'We Are Trying On Every Front To Increase The Role Of Government'

Photo of Mark Finkelstein.
  • Bookmark and Share

Give Ed Schultz credit for something: on his MSNBC show this evening, he hosted an amusing smackdown between Barney Frank and Ralph Nader, perhaps the two most morose public men in America.  For once, Barney was attacked from the left.  The gist of Ralph's rebuke was that Frank hasn't gone far enough in regulating the financial industry.

Frank was finally so provoked that he claimed/admitted that when it comes to regulation, Democrats are "trying on every front to increase the role of government."

Along the way, Barney resorted to his tried-and-true technique of hitting his host for having the temerity to cut short one of his long-winded harangues.

Watch and enjoy as Messrs. Sweetness and Light go after each other.

PS: don't miss the video of Barney blasting Nader with this choice insult: "Ralph gets to luxuriate in the purity of his irrelevance."  Ouch.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Refreshing

When a liberal doesn't lie about his intentions.

I know how Barney always

I know how Barney always whines on every show he is on about the talking head cutting him off like a five year old, when all he really wants to do is filibuster ...as usual.

Sad part or not so sad.. depending on how you look at it you can only understand half of what he is saying most of the time anyway..if you're not laughing by that time as it is.

What hit the spot with me is the 'Sweetness and Light' reference you made Mark...that is rich.

I'll have to watch the video later if I can stand it.

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

BT: I've edited it down to a

BT: I've edited it down to a pithy 1:25.  Check it out: definitely chuckle-worthy.

BT - edit

So I was gonna double down on bts' comment about liking Marks' comment about the Romper Room Rowdy  vs. the Nadir of Nader, cause the comment on the "messy-sewer" (and the Undertaker) was funny, but I skipped down to Tugboats shot across Barneys broad bow about what was said versus what he heard, and

Dammit , Tugger, give us a warning.

I think I hurt myself.

MD

"I may not agree with what your bumper sticker says, but I'll defend to the death your right to stick it." (Unknown)

Mark... Chuckle-worthy

Mark...

Chuckle-worthy indeed...I'm still grinning.

I had to wait awhile before I thought I could handle it with humor.

What would be even funnier is if you sped it up like Rush did awhile back when Obama/Pelosi/Reid or others droned on and on.

Now that is priceless.

Come on 2010!

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

I was surfing the channels

yesterday when this interview was going on. The first image on my screen was fwanks giant, open maw. I immediately flipped to the next channel but the damage was done. The image of that head back, mouth open to a large O was seared into my brain. I have tried everything to get that picture of that nightmarish head out of my head. Even Spongebob Squarepants. I am so glad NB prints the interview. I don't know what I would do if I had the voice as well as the face.

I think I will watch a Reagan speech and be cleansed.

Please get your quotes correct!

You printed:  Frank was finally so provoked that he claimed/admitted that when it comes to regulation, Democrats are "trying on every front to increase the role of government."

I've played that over and over and Frank distinctly says, "Democwats are twying on evewy fwont to incwease the wole of govewment."

All I ask is that you be accurate.

 

Gun Control - The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

→ Thank you Tugboat

That's exactly what I heard also.

BTW, you're not related to "Tugboat Annie" are you? 

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

The end of Barney F-wank jokes

I was going to comment that your quote seemed a bit odd or queer but with the new mind control laws, will have to refrain and just call it perverted. Is his roommate who runs Fanny the same one who was selling Fanny from Barny's basement or a new roommate? Did he ever divorce the old one or is he living in sin?

Q the Banking Queen parody

Q the Banking Queen parody

Well - duh...

Conservatives have been warning people that this is what Liberals want to do for decades.  And for decades, liberals have been denying it.

For once, Frankie-boy was stung into being HONEST.   You heard it folks - this is what he and all his cohorts on the left are fighting to do.  Make government, bigger, more intrusive, more tyrannical - with liberal socialist/fascist totalitarians ruling the roost forever.

Clean house in 2010!!

WOW! Who could

WOW! Who could tell!!

Facts are like kryptonite to the liberal.

I'm not a Bush fan but..

The person that screwed up Katrina were the Governor's.  They have state juridiction.  Which is why they call them Governor's.  The most deadly of which was a DEMOCRATIC Governor of Louisiana with a DEMOCRATIC Mayor of New Orleans.

There is jack and sh|t in the US Constitution stating that the Federal government takes care of the States during a fictional or factual crisis ala natural disaster.

As for the rest, Barney Frank is the epitome of corrupt statism.  Few know about his boyfriend Director at Freddie/Fannie.  Few know that he's keeping the Community Reinvestment Act alive through Freddie and Fannie.  They are still handing out money at the tax payers expense.

