A GOP Financial Reform Bellwether

Bit by bit, bipartisan negotiations in the Senate over financial regulatory reform have broken down. Richard Shelby, the ranking Republican on the Banking Committee split with the Democratic Chairman, Chris Dodd in February. Bob Corker filled the gap, stepping in to try to hammer out a compromise on an issue in which both parties see the potential for good policy and good politics. But wary of delays after a bitter health care fight, Democrats voted the bill out of committee in March with no Republican support, and now are looking to open up the legislation to amendments and debate on the Senate floor. As recently as last month, Republican leadership was open to a deal.

In a floor speech this morning, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell threw cold water on the prospects of detente, establishing a hard line of attack against the Dodd bill, and indelibly marking the party line: “We must not pass the financial reform bill that’s about to hit the floor.”

The crux of his criticism is that the bill “institutionalizes… taxpayer-funded bailouts of Wall Street banks.” He knocked the expansion of power at the Fed and Treasury, while sounding the alarm on Wall Street accountability.  If the outline of his speech sounds familiar, it’s because it is the exact argument pollster Frank Luntz urged Republicans to make earlier this year in a widely publicized memo. Compare the excerpts below (emphasis mine):

Luntz: “The single best way to kill any legislation is to link it to the Big Bank Bailout.”

McConnell: “We cannot allow endless taxpayer-funded bailouts for big Wall Street banks. And that’s why we must not pass the financial reform bill that’s about to hit the floor.”

Luntz: “Taxpayers should not be held responsible for the failure of big business any longer.  If a business is going to fail, not matter how big, let it fail.

McConnell: “[The Dodd bill] gives the government a new backdoor mechanism for propping up failing or failed institutions…. We won’t solve this problem until the biggest banks are allowed to fail.

Luntz: “Government policies caused the bubble and its ultimate crash. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Reserve, and the Community Reinvestment Act all had a role in the catastrophe. The government inflated economic bubbles with easy credit policies.”

McConnell: “It also directs the Fed to oversee 35 to 50 of the biggest firms, replicating on an even larger scale the same distortions that plagued the housing market and helped trigger a massive bubble we’ll be suffering from for years. If you thought Fannie and Freddie were dangerous, how about 35 to 50 of them?”

(See “Top 10 Financial Crisis Buzzwords.”)

Thus begins the wrestling match for the populist mantle, both sides claiming their party as the champion of Main Street. The Democrats’ response to McConnell (policy-wise) will be that the tax for a “bailout fund” is levied on financial institutions that pose a risk to the system, and that such a measure would help refund taxpayers for the original cost of TARP, as well as avoid the need for Americans to foot the bill in the future. Their political response will be basically the same as McConnell’s attack: to paint the opposition as protectors of Wall Street interests and the status quo.

Though McConnell has been masterful at holding his caucus unified against the Democrats’ major legislative agenda items so far, some observers predicted the anti-bank populism easily adopted by the Dems on this issue would make it difficult for the GOP to oppose legislation outright. Not so; the battle over financial regulation has just begun.

(See “Financial Reform: Far from a Done Deal in Congress.”)

Video and text of McConnell’s speech:

“A lot of smart people have thought about how to prevent a repeat of the kind of financial crisis we saw in the fall of 2008. We’ve heard plenty of ideas. But if there’s one thing Americans agree on when it comes to financial reform, it’s this: never again should taxpayers be expected to bail out Wall Street from its own mistakes. We cannot allow endless taxpayer-funded bailouts for big Wall Street banks. And that’s why we must not pass the financial reform bill that’s about to hit the floor. The fact is, this bill wouldn’t solve the problems that led to the financial crisis. It would make them worse.

“The American people have been telling us for nearly two years that any solution must do one thing — it must put an end to taxpayer funded bailouts for Wall Street banks. This bill not only allows for taxpayer-funded bailouts of Wall Street banks; it institutionalizes them.

“The bill gives the Federal Reserve enhanced emergency lending authority that is far too open to abuse. It also gives the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp and the Treasury Department broad authority over troubled financial institutions without requiring them to assume real responsibility for their mistakes. In other words, it gives the government a new backdoor mechanism for propping up failing or failed institutions.

“A new $50 billion fund would also be set up as a backstop for financial emergencies. But no one honestly thinks $50 billion would be enough to cover the kind of crises we’re talking about. During the last crisis, AIG alone received more than three times that from the taxpayers. Moreover, the mere existence of this fund will ensure that it gets used. And once it’s used up, taxpayers will be asked to cover the balance. This is precisely the wrong approach.

