agents guaranteeing subprime loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. However, the proposal did not alter the implicit guarantee of a Washington funded bail out in case the companies ran into financial difficulties, a perception that enabled these institution to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Congressional support was approximately split along Party lines and the proposal eventually failed.

Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) claimed of the thrifts "These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis, the more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." Representative Mel Watt (D-NC) added "I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing."

"I gotta take a break." Exactly, Bill O'Reilly. Spot on!

I was just listening to Mark Levin and he went off on O'Reilly called him names I never heard a conservative call O'Reilly before. Said Oreilly was a moron, a failure . Why? Becuase O'Reilly said do not blame Clinton but blame Bush. He has pissed off the right wing with this one.

I'm listening to the replay I guess.  He calls him the "non-factor". Oh my God what a shriek comes out when he raises his voice---jarring---and wait five minutes, he'll raise his voice.  I wish you would have given some more details---this guy's hard to take.

He's super tight with Hannity.  I wonder how Hannity and O'Reilly get along at Fox.

This is from Mark Levins web site this morning, he also has a picture of Bill O growling. He really hates O'Reilly

September 25, 2008

On Thursday’s Mark Levin Show: Obama and the Democrats’ economic plans will make the middle class poorer and the rich poorer as well. We were warned years ago about what was going to happen, and the politicians didn’t do anything about it - thus, leaving us in the current crisis that we are in.  Mark says that we should let the markets work their way out and that we shouldn’t bail these companies out. Mark explains mortgage lenders and the owners and the difference between them and the impact that they have.  Mark exposes Bill O’ Reilly for his smears against conservatives, and includes David Letterman and Jon Stewart as well.

Well, I'll give Billo a couple of points for that. I absolutely cannot stand The Detestable One, aka His Vileness, aka Mark Levin. ANYONE who calls out that schmuck... and Billo did, along with calling out Rush... deserves credit in my book.

O'Reilly is a lot like Matthews - there are gems of brilliance there but one must wade through lots of foul sludge to find them.

Well at least Bill knows it's Bush's fault and isn't trying to blame Clinton. Not sure what his beef is with Dodd and Franks. Dodd has been warning about problems in the financial services industry since he took over as committee chair but he's only been there 17 months. Bill came pretty close to calling Frank a faggot I think.

O'Reilly's blustering is pretty spot on, so I'm giving him a pass here. I'm not gonna knock the guy for his delivery. He's pissed. He probably lost a few bucks. And we should be blaming everyone from the White House on down. These clowns spend more time contemplating their navels than working for the American people. I say throw them all out of office. I'm not interested in partisan blame games. They are all frigin guilty.

Bill came pretty close to calling Frank a faggot I think.

Huh? He called Frank a big fat toad. Is "Toad" some sort of code word for faggot? That's news to me..

>>These clowns spend more time contemplating their navels than working for the American people. I say throw them all out of office. I'm not interested in partisan blame games. They are all frigin guilty.

That view is terribly naive and not the least bit helpful. "They are all friggin guilty" is  simply too vague to even offer a counter argument. Americans often want to sit back, not know anything about politics, and then blame the polticians when problems don't get solved.

Problems get solved when citizens really push politicians to solve the problem Blacks didn't get the right to vote because some politicians suddenly solved their problems; woemen didn't get the right to vote because politicans just fixed the problem; poor people didn't get the right to vote because politicans woke up one day and decided to enfranchise them. All of these problems got fixed by a bitter struggle, and a partisan struggle. People in power never want to give up any amount of their power.

In this case, the very rich want to exploit the system. They want to privitize the profits and socialize the benefits. The rich are not just going to give up the huge wealth and benefit they get from the current system. And this type of exploitation will not simply disappear because politicians cease being partisan. It will get solved (like the problems in the past) because politicians are partisan.

Well said, "They are all friggin guilty" is meaningless ranting at it's best.  And it should be noted that O'Reilly was too big a wimp to dole out the spineless pinky violence to both parties, so he managed to maintain some partisan hackery.

Problems get solved when citizens really push politicians to solve the problem

Good points. But bad business practices are the root cause of this fiasco. Whether regulations existed or not, the leaders of public companies have a fiduciary responsibility to investers to make sound investments and understand the risks associated with those investments. There are alot of smart guys at the helm of US financial institutions - how could they have not seen this coming, knowing what they were doing? 

So we can easily blame politicians, first for regulating, then for not regulating.... But how about stupid home buyers, sleezy realtors, greedy mortgage brokers, and irresponsible financial business leaders?

"They want to privitize the profits and socialize the benefits"

I think you mean "socialize the RISKS"

Hey J2, An author by the name of Kevin Phillips was on Bill Moyers Journal last Friday and has written a new book about this subject called "Bad Money". He takes both Dems and Republicans to task for this mess. You might find it interesting reading.