Nothing has been fixed.  Carter and Clinton's laws are still in place.  But I think we all know it's too late.  We now owe $106,000,000,000,000.00.  The GDP of planet Earth for the next 10 years could not cover that debt.  Buy food, gold, and guns ladies.  Last one out get the lights.

 

Thoreau you're on point but missing the big picture

good point about our debts. this country is screwed with its unfunded entitlements. but the CRA is the smallest fraction of that problem and isn't even considered in our major debt because it's a non factor. 

social security, medicare, medicare part D are the things that are and have drowned this country into a debt and can never pay back.

this isn't a democrat republican problem - its a US Government problem. both parties. don't let the media divide and conquer. "democrats did this" "republicans did that"  they have both screwed us and all of them, (save a handful of people who get it) should be kicked right out.

Fingers

Everytime I see an interview with Frank he is ALWAYS picking at his fingernails and complaining that he never gets a chance to respond.  Hey Barney, go see a manicurist and whine to her.

From the psycho-sexual

From the psycho-sexual theory of Freud, it starts at infancy. The site of  gratification is the mouth and the main activities are sucking, biting, and swallowing. If, as an infant, you had been overgratified, you can develope a fixation [failure to move on to the next stage of development] usually involving activities of the mouth, like drinking alcohol, gum chewing, gossipping, smoking, nail biting. These activieties [and many others not listed] satisfy the need for oral gratification. Barney Frank, may not have been biting or sucking his nails or fingers on camera for obvious reasons... but the constant playing with digits is a social substitution which still gives oral gratification to some extent. Most adults who exibit this sort of behavior are known to be insecure.... but no worries! I'm certain that once Frank is off camera... the sucking, biting, and swallowing commences.

Hope that helps!  ;~)

 

 

We retort, you decide!

 

 

 

 

 

THE BANKING QUEEN...

 Barney Frank is truely one of the most hateable people of all time in Congress. He is a corrupt statist as was pointed out ealier, & when called out, he projects against the person pointing it out. He is never happy, he can't take a compliment without fighting about it. He sucks, & so do those who vote for this idiot. 

The people of MA really need to examine why they vote for the likes of Frank, Kerry, & Kennedy election after election after elelction...they are damaging the nation greatly by doing so. Sad to see a state that was central to this nations founding has strayed way off the path & no longer understands the constitution that has made the USA what it is. That could be said about the northeast as a whole.

 

"...How blind can you be, don't you see...

...that the gambler lost all he does not have..."  

Nightwish

barney boy

Holeinthehull

From what I have heard about his personal life- you are right- "he does suck"

Holeinthehull Ralph gets

Holeinthehull

Ralph gets to luxuriate in the purity of his irrelevance, now that is rich coming from Twinky Frank.  He will see and experience irrelevance like never before in 2010 when he is pushed to the back benches of the House.  I hope he will have to ask permission from the Right to go to the "little boys" room, and then will be told to shut up, sit down, and listen and go at the end of the session!

holeinthehull.com 

don't like his politics BUT...

i don't much care for his politics but nader did a lot for the average consumer back in the 80's that he should be respected for. 

if you ever get in a bad car accident and survive you should thank nader. Consumer safety was his big thing back in the 80's. telling these companies that they have to make a safe product.

I'm pro saving american lives not letting are country bring in toxic products from china and else where. nader fought that fight, and for that i'm grateful.

but i guess since his politics are liberal he deserves scorneven though he devoted so much of his life to protecting americans and their children.  

Nader-politics

If Naders' accomplishments in the field of consumer safety saved anyone who then reached majority and voted as a Liberal Dem, thereby putting the current administration in power, I owe Nader nothing BUT scorn.

MD

"I may not agree with what your bumper sticker says, but I will defend to the death your right to stick it." (Unknown) 

Congress doesn't care about the Constitution!

They have and are daily breaking their oaths to "Protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and domestic".

This exchange with Speaker Pelosi on Thursday occurred as follows:
 
CNSNews.com: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”
 
Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”
 
CNSNews.com: “Yes, yes I am.”
 
Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told CNSNews.com that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a "serious question."

Pelosi should be impeached or recalled based on that one answer in my opinion.

Throw 'da bums out!!!

Before it's too late. 

www.loyaltoliberty.com

→ The Public Auction

Having sold our sovereignty at yard sale prices in exchange for earlier deaths and lesser quality lives, the remaining are forced to grovel at the feet of their Chinese masters.

The Obama Award will be given annually to that citizen who best epitomizes the "Service". 