“Far from protecting consumers from Wall Street excess, this bill would provide endless protection for the biggest banks on Wall Street. It also directs the Fed to oversee 35 to 50 of the biggest firms, replicating on an even larger scale the same distortions that plagued the housing market and helped trigger a massive bubble we’ll be suffering from for years. If you thought Fannie and Freddie were dangerous, how about 35 to 50 of them?

“Everybody agrees on the need to protect taxpayers from being on the hook for future Wall Street bailouts. This bill would all but guarantee that the pattern continues. We need to end the worst abuses on Wall Street without forcing the taxpayer to pick up the tab. That’s what Republicans are fighting for in this debate. The taxpayers have paid a high enough price already. We’re not going to expose them to even more pain down the road.

“The way to solve this problem is to let the people who make the mistakes pay for them. We won’t solve this problem until the biggest banks are allowed to fail.”

(See “The Financial Crisis One Year After.”)

UPDATE: Here’s some clarity on what the bill actually does as far as “bailouts” go:

“Roadmaps” for shutting down banks: The bill would require large institutions to periodically submit plans for systematic shutdown to be used in the event of disaster. Higher capital requirements and restricted trading activities could be be used to punish companies that failed to submit adequate “funeral plans.” These plans are supposed to help oversight agencies understand the best way to start dismantling the institution and selling assets quickly in a dire scenario — it’s an information and transparency measure, not a structural change.

Liquidation: Under the Dodd bill, the FDIC would take charge of selling off pieces of large financial institutions that go bust, but the Treasury, Fed and a panel of bankruptcy judges would have to sign off on liquidating an insolvent firm before action could be taken. (The judges aren’t a part of the Frank bill.)

(See “Top Ten Bankruptcies.”)

“Bailout” fund: The biggest financial institutions pay into what is basically a bailout insurance fund, a $50 billion pool fed by a tax on the largest financial institutions that acts as a cushion between the cost of intervention and the taxpayer. (The fund is $150 billion in the Frank bill.) This money would be used to rescue or liquidate some firms in trouble, paying for taking bad assets off the books or the operational cost of busting down the company to spare parts. The FDIC can borrow more money from the Treasury to work with while it sells off assets, but only as much as they expect to be repaid in the end. If those funds get eaten through and the government lends institutions money out of its own pocket, the feds get to be first in line for repayment. Worth noting: Current estimates put total losses from TARP at a bit under $100 billion.

So back to the issue at hand. When McConnell talks about “the tax payer,” at least for the first $50 billion, he means the banks. And when he says “let them fail,” he means don’t seize and dismantle. As far as “institutionalizing” bailouts, a more accurate characterization is probably that the bill establishes a protocol for rescue scenarios. But that doesn’t mean it incentivizes them.

(See “The Winners and Losers of the Wall Street Mess.”)

Related Topics: financial reform, Mitch McConnell, Democratic Party, Republican Party, Senate
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • nflfoghorn

    Monkey see….

  • destor23

    It’s a good strategy as you’ll still find a lot of bailout hatred and Fed skepticism on the right and left. I doubt the Republicans would come up with a less-friendly-to-business alternative but the minority party isn’t necessarily expected to come up with alternatives in any event.

  • deconstructiva

    While McConnell recites the one Tea Party phrase – No Bailouts™ – there’s a deeper flaw in his argument. By opposing any financial reform he and the R’s are tacitly fighting for the financial status quo which caused this recession. This includes allowing almost no regulation of derivatives, allowing the mortgage market abuses, etc., all of which led to bank collapses and then the ill-advised bailouts. Mitch ain’t addressing the root problems. I wanna watch him filibuster in favor of the banks / status quo. That’ll be fun. Maybe Karen will get her wish after all: a Real Filibuster™.

  • gysgt213

    “If the outline of his speech sounds familiar, it’s because it is the exact argument pollster Frank Luntz urged Republicans to make earlier this year in a widely publicized memo. Compare the excerpts below (emphasis mine):”
    .
    And that is who is driving our discourse in politics and the media. Frank Luntz. But welcome to the party he has been throwing for years now. Luntz doesn’t give a damn about this policy or any other.

  • jbentley4

    What credibility do Mitch McConnell and the Republicans have on this issue? The previous crisis occurred on their watch and be traced back to the implementation of deregulation policies that have been a cornerstone of Republican dogma since the Reagan Administration.

