Lafayette,

I see. So, ad hominems are acceptable as long you’re the one making them? As to your agenda, sadly there isn’t anything in it not already covered in the DNC’s very own roadmap.

http://www.democrats.org/about/party_platform

Simply using your free time to write a political statement doesn’t give you the right to claim you are “doing something” about the problems we face. In fact, working to further the agenda of some multinational in Europe arguably puts you squarely in the camp of interests you claim to stand against. Of course, that’s just an assumption, but I’m guessing you’re not there to teach English, are you?

As to what I do to “make a difference” (not that it’s any of your concern), I’ll compile nice, neat list, just like you’ve done:

1.) In classes, workshops, and conferences, I work with primary and secondary educators to build inquiry communities by which teachers may successfully challenge the unfair, blatantly profit-oriented pedagogy often forced upon them and their students. In the main, this involves teaching educators how to conduct research in their own schools and classrooms, and how to construct arguments in favor humane and humanizing pedagogy that engages students in authentic reading and writing practices for the development of critical thinking skills and empathy.

2.) I am currently researching and writing grants on behalf of the local chapter of the National Writing Project, recently defunded by the federal government, whose aim is to help teachers of English develop collegial writing communities in order to facilitate development of a more informed, critically focused writing pedagogy.

3.) I undertake studies with the teachers I’ve had the honor of working with in order to document and evaluate the pedagogical innovations they are developing. I have been fortunate enough to present these findings in conferences and to publish them in journals with the teachers themselves.

4.) I have, since Octobor, made frequent visits to the local Occupy chapter to stand in solidarity and deliver donations of food.

5.) I have, in the past two months, attended two community forums held to discuss the hydraulic fracturing of the Marcellus Shale in New York State. I presented arguments to the effect that hydrofracking would not enrich common citizens, nor lower our energy costs, but would, in the long term, cost taxpayers incredible sums of money in environmental- and health-related expenses. I presented graphs and read excerpts of studies conducted about hydrofracking and its environmental effects (with thanks here to David J. Cyr, whose website proved useful in this respect). I expect these meetings were only for show (Big Energy bought our legislators and “progressive” governor long ago), but I went anyway.

6.) I have regularly attended school board meetings to challenge budgets that have eviscerated the Arts in the recent years, arguing that they are absolutely vital to the intellectual, moral, and emotional development of our students. Also to little avail (the budgets were going to pass, true education is just “too expensive” for Americans), but I went anyway.

So, in the future please spare me your self-righteous infatuation with your hobby-time conceit. Come home from France and jump in the trenches if you’re serious about “solving” our problems. Otherwise, you’re just another misguided pedant, gazing across the pond at something he’s lost connection with and can no longer fully understand.

POLITICAL AGENDA FOR NATIONAL REFORM

AF: You seem capable of thinking only in a narrow scope, preferring platitudes and facile, blanket remedies to what are the ugly realities of gross systemic failure.

Enough of the ad hominem insults.

Put your money where your mouth is by demonstrating concretely what you think is specifically necessary to change America. I mean Be Specific or do not bother at all.

Here is my proposition (to the debate) of a Political Agenda for National Reform, the intent of which is to serve as a litmus test for progressive candidates for next November’s election.

I’ve shown you mine. Now you show me yours.

Lafayette,

A disappointing, but not unexpected response. You seem capable of thinking only in a narrow scope, preferring platitudes and facile, blanket remedies to what are the ugly realities of gross systemic failure. I outlined the underlying causes (in very simple terms, may I add) for the “Dumbing Down of America” in my post, yet you seem neither to acknowledge or understand the situation, preferring to lay a vague, unspecified blame on… everyone in America?

I’ve attempted to respond thoughtfully and in good faith to your comments, only to receive insults and derision in return. You’re clearly not interested in considering other perspectives or in expanding your own. That’s all well and good, and I wish you all the best in marketing your “progressive action agenda” from… where was it, again? France? Yes, good luck with that.