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

           Barney

           Barney Frank. What a load of garbage this guy is. The number one reason we are in this mess is Barney Frank. If this freak opens his mouth, you can bet he's lying. Nader is irrelevent. Barney Frank lied to Congress & to the American citizens. Anyone who votes for this piece of trash is throwing away their vote to a corrupt degenerate.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

NEWSBUSTERS

Why mislead people?

he said they're trying to increase the roll of government in the the financial regulatory market. that headline doesn't tell people that they're talking about the banking industry. 

every economists (and i know many) thats not an ideologue says that lax regulation in the insane derivatives market as well as other securities markets caused this mess we're in now. these wall st guys and these big banks should never have been allowed to do what they did with our money then get BAILED OUT BY US!!! 

how can anyone here argue regulation? unless you're bought and paid for by the big banks.  the big banks think they should be able to do whatever they want to make a quick buck even if that means leveraging themselves 50/1 on toxic assets.

why are people on the side of the big banks? they can't defend themselves with their billion dollar salaries and their hundreds of millions in lobbying?  i wish i could buy my congressman to get him to do whatever i wanted. but then i'd be a scum bag and part of the problem like the banking lobby is. 

 

support the billionaires  seems to be the mantra of people who oppose any regulation. 

 

~SAJC05

What part of "On every front" is incomprehensible to you?

→ Thanks cl3x

I'm just waiting for him to tell us how many Credit Unions went down.

Oh, I remember!  The Government wasn't forcing Credit Unions to take on NINJA loans to stroke ACORN.

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

choselife3x

what part of  "every front of the regulatory area" don't you understand? 

cover your ears, go "la la la la la" blame everything on the democrats and nothing will ever get done.  pretend our economic woes began january 20th of 09 if it makes you feel better

→ sajc05

By all means, continue to read and hear things contrary to the way they are stated.

Lather, rinse, repeat. 

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

Cool Arrrow

I see the problem here. you didn't watch the video... thats not your fault. maybe you can't watch the video where you are. 

when you see increase government red flags appear in your head "socialism"  "fascism"  all those clever well thought out words.  they might be true too. but whats he's arguing in THIS video is increased regulation in the financial sector. 

Support the billionaires - oppose regulation 

→ Silly me

NO!!!  I must have been thinking of another Barney Frank, whose bailywick is the tomato growing concerns.

jacko5, it was the same Barney Frank, object of your lust, who proclaimed Freddie and Fannie were sound before the crash.

And don't tell me it was Freddie Mercury and his fannie he was talking about.  Freddie was already dead. 

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

so you oppose regulation in

so you oppose regulation in the derivatives market? you think credit default swaps are just dandy and should remain unregulated? 

you obviously have a one sided view of why the system crashed. keep on blaming the poor people and CRA. go back to sleep. 

→ One sided?

Not at all.  Unforgiving? Maybe.

You're talking to somebody who once lost a house becasue he signed up for more than he could afford.

How about you send me some bailout money?  The Government d@mned sure didn't give me any.  And I didn't ask for it either.

Never mind.  I don't need your money.  I have the last 20 years learned from that lesson and am better for it. 

Pity the poor, but don't pity the intentionally ignorant.  We knew there was no free lunch, we just didn't calculate the size of the check when the waiter brought it over.

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

~sacj05

I don't blame everything on the Democrats, I blame everything on the politicians. The government expanded more under Bush than it did under Clinton, his "Republican" status doesn't mitigate that.

I believe that McCain would have governed in much the same manner that Obama is. 

If you want to see Barney Frank scoffing at regulatory reform for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, watch this video and listen carefully to the lithping at the 1:37 minute mark.

I like what you just said

I like what you just said there. and it's what i've been trying to say for a while.  obama is no good but either was bush. some people here seem to think bush was awesome. 

no, barney is a politician, you can't believe what he says. he talks out both sides of his mouth.

he opposed regulation as did every politician that was bought and paid for by the banking lobby.

but I agree with anyone who is trying to regulate now, whether it's a 180 from where they were before.  

 

SAJ

Where was frank when Bush II was saying we needed more regulation in the banking industry? Oh, yeah, he was busy voting AGAINST it.

"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest

first of all the poor don't

first of all the poor don't even have enough capital to ruin our financial system. so to blame the CRA and poor people on our problems is close to insane when the FBI even said that foreclosures from cra totaled 10 % of all the trouble in the housing market. are you forgetting the "home flippers" all the strip malls we built that never got tenants?  

did the CRA mandate that all the big banks leverage their assets 50/1 sometimes 100/1 on risky ventures? i guess i missed that part 

 

Bush along with rush and hannity used to brag on how black home ownership rose during his presidency. bush and obama say a lot of things... don't believe them.  