    It’s easy to say “let them fail,” but if we had pursued this policy in the past two years, the current recession would have been much, much worse. The results would have been millions more unemployed and a totally broken financial system.

    Of course the solutions from Frank Luntz and Mitch McConnell would just be to blame Obama (that’s pretty much the Republican answer to everything these days).

  • deconstructiva

    Adam, are you going to keep doing “1000 words”, or perhaps combine it with your morning reads? Also, who’s going to unofficially take over the dirty work at the swamp such as dealing with the High Sheriffs, fighting the tech wizards at Hogwarts (with swords) when the site messes up, keeping Rusty on a leash, etc.? Karen used to do a lot of that; will you now? Or Jay (when she gets back from Europe)? Or Amy, though when she goes on maternity leave, you’ll need a “plan B”?

  • square1

    Isn’t it amazing? Everyone wants bold financial reform. Liberals obviously want more aggressive reform. Tim Geithner wants more aggressive reform. Chris Dodd wanted more aggressive reform. And now the GOP wants more aggressive reform. Indeed, the GOP is so adamant about not passing a weak reform package that they will filibuster anything that fails to end the bank bailouts.

    So, with all this pro-reform talk, why are we going to end up with a reform package that objective experts consider too little, too late, and too weak to prevent more financial crises in the near future?

  • deconstructiva

    Sounds like health care reform again, doesn’t it? Maybe we’ll have “exchanges” too, although a good exchange here would be an open market for derivatives: not really for average Joes to buy and sell swaps but to force transparency on bank deals amongst themselves.

  • freeinpa

    “”This is a favorite talking point of the right wing, that you can’t have reform without Fannie and Freddie,” said a spokesman for Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. “But they have not yet made a policy case why GSE reform needs to be part of regulatory reform.”"
    ==

    Somebody needs to inform this blowhard that Fannie Mae has already been bailed out to the tune of $75.2b.

    The only reason is where else will old Demo political hacks go to collect millions in taxpayer money. Raines, Johnson Gorelick and Rahm. Yet, the left complains about the money Palin is making. At least it was not taxpayer money.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    My understanding is the 50 billion dollars McConnell is referring to is money put up by the banks, not the tax payer, and it will be used to carry out an orderly liquidation of a troubled bank. In other words, it is not designed to bail them out, but to dissolve them in a way that doesn’t cause panic in the entire financial system.

  • Matt

    This is one issue where the masses can match the Tea Partiers for rage. Voters are more angry at Wall Street than they even are at Congress (that’s saying something). The GOP is taking a very risky position in seemingly defending the CEO’s that ruined the economy in the first place.

    http://www.political-buzz.com/

  • notfooledbydistractions

    Of course it doesn’t hurt to meet with hedge fund managers, etc. to help propel your pro-Wall Street, pro-banking stance…

    From thinkprogress –

    What McConnell did not mention was that, last week, he traveled alongside National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman Sen. John Cornyn (TX) to New York City for a private meeting with elite hedge fund managers and other Wall Street executives. The purpose of the meeting between the top Republicans and the financial executives was to enlist “Wall Street’s help” in funding Republican campaigns in the fall and killing any tough financial reform:

    As a financial reform bill starts to take shape in Washington, two key lawmakers came to New York City last week to explain what it means for Wall Street, and how financial executives might help prevent some of its least market-friendly aspects from becoming law by electing more Republicans, FOX Business Network has learned.

    About 25 Wall Street executives, many of them hedge fund managers, sat down for a private meeting Thursday afternoon with two of the most powerful Republican lawmakers in Congress: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, and John Cornyn, the senior senator from Texas who runs the National Republican Senatorial Committee, one of the primary fundraising arms of the Republican Party. [...]

    In order to assure [Republican electoral] gains, and add even more, McConnell and Cornyn made it clear they need Wall Street’s help.

    Oh yeah, republicans are looking out for everyman – the working folks.

  • square1

    Ironically, I would argue that the losses far, far exceed what freeper suggests. Although, freeper is, no doubt, too stupid to understand either why the losses will be so great or why they have little to do with Rahm’s oversight (or lack thereof) back in 2000-2001.
    .
    Not that I am defending Rahm. Freeper is too stupid and partisan to understand that most Democrats don’t like Rahm. Outside of D.C. and his former district in Illinois, you can probably count the number of Rahm Emanuel fans on one (4 1/2-fingered) hand. His Fannie-board payday is exactly the type of legalized sleaze that nauseates most people when they think of politicians.
    .
    But if anyone wants to civilly or criminally investigate Rahm, have at it. Too bad the statute of limitations is pretty much up and the GOP had no interest in investigating Fannie or Rahm for years.