Ps. For some reason, my stuff isn't getting through. Last night and this morning. 

Well I think misinterpreted when he said "You Frank-you." as self editing.  THat's what I get for reading the transcript.  Maybe I'm also wrong in thinking he said of Frank "I'd hit that."

Well no surprise. Here's a little anecdote for today. I did some canvassing last night after work, ran into two fellers who were pretty angry that they could not vote for the hot chick from Alaska. Why could'nt they vote? Both are convicted felons. They remarked that just because they made one mistake, they are not allowed to own firearms, get a passport etc. Drunk as skunks, made me think maybe they should not be allowed any alchohol either.

My usual reaction to Bill: not only do I need a break, I need a DRINK.  To IRONY and any of my other fellow Big Easy friends, join me at d.b.a. on Frenchman Street.  On ME.

This O'Reilly character is a real steaming pile of humanity, isn't he? "O'Reilly Factor FOR KIDS!", indeed. His violent comments are just manly enough for people to start talking, though!!! Some people are saying that they bet that O'Reilly would just LOVE to get his hands ALL OVER Barney Frank and teach that BAD BOY a lesson! Ohh, O'Reilly, what else would you "break off"? But, as the great man himself once said, "let's relax with all this gay stuff".

"I swear to God, if they were in this room right now, I would hit them. Dodd and Frank -- the House Finance and Senate Finance. They knew. Don't point a finger at anybody, I'll break that finger off."

"The next politician who gets up there and points a finger, I'm gonna go after them myself."

OReilly has a right to disagree in a disagreeable way, but he does not have a right to threaten anyone with physical harm. He has establised a clear pattern of criminal behavior with his bullying, intimidation and physical threats.

Bill OReilly is indeed a Domestic Terrorist. He should be immediately arrested and held without bail until his trial, hopefully many years from now.

While I don't advocate injuring any members of Congress ... listen to the whole rant. I don't think this benefits conservatives one bit.

So, I give a half-hearted "Why is this on here?"

He talked about injuring Democratic members of Congress.

And he also accused Frank and Dodd of knowing about this mess, but doing nothing, when we ALL know that's not true.

Yes and I have dreams of Bills face and an excessive cream pie. But thats just me.

It's not just you. ;-)

Good for O'Reilly.  Maybe an embarrassed relative or someone has been talking him out of the cult.  More likely his bosses are feeling heat or worrying about January 09.  I don't have a good feel for it as I don't listen to the show.  But anyway my point is he will be heard by and possibly even persuade non-Democrats because he's one of them.  He had to say the last bit to maintain his street cred with the anti-Democrat bigots (Is 'bigot' appropriate? Anyway, it feels right to me.)

(Having said that, the right move for one of the Democrats he kind-of threatened would be to call his bluff and show up at his studio in just as bad a mood.  It would garner respect from todays's American and by extention respect also for the Democratic Party.)

I pretty much had to read the entire transcript of what this jerk o'reilly said, just to find out the only thing that I'm interested in, and that matters:

FOR or AGAINST spending a trillion dollars of the American Taxpayer's money, to cover the losses of WALL STREET financial services companies and investment funds... FOR or AGAINST that?

That's all that matters, and all that is current and important... it's only idiots and other mental defectives, who think this is time to blame whoever they think is at fault here (and it's obviously those who hold the Regulatory Power of Law in this regard, who are at fault for not exercising that Power to prevent this situation)... idiots and mental defectives, and also those who are so bent towards political bashing that that's all they see here: an opportunity to bash whoever they hate politically.

And so in sifting this jerk's transcribed harangue, he's obviously FOR the WALL STREET grab of a trillion dollars of Taxpayer's money, and he's also for bashing Rep. Frank and Sen. Dodd not only politically, but physically...

The jerk.

If you're following this whole WALL STREET Bush Paulson scheme, you might be interested in some of the best and most critical reporting on the matter that I've found on the Internet Wire, as being what McClatchy's Washington Bureau is regularly publishing.

Most recently (just hours ago), they have this headline to a David Lightman (no not the one who hacked NORAD's computer in the movie 'Wargames') and Margaret Talev article:

"Bush's Bailout Meeting Ends In Disarray; McCain Gets Blame"

Sound interesting? Sound like anything you've been hearing of late on the matter?

From that article, here are a few excerpts:

"...agreement on a $700 billion rescue plan threatened to unravel Thursday as lawmakers at an often tense White House meeting clashed over details."

"What this looked like to me was a rescue plan for John McCain," said Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd..."

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he believed the breakdown was simply an effort to allow McCain to miss Friday night's scheduled debate with Obama.

Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, seconded that belief. "I think McCain was hurting politically," Frank said. "I think this was a campaign ploy."

When McCain arrived in Washington to discover that an agreement was near, Frank said, it became necessary to upset it so that McCain could later be seen to have played a role. "He's making it harder to get things done," Frank said."