There seems to come a point in every authoritarian state when corruption at the highest levels makes it increasingly obvious that the status quo is no longer desirable or sustainable. The United States would appear to be at, or near, that threshold

Dramaturgy. You write Hollywood scenarios, right?

We’ve been through worser times and survived well-enough.

What should worry us is the Dumbing Down of America. That is, how people of all classes - the poor, the middle-class, the rich - could have allowed this mess to happen. Under their very eyes that were occupied elsewhere mundanely.

Democracy is like any freedom, use it or lose it - that is, one must be involved as a participant and not a spectator. Who, when they don’t like what they see happening, start bitching-in-in-a-blog.

There seems to come a point in every authoritarian state when corruption at the highest levels makes it increasingly obvious that the status quo is no longer desirable or sustainable. The United States would appear to be at, or near, that threshold; decades of market deregulation have led to their logical endpoint, a vast corporate consumerist culture in which literally everything, from education to politics, is understood in market terms. While I sympathize with Lafayette’s arguments, I’m puzzled by their narrowness. He seems not to disregard the intricate relationships between education, regional/cultural identity, and what I’ll call the “divine economic orthodoxy” - the conflation of so-called Christian values with those of the free market.

For now, I’ll focus just on schooling. If we look at education since Reagan, we see a series of manufactured crises (the “A Nation at Risk” report, for instance) leading to an ever greater focus on test taking and standardization, while simultaneously “reskilling” teachers as test prep technicians, as consumers of scripted curricula not of their own design. Not only has this made education into a $30+ billion dollar per year industry, but it has meant the near complete dismantling of progressive pedagogies (i.e. those that teach critical thinking and reasoning). In fact, a pedagogy of consumption has had a stranglehold on education since state and local control was eviscerated with No Child Left Behind. Packaged curricula are now designed and marketed to schools by the same companies that design and sell standardized tests. Each year, “scientifically proven” new curricula are marketed “guaranteed” to raise test performances, as if a score on a test was an indication of anything at all. In fact, test takers are simply producers of statistics, which are consumed by the public and politicians as further evidence of public education’s decline. It is all part of a vicious cycle of consumption, feeding an educational marketplace that such paragons of virtue as Rupert Murdoch feel can reach $500 billion or more - once education is fully privatized.

The result of this stultifying idiocy, of course, is the stunting of childrens’ innate capacity for critical thought and empathy - the foundation of any democratic society. In destroying these, we render a population capable only of, to coin Oddsox, narrow “self-interest”. When we produce generation after generation of shallow, self-serving consumers, how is it possible to maintain a functioning social democracy? This is but one of a plethora of systems in need of critique, and I feel that disregarding the marketization of every major institution in the forging of our current social order is akin to not seeing the forest for the trees. The question becomes one not of national salvation, but of local and regional resistance. The country has failed, but local regions can weather the eventual collapse if they organize now, and organize well. Controlling school boards, county seats, and the State senate and congress is, I think, the only viable way to preserve some dignity and sanity in our individual regions.

Oh Lafayette, now you state you seek a reformation of your party. We’d all love to see the plans.

RL: What will it take to prove the totalitarian corruption of the US corporate capitalist system?

Evidence that stands up in a court of law. Iow, lotsa luck.

If the above is what you want, then it is by means of far more effective legislation that is necessary to correct three key defaults:
* Ineffective market oversight of market aggregation that stifles price competition - ala Bigger Is Better for American Business – which is anti-competitive nonsense in most instances.
* Limiting corporate funding of PACs and SuperPACs to “get out the vote measures”. All specific candidate funding should be capped at a certain amount by individual voter and that amount (when its source is verified) be matched by the American government in order to fund elections. (Hopefully this will reduce drastically the mindless electoral hoopla that costs half a billion dollars per PotUS election.)
* Perp-walks of those convicted of intent to fraud with predatory pricing and negligence in assessing creditworthiness of borrowers. Then bundling into Toxic Waste investments with the connivance of CRA’s and Triple-A ratings of junk, sold to debt-investors (meaning banks that should have gone belly-up had TARP not occurred.