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    Right. That is the point here. It’s not just that the GOP is using Newspeak to sell its unending opposition to everything; it’s that they’re lying about everything.
    -
    FWIW, blaming the CRA and Freddie is a transparent lie, as, anyone who takes 45 seconds to learn anything about anything knows: “Those who continue to blame the CRA, Fannie Mae, etc. reveal their fundamental misunderstanding of how credit operates in general, what the financing process was like from 2002-07, and how this situation came to pass. Or worse, they understand it, and choose to lie about it anyway for partisan political purposes.” (And Barry Ritholz is hardly a Democratic apologist).
    -
    That, I submit, Adam Sorenson, is the story here– not that “the battle has begun,” but rather that this speech is a lie from beginning to end, in the service of obstructionism, tarring the Democrats with lies, and currying favor with the banking lobby.

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    (This was meant to be a reply to notfooledbydistractions’ comment above, on the GOP working to assure Wall Street that it will do what it wants in begging for money).

  • http://www.1hand-up.com activecitizen54

    Restore Glass-Steagall and then Audit and Do Away with the FED.
    The Dodd Corporate Communist Collusion and Cooperation Act of 2010 is not “reform” or “regulation” and anyone putting more power in the hands of the FED is out of their mind.
    It’s a set-up for what they will crash come fall just because they can.

  • Ivy_B

    I’ll bet those hedge fund managers offered to have their gains taxed as regular income instead of at 15% in order to help the country.

  • Ohg Rea Tone

    I cannot imagine that this will go over well with the Tea Bag Movement. I know these people – they are anti-elite – and Wall Street spells elite. ………

    http://thefiresidepost.com/2010/04/12/personal-experience-with-tea-bag-mentality/

  • drsam8

    I have puzzled for long about the extreme and uncaring political tactics of many present-day rightwing Republicans, ideologues and “tea-baggers,” especially their leaders. I came way in every moment of reflection filling sad about the human condition and the hypocrisy and unconcern of those who do not care much about human suffering and social progress. They seem to be the true enemies of humanity in the new century. I do not see aristocracy of virtue in their conduct; I see only human wickedness as amply described in the Bible, the book they say they owe so much allegiance. But they wouldn’t call it that—because they try to justify their action by invoking other principles—like reducing the deficit. Funny that many prominent Republicans only care about reducing deficit when they are not in power. I remember Dick Cheney intoning during the Bush years that “the deficit doesn’t matter”! It is a shame that the Party of so-called “moral majority” cannot even see the irony of their hardened heartlessness. Given the pattern we have seen since Obama took office, it is not suprising that Mitch McConnell and Kyl are now blatantly betraying the people and siding with Wall Street for their own corrupt ends. They will continue to do so as long as hate prevents some Americans from recognizing who their real enemy is. Under the leadership of Boehner and McConnell, Republicans members of Congress formed a united front to oppose every good work that the Obama administration is trying to do for the whole community–for the people. I believe they opposed the health care bill because they felt the poor would benefit most, even though most middle class people would in fact shelter under its many compassionate provisions. If Christ were to return to earth today, these lawmakers and many tea-baggers would not recognize him. Some people want to have both ways. While they assert that Obama is for Wall Street, they also call him a “socialist.” How can people like Boehner, DeMint, Coburn and McConnell not see, and shudder, at their own hypocrisy? How can they not see the general suffer brought on by the Wall Street titans? For these Republican leaders, it is “not country first.” Boldly, they are saying to us, it is personal and political gains first. They all think we all can be fooled all the time. This is the moment for Democrats to rise in unity to expose their shell game and blatant hypocrisy.

    Dr. Sam

  • freeinpa

    I’ll bet those hedge fund managers offered to have their gains taxed as regular income instead of at 15% in order to help the country
    ==

    Maybe you can ask Marc Lasry of Avenue Capital Hedge funds who was the Clinton money man. I am sure he and all Democratic HF managers all paid the regular tax rate in the interest of fairness.

    If it goes back up then HF won’t be able to hire Algore, Chelsea Clinton, Rahm among others for their invaluable market expertise.

  • freeinpa

    “The GOP and the Tea Party Movement are guilty of using words like socialism and communism and Hitler to define the Democrats in general and Obama in particular.”
    =

    And this differs with what the liberals called and said about Bush for 8 yrs how?