→ 05

OK, so you don't think there really was a mortgage meltdown.  You're entitled to your opinion, however silly it may be.

But if you've got the cash, I'll bet I could direct you to some absolute steals in California and Florida.  Probably people walked away from them because they were moving up in the world and didn't want to bother with selling them, huh? 

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

there was a mortgage

there was a mortgage meltdown. what i'm simply stating is that lending money to people who were not credit worthy is not the reason we're here today. 

the fed created the housing bubble on its on. it made money free by keeping interest rates lower than they should be.  If the banks were not allowed to become "too big to fail" then the individual banks that made these loans would have fell NOT the entire system. 

→ OK

And the Federal government was guaranteeing all those bad loans as well as the bundling thereof.

I'm not a big fan of the FED, but I'll guarantee you, if every homeowner were still making those payments they committed to, there wouldn't have been a meltdown. 

And if Americans hadn't been so quick to use their appreciation equity as an ATM card, they wouldn't have been so quick to walk away from structures in which they no longer had equity.

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

Perhaps you were not with us

When all of this was being discussed. The ovewhelming majority on these boards were against the stumulus, and willing to let the banks that made bad loans fail.

I don't see what you are railing against here.

"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest

I'm railing against people

I'm railing against people who seem to think there is something wrong with regulation in this industry when it has been proven that no lax regulation is a very, very bad thing. 

→ No you're not

You're railing against banks who were browbeaten from Jimmy Carter's CRA to the present into giving loans they knew were risky.  Now you're asking for regulation to undo the previous regulation.

What's next?  Re-re-regulation?

Gangs like ACORN, and the blubbebutts that feed them are the problem.  If they force banks to give loans to losers, they have to give the same opportunities to people of more means as well. 

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

Cool Arrow

you're lost. 

as i said. most non partisans know that ACORN, while a corrupt group that deserved to be shut down had little effect on our current problems.

THERE WAS NO REGULATION, get it through your head.  the derivatives market along with credit default swaps was 40 trillion dollar, unregulated market. it was all risky gambles, like a casino, so the big banks can leverage 100/1 to try and make a quick buck. THIS is the biggest reason for the melt down. along with the repeal of glass-steagle which created "too big to fail" 

answer me this:

which member of ACORN  made the banks leverage their assets 100/1 on risky gambles? which part of the CRA states that the big banks can buy up all the small banks concentrating all the capital into a few places (thus too big to fail) and made them venture into credit default swaps??

can't wait to see how you blame poor people and acorn on this. 

→ No problem sajc05

I know it's silly of me to read the tea leaves contrarily to how you big thinkers do.  All I know is what seems to be working for me.

Maybe I'm just mad because Texans didn't fall for all this nonsense to the same extent as the rest of the country.

I still don't see property values dropping here, and therefore don't see any steals out there.

And I don't want to move to California or Florida.

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

Although we are infested...

...I'm with you, CA.

It would seem the insanity of the "left-coast" and the northeast has not made it's slithery way down to Texas - and thank God.

Yes, there are those who made very poor choices and are now paying the price, buy by and large the Texas economy is the strongest in the nation...I wonder why this is?

Anyone who would like to blame our current national economic mess on de-regulation, or lack of regulation singularly is viewing the world from a myopic prism and will never understan the "big picture".

It was in fact the CRA and it's Chicago "thugs" (read:Acorn et.al.) who caused the financial institutions to take unecessary risk and in an effort to hedge their bets, were forced into deeper risk in an effort to minimize the damage when the risky (unworthy) loans defaulted...btw - it wasn't those who could afford their loans who defaulted...hmm, I wonder who it was??

Seems the rants and raves from some who are grossly uninformed, ring hollow when taken out of context.

Just my 2 cents.

Um, in short--yes, the

Um, in short--yes, the government REQUIRED banks to make bad loans, in order to prop up racially categorized statistics.   In 2005 I was offered a mortgage where the payments represented 80% of my take-home pay.  Being smarter than the average bear (and not encouraged by ACORN), I turned it down, knowing it would wreck my financial situation down the road.  But thousands of people who couldn't afford the houses they bought did so because they were assured at every turn that the government would cover them.  Many bought property with no intention to ever make a payment, relying on ACORN and other poverty pimps to militate on their behalf. This huge demand caused the artificial inflation of real estate prices. (And the construction of strip malls that never got occupied.  Retail construction ALWAYS follows residential trends, not the other way around.)