It really does not take much. The hard part is the will to execute each of the above policy objectives. And that shall not be forthcoming from a Congress constituted as it is presently of political wusses co-opted by BigMoney.

We, the sheeple, need to vote for more progressive politicians pushing a clear agenda of Progressive Values into both legislation and execution by the PotUS and Federal agencies.

Lafayette

“What would have made it perfect is a Public Option” seems to fit perfectly with the rest of your fatuous middle-of-the-road politics.

The Public Option was a talking point prop that was put out by Obama for those who wanted single payer socialized medicine, taking the insurance industry out of mainstream medicine.  It was meant for chumps who would believe what he said, rather than what they saw.

If you think that would have been a perfect solution, I’d guess that you think Obama and his administration are unaffected by the billion dollars from the monied interests whom he’s now shaking down. It’ll just be four more years of honest government.

Don’t forget to leave cookies and milk for Santa.

While I do understand the difficulty Lafayette faces in his blind allegiance to his party, the truth is still what it is, and his opinion is simply blind to those truths.

Ad hominens, RD. You should now better - haven’t you something more poignant in your quiver for rebuttal?

As for those Dems listed, I’d like to see them all replaced. Yes, the Dem Party at present is not the one that I would like to see persist. (Perhaps some of them were holding out for a Public Option, but universality is better than nothing at all - even if it simply puts more people without Health Insurance into the clutches of private insurers.)

You know very well, on this forum, that I have repeatedly called for its renovation by means of a more Progressive leaning of Democrat legislative objectives.

Which will be a lot easier to implement change, by deriving far more fundamental reform of America, than the Replicant party for whom you and BO are shills.

Shame on you both. Defending a bankrupt Repub party whose dogma has done irreparable harm to Americans nation-wide.

What will it take to prove the totalitarian corruption of the US corporate capitalist system?

OMG

While I do understand the difficulty Lafayette faces in his blind allegiance to his party, the truth is still what it is, and his opinion is simply blind to those truths.

The 39 “Democrats” Who Voted Against Obama’s health care bill

Adler
Altmire
Baird
Barrow
Boccieri
Boren
Boucher
Boyd
Bright
Chandler
Childers
Artur Davis
Lincoln Davis
Chet Edwards
Gordon
Griffith
Herseth-sandlin
Holden
Kissell
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Betsy Markey
Marshall
Massa
Matheson
McIntyre
McMahon
Melancon
Minnick
Scott Murphy
Nye
Peterson
Ross
Shuler
Skelton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague

Further, five Democratic Senators voted nay as well.

As to the “regulation” of our corporations, whether in the oil or financial industries, well, pie int he sky doesn’t feed anyone either.

DIFFERING OPINIONS

You got the above part right, BO.

Here’s the rest where you have the rest Dead Wrong.

BO: Remember that his first major actions were to give the banksters carte blanche capitalization, realization of their expected profits, immunity from investigation,

They did not have Carte Blanche, since there were placed on the BoD government representatives watching over operations (Yes, yes, all those “watch-dogs” were co-opted … or some other silly nonsense that you may wish to cook-up to suite your purposes of warped propaganda).

There is NO IMMUNITY from investigation – you are simply purporting a reality that existed from the previous administration. That message was significantly underlined in the video.

Yes, the banks went on to make profits. So what? The objective was that they not fail and thus stop the Credit Mechanism that is the prime generator of the propensity to consume in America.

shrank the size of the industry (through mergers and acquisitions giving the remaining companies more economic and therefore political power) and codifying too big to fail. 

More bullshit. This phenomenon has been happening since long before Obama took office.

It became an American religious belief in business that “bigger was better” and successive administrations let it happen. Even Clinton’s.

He followed that up with “Health Care Reform” that more deeply ingrained the Insurance and Pharmaceutical cartels into the health care system, delivering more “customers” and leaving them in complete control of costs.

The Health Care legislation is imperfect. Very imperfect.