    So as long as you agree with the name calling its ok but if not then its a crime. You really need a scorecard to keep track of the shifting moral stands of the left.

    ==

    The author also sounds like a bitter woman who dislikes her family and what they believe. Seems she is the elitist.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    The modus operandi of the right on this issue, like many others, is not that difficult to discern.

    Step 1, lie about the content of the legislation, step 2, pretend you have the interests of the little guy at heart, step 3, collect money from the special interests you are really protecting, by bamboozling everyone else. Step 4, go back to step 1 and repeat the process.

  • freeinpa

    square1:

    Speaking of too stupid, I was referring to how the Democrats have used Fannie && Freddie as personal piggybanks for political hacks. If there are only 4 people who like Rahm and he is Chief of Staff representing a Democratic president then the Demos are the stupid ones.They were paid millions of tax payer money for essentially doing nothing–Government welfare.

    Yes the Repubs tried put regulatory constraints on them and was fought by the Dems led by Barney Frank. As in his quote below he was for regulation before he was against it. The damage at Fannie & Freddie started with Andrew Cuomo and went down hill under the Mafia-like protection the Demo political hacks working at these GSEs received by the likes of Barney Frank.

    Now, I voted in Committee for a bill in 2005 to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I was in the minority, remember. This was a Republican Congress. The bill passed the Committee. It went to the floor. At that point, the Republican leadership ordered Oxley to put in an amendment that cut out affordable rental housing. I voted against the bill because of that, but I was still for the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac regulation.

  • apollyon07

    I would hope the Republicans won’t (post HCR) resort to the slash and burn approach, but it’s starting to look that way.

  • kcwookie

    Sure, they say that now. Ask Mitch about coal miners in West VA. Anything he says is suspect.

  • pane242

    Why bother paying McConnell’s salary, when you have the wizard behind the screen telling him what to say? These guys are a complete failure, incapable of thinking on their own. It is sad to watch.

  • mbrmark

    You can definitely see where McConnell stands. He is the Rich People’s dog. They order and he wags his tail, and does his duty on command.

  • the committee

    Oh noes, I don’t see how Democrats could possibly counter these Magickal Luntz talking points.
    .
    Hint: In October 09, Mitch McConnell called the bailout a success. Why wouldn’t he want more?
    .
    Thanks for including the content of the various proposed bills, Adam. This was wildly informative.

  • redraven937

    [...] but the minority party isn’t necessarily expected to come up with alternatives in any event.

    Uh… why not?
    .
    I mean, what else are they doing? I certainly expect the minority party (of either flavor) to be coming up with alternatives and even items of their own.
    .
    It is just incredibly depressing to see governing become (if it wasn’t already) a sort of “taking turns” approach where the majority passes things and the minority tries to get the majority to not pass things until people get fed up with the lack of passing things and votes the minority into office to repeat the cycle. Meanwhile, actual people are hurting while career politicians play these marketing games for their own benefit. It’s outrageous.
    .
    If you are not offering alternatives, then you aren’t serving the people you represent.

  • http://marco23.wordpress.com/ marco23

    I read Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s pouring cold water on the Government proposal on the financial reform bill. His words revealed a finality of purpose and the usual declaration of open war between the two parties.
    It reminded me at once of a similar episode in Philadelphia a short time after the new country was in the process of building a reasonable system of government. It was contained in an excellent short story written by the father of one of the delegates. It revived in me my own interest in deciphering the devious ways in which government functions at times.
    I remember that the problem under examination described in the short story were the banks. From initial modest places served to exchange currency, weigh payments in ores measured in ounces, safekeeping the farmer’s cash, make payments to banks in other towns, assess seed values, provided for their storage and loan money to local merchants. Then, at one time, the banks were prodded by a few sharp businessmen of questionable honesty, to expand the bank services which meant assessing additional charges for their services and trading in some of the values covered by some of the simple daily transactions they performed.
    The slick businessmen had arranged to have several representative of that state government, become the aggressive front that would steamroll the necessary measures before their state conventions to allow the banks to institute those highly profitable operations. Each one of the slick businessmen was entitled to receive a percentage of the profits realized by the local banks.
    While no formal document reflecting that agreement between banks and representatives has ever been found, a love letter sent by one of the guilty representatives to his lover in Southampton, described in detail the arrangement and included a sheet of paper where the names of the bankers and the representatives were listed and dated. No title or explanation of any kind, except the signature or initials of each one of the bankers and the representatives were included.
    I had forgotten the name of that representative’s father and had not paid any attention to the incident at that time nor had I developed any desire to do some research, as I have done numberless times on matters of historical value. All I remember was that the bankers as a result of such proposal were transformed and their ultimate objectives changed.
    Someone had coined by then the phrase “There is one born every minute!” referring to both the rural citizens and the wise residents of towns and villages. Instant market research!
    Somehow, Mitch McConnell’s performance in our Congress, revived that memory in most of its details. It also led me to evaluate mentally, the changes that took place in the nature of the banks. From a simple set of principles, with the welfare of the people in mind, they have suffered a gradual transformation into complex webs of controversial services and doubtful transactions that seem to sustain our modern financial institutions.
    I do not deny the need to improve and change as long as service and honest performance are observed. A bank is to serve the people not the other way around. That original wooden counter was never intended to create unexplained riches.
    It made me wonder about whether some similar involvement, wrapped of course in modern technology is behind some of the convictions of the party of Mitch McConnell’s.