To ignore the criminal malfeasance of the left, both legislative and "community based", in this part of history is to willfully support that malfeasance.  Income is not a prerequisite to criminal behavior.

"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me

Everything you said is true.

Everything you said is true. BUT is not why we're here with our economy. 

what part did the CRA and ACORN play in creating the complex and unregulated world of derivatives and credit default swaps? which member of ACORN told the banks that they had to leverage their assets 100/1 on these risky markets that are like casinos?

i know the answer. NONE 

sajc05:  Misleading? 

sajc05:  Misleading?  Please read the item [emphasis added]:

"he claimed/admitted that when it comes to regulation, Democrats are "trying on every front to increase the role of government."

right. it should read in the

right. it should read in the headline like that too. 

frank: increase government in all fronts of financial regulation.

which is a good thing, because as I said, economists that are not ideologues all agree that lax regulation on the banks and wall street let these guys gamble our money and leverage their assets 50/1 100/1 and because they were allowed to become "too big to fail" when they did fail they brought the whole system with them.

 

let's deal with facts; the derivatives market is a 20- 30 trillion dollar market that was unregulated. along with credit default swaps.

the CRA is pennies in comparison.  

i dislike the democrats as much as anyone here. but i'm not with republicans and there mantra of: it was all the poor peoples fault.

 

support the billionaires - oppose regulation  

→ Derivatives

I was first made aware of "Credit Default Swaps" right here at NB, when sarcasmo linked to this article in the NYT .

A little bit of reading was enough to convince me to remove my holdings until the dominoes started to fall.  I'll always be thankful to Sarcasmo, Glenn Beck, and (laugh if you want) Ron Paul,  for the heads up while others were laughing at the idea.

Notice the curve of the graph.  At the time, a market that had existed for only about 7 years was already at $45 Trillion.  Already bigger than the NYSE.

Saw it coming.  Prepared for it.  Wasn't rocket science.

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

good. you were smart. now

good. you were smart. now are you telling me that these markets should be allowed to go on again unregulated?

→ No

Those derivatives should never have existed.  They are legal documents written in intentionally convoluted fashion to mask their real worth.

Remind you of a 1500 page Health Care Bill floating around Congress lately? 

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

Nobody's claiming it "was

Nobody's claiming it "was all the poor people's fault".  The point is, it was the Democrats' (primarly Frank, Dodd et al) and the poverty pimps' fault.

Fact:  President Bush sent 34 separate memos to Congress warning them to look into regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. 

Fact:  Barney Frank led the charge to protect them from regulation, and he got support from Dodd, Obama, Kerry, and many others who were financially benefitting from the status quo.

To say that derivatives were the main problem is more than a trifle misleading, as the derivatives market relies on the underlying investments, and swings widely based on small moves of those investments.  So when the housing bubble burst, causing everyone from homeowners to investors to construction companies and their suppliers, etc. to come to a screeching halt, the impact on a wide range of investments was substantial, and the resulting impact on the derivatives market was monumental.  But to say that CRA's impact had little to do with it is dishonest.

"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me

No it doesn't the FBI itself

No it doesn't

the FBI itself said that poor people defaulting on loans made up about 10% of foreclosures.

When a bank is allowed to buy up all the small banks concentrating all the capital in one place then leveraging all its assets 100/1 in risky ventures had more of an impact on our financial system then some ACORN clown lobbying for a loan.

TOO BIG TO FAIL - is why we had to fork over all our money to these guys once their gambles didn't pay off. they should have never been allowed to become TOO big to fail. but then how could these guys make their billions then, right? 

One question...

...why were they forced to gamble?

Simple answer would be fine.

If you can't/won't connect it back to CRA / ACORN / FANNIE / FREDDIE; then you and your argument are disengenuous and will have said enough, for me anyway.

Re CDS

A big part of the CDS problem was the process by which credit ratings were assigned to them, as well as bundled mortgages. The creators of the CDS were paying the credit bureaus (Moody's, S&P, Fitch, others) to assign them ratings, a corrupted process. Had meaningful ratings been assigned, purchasers would have better understood their risk and the CDS would have been much less popular.

You can call that lack of regulation or lack of due diligence on the part of the creator, the buyer, or the credit agency, or all of the above.

He came close to getting it right.....

Democrats are "trying on every front to increase the RULE of government."

There...fixed it for him.

Obama is a liar and Truth is

killing his Marxist agenda.

"Along the way, Barney

"Along the way, Barney resorted to his tried-and-true technique of hitting his host for having the temerity to cut short one of his long-winded harangues."

If I'm not mistaken, you meant to say "twied-and-twue technique."

And Barney delivers "long-winded hawangues."

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.