What would have made it perfect is a Public Option – but that was blocked by the intransigence of the Republicans who threatened to filibuster the bill to death in the Senate (where they had ruined the Dem’s SuperMajority by just one vote – given them by the election of Roberts in Massachusetts to replace Ted Kennedy’s seat.

Ted probably rolled over in his grave when he saw what happened – he was a prime promoter of a Public Health Option in America.

So, Obama concentrated on pressing the pharmaceuticals to cut costs. What is the harm in that? Especially given the fact that placing them under tutelage by enforcing a pharmaceutical pricing mandate (which a true Public Option would have done) was not possible.

In order to reach a “deal” with Congress to fulfill its Constitutional duty, he converted the Bush tax cuts to the Obama tax cuts and readily put the social safety net on the chopping block, while protecting the Pentagon and Corporate welfare budgets.

Who else should he “deal” with? You?

Lead-head had served Obama (on a platter) the worst recession in 80 years. So, at the time Fiscal Stimulus spending was called for as remedial action. Any tax hike could have cut consumption and that was not at all any solution. So, Obama let them continue and they helped keep unemployment down to 9% - instead of escalating to the 20 percent levels of the Depression Era.

The Pentagon Budget is on the chopping block … you just haven’t noticed.

MY POINT

You’ve got it all wrong, wrong, wrong.

Try harder. If you want to shill for the Replicants, you’d better get your facts right.

SMELLS TO HIGH HEAVAN

Both major parties are hopelessly corrupt.

Ignorant nonsense by the ignorant, for the ignorant.

The political system is corrupted but the parties remain in the hands of those citizens who constitute them. (Iow, get off your duff and militate instead of bitching-in-a-blog. Or is that too difficult?)

Such brash commentary as that cited above serves no purpose whatsoever except mudslinging. Let’s light one candle rather than curse the darkness.

Any candles out there? Or does the Mindless Negativism own the political blogs of America? Such catharsis simply deepens the deep, Deep Doodoo and smells to high heaven.

It keeps becoming reiterated, even by the lamestream media:

We have now had two consecutive, radically ineffectual presidents.

Both major parties are hopelessly corrupt.

The government is doing all it can.  Rather like a canoe trying to save everyone on the Titanic.

The government has been reduced to a radically inadequate vehicle for managing American politics.  The government is owned and operated by the world’s worst criminal element.

When the Justice Department guy says “I get it”, at the end, that he finds excessive risk-taking “troubling”, and greed “upsetting”, then proceeds to lecture us about “emotional reactions”, yet can’t bring himself to speak about widely reported fraud and criminal behavior…

A few things to keep in mind.  Just a few months ago, 60 Minutes was running stories about the usury corporate tax rates in the U.S. and Tea Bagger slanted horror stories about the National Debt, the conclusion of those stories were to lower taxes on the “job creators” and austerity for the little people.  Corporate
media is merely putting a moistened finger in the air and running stories to boost ratings to increase advertising revenue.  The appearance of the story is an indication of what people are paying attention to, and not the Fourth Estate actually living up to a societal obligation.  If one of the “parties” were to say the
Earth is flat the headline would be, “Views Differ on Planet’s Shape”.

As for investigations into who, or what, was responsible for the looting, Holder really wanted to begin investigations into Wall Street, and the war/domestic crimes of the Bush Administration.  Unfortunately his boss had other ideas. Post election, President Elect Obama began to backpedal on Candidate Obama’s
promise of a return to the rule of law with his nonsense about “looking ahead instead of backwards”.  Remember that his first major actions were to give the banksters carte blanche capitalization, realization of their expected profits, immunity from investigation, shrank the size of the industry (through mergers and acquisitions giving the remaining companies more economic and therefore political power) and codifying too big to fail.  He followed that up with “Health Care Reform” that more deeply ingrained the Insurance and Pharmaceutical cartels into the health care system, delivering more “customers” and leaving
them in complete control of costs.  Following that, he came to an agreement with BP that allowed them do use an unapproved dispersant in an untested way to make the oil, and thus the problem, “disappear” ,in exchange for a fine that
includes a PR campaign for BP, (have you noticed the spots featuring happy Gulf Coast tourism people?).  In order to reach a “deal” with Congress to fulfill its Constitutional duty, he converted the Bush tax cuts to the Obama tax cuts and
readily put the social safety net on the chopping block, while protecting the Pentagon and Corporate welfare budgets.