Are you hearing those quotes about McCain from the principal players in this matter, are you hearing them on the television or in the other media you might be monitoring?

Those are actual quotes, which are always worth more than strange interpretations of what those people are supposedly thinking, or strange paraphrasing of what they've said... McClatchy right now (as I said) has the best and most critical reporting and commentary on this matter... read the rest of Lightman's and Talev's article...

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/53085.html

...and some of the other good and timely and critical stuff they're reporting in this matter.

And for the record, I am adamantly AGAINST this fear-mongering bold scheme to siphon a trillion dollars of American Taxpayer money out of the U.S. Treasury, and giving it to WALL STREET fund managers (who are mostly greedy kids) to cover the losses they incurred in what even George W. Bush months ago referred to as a "WALL STREET hangover" (which means they partied hearty and greedy and lost theirs and mostly others money, and you're supposed to pick up the tab)...

I am adamantly AGAINST this Bush Paulson WALL STREET trillion dollar theft, and I think that Rep. Frank and Sen. Dodd and the rest of the Democratic Congressional leadership, are being played for suckers by chicken little, and are failing the American People in a spectacular manner, yet again, and are even so stupid that they've put themselves in the idiot position of being on board with this scheme too soon, and are now in the idiot's seat, as it unravels under an extraordinary popular revolt against it...

They failed yet again, and are out of touch yet again with the American People, and are behind the eight ball yet again... what else is new with the Democratic Congressional leadership.

Typical Billo...The truth is, there is no mystery as to how we got to this point. 30 years of so-called "Reaganomics" has led directly to this financial disaster. There is no need for forensic analysis because there is a clear culprit. The republicans need to be reminded at every opportunity that this is their policies laid out for the world to see. Do yourself a favor and read anything by Dr. Ravi Batra. The days of the Free Market/Trickle-Downers are numbered. I just wish we had learned the lesson from the last Republican Great Depression!

It's really easy for him to say something like that in a room with a microphone away from those guys.  Would he really have the balls to do something like that in person?  The Fox guys are getting more and more desperate every day.

THANK YOU FOR POSTING THE TRANSCRIPT & AUDIO! It doesn't get much better than one wingnut bozo attacking other wingnut bozos! I'm sure Limbaugh, Hannity, and others will now have to respond to BOR and that will throw them off their planned propaanda campaigns.

Mark Levin responded yesterday

I pulled this from that idiots web site.

September 25, 2008

On Thursday’s Mark Levin Show: Obama and the Democrats’ economic plans will make the middle class poorer and the rich poorer as well. We were warned years ago about what was going to happen, and the politicians didn’t do anything about it - thus, leaving us in the current crisis that we are in.  Mark says that we should let the markets work their way out and that we shouldn’t bail these companies out. Mark explains mortgage lenders and the owners and the difference between them and the impact that they have.  Mark exposes Bill O’ Reilly for his smears against conservatives, and includes David Letterman and Jon Stewart as well.

Not too much at this point.  The deregulation of the futures and derivatives market play a huge, but confusing role here.  The inability to overcome filibusters is what I will blame the Dems for (which isn't much).

All of the policies that led to the meltdown were put in place long before 2007.

The misinformation in this article, of course is O'Reilly's threatening to hit Frank or Dodd if they were in the room with him. Actually, if they were there, O'Reilly would run crying into the night, frightened into soiling his Depends.

And that, of course, is known as "going off the Depends..."

>>And I'm talking to you, Barney Frank. Who's the guy that was, "Oh, if you don't lend money to poor people, you're a bigot?" Who was saying that, Barney? Probably your imaginary friend, Bill. The same one who told you the houses were all cheap.

Barney "I Need Speech Therapy" Frank and Chris "Friends of Angelo" Dodd are corrupt!

Again with the insults but nothing of substance to back up the cheap shots.

If I remember correctly, Barney Frank was rated as one of the most intelligent, if not THE MOST intelligent member of the House.  Why take a swipe at his speech?  Have you nothing else to point out?

You're disgusting.  No rebuttal so you begin with the personal attacks. Typical right-wing a$$hole.

Notice how he only wants to punch the democrats?  And he start's it by saying, "Oh and the far left, forget about it."  It's interesting.  Bottom line is that he is STILL a shill for the Republican party.  Here's what I think the angle is.  Bash Bush.  I be that's even in the talking points.  "Bash Bush and his elite bailout plan".  Then say "they're all ripping you off!!!" at the top of your lungs.  THEN start talking about how the left wing are.....(wait for it)......EVEN WORSE!!!!! See?  They get separation from an unpopular president, while at the same time they get to paint the left as the even MORE corupt of the two parties.  Who can save us from these twin evil?  The Maverick!!!  (of course.  Duh!)

But MAN I love hearing Bill yell.  I want to get him in  movie Daniel Day Lewis.  Fun stuff.  Good times.