It seems folly to expect a politician with that kind of record to go after his benefactors, as he has already raised more “contributions” from them than the combined totals of his Republican opponents.

Albion, thanks for the respect, much appreciated and back at you. 

Today in Osawatomie, Kansas, our President is giving a speech where in 1910 Theodore Roosevelt called for a New Nationalism.
I’ll humbly defer to TR (with an assist from Abraham Lincoln) give some perspective:

ON LABOR, CAPITAL and CLASS ENVY:

In the 1910 New Nationalism speech, TR quotes Lincoln’s 1861 address to congress:

“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”

If that remark was original with me (TR speaking now), I should be even more strongly denounced as a Communist agitator than I shall be anyhow. It is Lincoln’s. I am only quoting it; and that is one side; that is the side the capitalist should hear. Now, let the working man hear his side.

“Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights…. Nor should this lead to a war upon the owners of property. Property is the fruit of labor; . . . property is desirable; is a positive good in the world.”

And then comes a thoroughly Lincolnlike sentence:

“Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another, but let him work diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built.”

It’s not merely a refusal to prosecute, it’s a refusal to even investigate. With the DoJ refusing to even open any investigations or even engage in any discovery, there’s no way to prosecute. They are falling all over themselves to avoid any discovery by rushing to settlements that let the banks off the hook with a pittance. And then pressuring the States Attourneys to sign on. The rot goes all the way to the top.

So the Justice Department hasn’t been able to make a single case against any of the thousands of criminal co-conspirators on Wall Street…but they are now able to take on the medical marijuana movement in California by use of the IRS code and denying businesses the ability to deduct their legitimate costs of business because marijuana is illegal under federal law and you can’t use the tax code deductions when you’re engaged in illegal activity…albeit legal in California.

Isn’t it fabulous that the Justice Department has such creative prosecutors when it comes to the activities in which they don’t look to reap political capital?  Obama is raising $1 billion for his (apparently) unopposed run for the nomination and reelection.

Prosecute the previous administration for war crimes?  Not enough evidence…though Bush and Chaney appear on television, bragging about the corpus of their crimes.

Prosecute BP?

Investigate the $7.7 trillion that the Fed gave banks at no interest, to lend the the USG and earn interest?  Even address the issue?

No, no and no. 

The decision to prosecute is discretionary; it is a political one, and the Obama administration is a hands-off our contributors kind of gang.  They are aiding and abetting the felonious one percent.

If you believe the Holder Justice Department, you’re one naive fool.

Oddsox,

With respect, I fail to see how substituting “self-interest” for “greed” changes the essential nature of capitalism or how it is practiced. I see no benefit in substituting a polite euphemism for a cold reality. In my view, the time is long past due for us to absolve ourselves of any lingering naivete concerning an economic system which places greed (or “self-interest”) above concern for the common weal. Far from “evening the score”, I don’t see how stringent regulation of a system that has proven - time after time after time - incapable of governing itself, or of learning from past failures, isn’t a moral, economic, and democratic imperative?

Albion, you emphasize “unfettered” capitalism as a source of our troubles.

And, of course, the TrustBusting of 100 years ago wasn’t initiated by the Rothchilds and Rockefellers themselves—so we agree on a need for regulation & oversight.

But over-regulation is as problematic as none at all.
Regulation is a means to the end of insuring fair competition in the marketplace. 
Leveling the field, not evening the score.

—

“Greed” is, by definition, a sinful excess.
“Self interest” is, IMHO, a virtue.
The freedom to act in one’s own perceived self interest (not “greed”) is also a basic tenet of Free Market Capitalism.

If you and ardee would substitute “self interest” for “greed” we could find some common ground.

ardee, you cite history in our discussion of the nature of Capitalism.
 
Perhaps you’re referring to the big trusts of 100 years ago (oil, railroad, cattle, tobacco, others)

But these were broken up using Anti-Trust action in order to foster increased competition, and we went forward from there.
Increased competition is the cure today as well—and fair competition is a basic tenet of Free Market Capitalism.

more…

The real answer to the question of
why there have been no serious
criminal prosecutions Steve Kroft
did not pursue. The answer is
simple and obvious: comprehensive
systemic corruption from the
president on down.

wish TruthDig allowed for self-editing —I erred when writing:

“We can’t regulate human nature.”
Of course, we can, and do.

“We can’t extinguish human nature.”

Lafayette,

You will notice I referred specifically to “unfettered” capitalism, whose company we’ve had the pleasure of enjoying, to an ever greater degree, since the 1980s. I won’t argue that, with strict oversight and very harsh penalties for the worst of its practitioners (they once hanged speculators, you know), capitalism could remain a viable tool for social prosperity. Unfortunately, at its core, capitalism is the idolatry of human greed; it is, as a great many philosopers and social theorists have shown us, the worship of death. In its purest form, capitalism IS fascism, an ideology and social order widely recognized (even here) as inherently self-destructive. It is also well-documented that capitalism is incapable of learning from its own failures, a weakness which has everything to do with its guiding “principle”: unrepentent greed. Once we recognize this, we are left with two options. In the first, we reduce capitalism forevermore to an economic tool, a useful metaphor for the darker side of out nature, but one that provides us with an important understanding of market forces. We use this understanding to regulate our tool in the strictest possible sense, and all “entrepreneurial enterprises” must clearly prove to regulators that the “product” or “service” they propose to sell is of actual value to the community it proposes to profit from. Deviations from this acceptable path would result in automatic revocation of business charters, with particularly egregious cases being prosecuted publicly and expediently. Our second option would be to abandon capitalism entirely, to relegate it - as I previously suggested - to the dustbin of history. There are other economic models and ways of being in the world that are not predicated on the lionization of greed and its attendant, subconscious worship of entropy and death.

“The elimination of all competition” is NOT a given of our Capitalist culture—it’s where the brakes are broken, harkening again to Lafayette’s metaphor.

The history of our nations business practices refutes your opinion, and rather glaringly.

ON GREED & COMPETITION:

“...greed seems inherent in the latter stages of Capitalism…given the goal of our capitalist culture; the elimination of all competition and the endless need for more and more profit.”
—ardee

Just as greed (or, politely put, insatiability) is a human condition, so is the need to compete.

“The elimination of all competition” is NOT a given of our Capitalist culture—it’s where the brakes are broken, harkening again to Lafayette’s metaphor.

Satisfy the human need to compete (by re-establishing and maintaining fair competition in the marketplace) and the Capitalist car carries us safely down the road.

That’s why I keep beating the drum for breaking up the big banks and taking the “cronies” out of Crony Capitalism.

ON GREED & CAPITALISM:

“Capitalism is a mechanism. Greed is a human attribute.”
—Lafayette

Yes, exactly.
And we can regulate a mechanism (fix the brakes, using your metaphor).

But we can’t regulate human nature. 
It’s just a given.
Fortunately, it’s not greed that produces wealth in a capitalist system.

Thomas Sowell (the real one, not the imposter whose fake OWS article is circulating through email chains lately) explained it well:
“I could become so greedy that I wanted a fortune twice the size of Bill Gates’—but this greed would not increase my income by one cent.”

Lafayette’s studied comments are, to me, indicative of a real problem, one that stands in the way of any hope to stop the creeping fascism that overtakes this nation and this world.

This worthy poster is, in my opinion. locked into the status quo, seeking answers within a corrupt and corrupting system. He notes; Capitalism is a mechanism. Greed is a human attribute. and I concur. However, greed seems inherent in the latter stages of Capitalism one might surmise, given the goal of our capitalist culture; the elimination of all competition and the endless need for more and more profit. Certainly humans run all human endeavors, yet systems with inherent flaws cannot be held blameless.

Lafayette decries the dearth of “whistle blowers” when the investigative process includes subpoena powers and the very real possibility of unearthing evidence without simply waiting for it to be hand delivered, perhaps with a nice bow.

No, the real problem is , in fact, the system and its corruption by the corporations and the politicians who are the sole property of these entities. One might await some selfless citizen’s conscience in order to bring justice to bear, or one might recognize the need to alter the status quo that will never, ever address the evils that money and the undue power of the few has wrought on our governance.

WHY, WHY, WHY?

ks: Stay tuned!

Let’s hope so. I am grateful to TG for putting up this video well worth watching. (Can’t get the show where I am in France.)

For some time now, I have wondered out loud why there were no prosecutions of the Truth In Lending Act of 1968 related to the SubPrime Mess. Sarbanes-Oxley is an immensely complicated piece legislation and it was comforting to see the experts on S-O giving their opinion of the possibility of prosecution in the matter.

It is senseless for a DA or the DofJ to go up against a well-known company in what will be a cornerstone-case that could lead to other prosecutions ... if only to lose it. So, the evidence must be both solid and repetitious - so as to discount any disculpation for “lack of evidence of a criminal offense”.

This is not the first time that Financial Fraud & Negligence rears its ugly head. Both Keating and Milliken did time for their misconduct. So did some people at Enron.

So why, some might ask, does the malfeasance at the Top continue? Well, crime in general never sleeps. But this case is so shockingly outsized given the real consequences to the American public.

Why, I ask, therefore, was it not preventable by more assiduous auditing of market activities? Why, as the DofJ official in the video indicates, is his office waiting for someone to blow the whistle for an offense that a number of well-conducted audits of a company business would have overcome?

Why, why, why? Because if we can assume that laws must be in place to prosecute crimes, then must we also assume that effective Market Oversight depends upon the good will of whistle-blowers? That is simply not acceptable – being reactive and not proactive.

MY POINT

The government oversight agencies can do better and they MUST do better. Let’s hope,  furthermore, that the new Consumer Protection Agency gets some real teeth and the nation can be assured that it is wide-awake and not slumbering like other government agencies.

POST SCRIPTUM

Yes, some say there is a lack of the talent necessary to investigate such cases. And the response is: C’mon, with unemployment at 9% we cannot find some new talent that wants to earn their spurs? (At 100K per person, how much would 1000 newly hired investigative-lawyers add to the DofJ budget?)

And instead of using the DC “revolving door” (to improve greatly their salaries) make a career of investigative work on behalf of American Justice?

An ounce of prevention is worth a ton of cure.

Stay tuned!

BAD LOGIC

It is past time we recognized that unfettered capitalism is a moral and spiritual blight that should be consigned to the dustbin of history; we must evolve past the destructive worship of greed and selfish individualism to recognize that true prosperity is the product of healthy communities

Interesting comments, but what does the latter (greed) have to do with former (capitalism).

Capitalism is a mechanism. Greed is a human attribute.

Why blame the mechanism when humans are at fault? A car can have bad brakes causing much damage - but is that the car’s fault?

Or the driver’s?

NB: Marx made exactly the same mistake you have with your logic.

And let’s not forget that according to the 2010 census, 100 million Americans are poor or near poor. One in three.

“What improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconveniency to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable.” Adam Smith, The Wealth Of Nations

Why is Eric Holder still out of jail?

Lets hope these new protesters grow to be tomorrows prosecutors and remember what brought them here.

Soon to retire, my daily concerns are more aligned with keeping my men employed, buying American and writing my congresscritters every chance I get at http://www.congress.org, other than that I vote out the lizards every chance I get albeit on the paperless voting machines that my 12 year old son can hack.

The time of peaceful revolution may be comming to an end.

as Marx noted: the ruling ideas are the ideas of the ruling class. The working claas—aka the 99%—has a whole different notion of reality than the justice dept (AKA—an arm of wall stereet).

Get a rope!

ssg16535—don’t be a dope.  You think a team of
television journalists is going to spend 9 months on an
investigation by robbing their children’s piggy banks that
they stuffed from their paper routes?  Of course there are
commercials, you maroon.  Your inability to sit through
them indicates an essential non-interest in the issues and
a preoccupation with your own convenience.

Shit costs money, dude.

@debt&taxes;:
Yes, I heard the aforementioned Raines assert housing assets were worthy of being capitalized at less than 2% (a 50-1+ leverage ratio). 
No jailtime for his book-cooking at Fannie Mae, but he did have to return a fraction of the bonus money he and his cronies pilfered.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/19/business/19fannie.html?ref=franklindraines

2 more points:
1) Investigate the GSEs. 
I’m fine with enforcing Sarbanes-Oxley, but wish more attention would be paid to wrongdoing at Fannie & Freddie (GSEs). 
If a brighter light were shined here, I’d wager we’d be albe to expose and hold to task Raines, James A. Johnson and a few congressmen and senators: Dodd (Countrywide) & Waters (OneUnited Bank) for sure.  Perhaps Barney Frank, and others?

2) An Ounce of Prevention.
Even if every corrupt CEO, lobbyist and politician is brought to justice, the “Too-Big-To-Fails” mustn’t be allowed to hold us over a TARP barrel again.
That’s why we need to enforce anti-trust legislation and break up the big banks.
http://open.salon.com/blog/oddsox/2011/10/10/too_big_to_fail_too_big_to_begin_with

@gerard,
Let us hope for the former and not the latter.

Better late than never.

@prsnersdilema,
An eloquent appraisal of the malaise we face. It is past time we recognized that unfettered capitalism is a moral and spiritual blight that should be consigned to the dustbin of history; we must evolve past the destructive worship of greed and selfish individualism to recognize that true prosperity is the product of healthy communities informed by empathic minds. Sadly, our evolutionary window is constrained by the catastrophic ruin we visit upon the planet and time is running short.

thank you, steve croft…very good stuff.  i hope the
Department of Justice and the Obama Administration will
have their feet held to the fire over this exposure of bankster fraud.

Important to note Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac are excluded from posting collateral on their derivatives transactions. 

This creates a huge disclosure loophole for them, and protects people like past Fannie Mae President Franklin Raines from prosecution.

Thiose that rule us have no honor. And so we have become a nation that no longer is
governed by the rule of law.  Congress no longer functions to protect and defend the
consittuion, but instead is doing it’s best to unravel our rights in the name of protecting
us from, the enemies of the plutocracy.

The comic antics of the moneyed elite continue to destroy the world economy, while
they look for a solution to the mess they created. None of their solutions will succeed,
because they and their larcenies are the basis of what’s wrong with the markets. And as
long as they are in charge there can be no solutions.

Men without honor such as they are, cannot overcome themselves. To do that requires
something they don’t have inside.

Their money has become just another lie, without meaning and without value. Empty
words and false promises cannot a nation make.

Even though I’ve followed this story pretty closely, it is still jaw-dropping to hear that not a single person from a large financial institution has been prosecuted for a crime stemming from the systemic securities fraud that produced the financial crisis. How can anyone hear this fact and not conclude that we live in a corrupt plutocracy?

Sounds like it could have been an interesting story, but I got more commercials than story. I quit after the first commercial after the teaser. Can someone create a clean copy of the video that is actually watchable?

Go get ‘em, Steve.

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/illicit-but-ill-defined/

Good job 60 minutes. 

Once upon a time the fourth estate acted as the watchdog for the public until the corporations were allowed to buy everything including the competition.

This sort of “business practice” is endemic to our financial community and not confined to one or two corporations. The fact that Obama’s administration is filled with former members of this community lends the cachet of legality to what is basically a bunch of crooks.

The American people are going to have to stand up and decide whether this is the kind of society we want to leave to our children.