  • Friar Tuck

    I had forgotten the name of that representative’s father and had not paid any attention to the incident at that time nor had I developed any desire to do some research . . .
    .
    So why did you bother to post this? If it’s not worth your time, it’s certainly not worth ours.
    .
    We also subtract points for incoherence, unless you’re newrusty or freeper and incoherence is part of your act.

  • osaycanuthink

    how can we have serious reform thru senator dodd who with rep frank are responsible for pushing sub prime loans to fannie mae,,,,,if the would admit their idiocy their present efforts might nbe credible.

  • mppnsg

    What I’d like to know is, WHO IS THE DEMOCRATIC FRANK LUNTZ?!

    The GOP messaging machine is relentless.
    Plus, they have an entire network now.

    Democrats need to counter.

  • 3xfire3

    FOES of TEA PARTY MOVEMENT to INFILTRATE RALLIES
    .
    Apr 12 06:30 PM US/Eastern
    By VALERIE BAUMAN
    Associated Press Writer
    .
    ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) – Opponents of the fiscally conservative tea party movement say they plan to infiltrate and dismantle the political group by trying to make its members appear to be racist, homophobic and moronic.
    Jason Levin, creator of http://www.crashtheteaparty.org, said Monday the group has 65 leaders in major cities across the country who are trying to recruit members to infiltrate tea party events for April 15—tax filing day, when tea party groups across the country are planning to gather and protest high taxes.
    .
    “Every time we have someone on camera saying that Barack Obama isn’t an American citizen, we want someone sitting next to him saying, ‘That’s right, he’s an alien from outer space!’” Levin said.
    .
    Tea party members said the backlash comes from ignorance.
    .
    “They can’t actually debate our message and that’s their problem,” said Bob MacGuffie, a Connecticut organizer for Right Principles, a tea party group that also has members in New York and New Jersey.
    .
    The tea party movement generally unites on the fiscally conservative principles of small government, lower taxes and less spending. Beyond that the ideology of the people involved tends to vary dramatically.
    .
    Levin says they want to exaggerate the group’s least appealing qualities, further distance the tea party from mainstream America and damage the public’s opinion of them.
    .
    The site manifesto says they want to dismantle the Tea Party by nonviolent means. “We have already sat quietly in their meetings, and observed their rallies,” the site said.
    .
    Another tea party organizer said the attempt to destroy the movement was evidence its message is resonating.
    “We’ve been ignored, we’ve been ridiculed. Well, now they’re coming after us,” said Judy Pepenella, a co-coordinator for the New York State Tea Party. “Gandhi’s quote is one we understand: ‘First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.’”
    .
    Of course, their mission begs the question: If the tea party is a manifestation of such desperately fringe irreprehensible behavior, why would there be any need for an organized sabotage of their message?
    .
    The simple existence of the Crasher’s should illustrate the effectiveness and marketability of the tea parties principles. Moreover, the existence of such indecent tactics reflects far more poorly on the perpetrators of the sabotage rather than its intended victims.
    .
    And while apprehension for such an organized assault on the tea party movement is quite appropriate, the attack on conservative principles should be seen as a compliment, and a barometer for our success. Few movements would garner so much hate, or objection, if they remained a fringe movement. It is only because of the widespread palatability of conservative values that the tea party movement has merited such a fervent opposition.
    .
    I find it interesting that this hateful group of Leftist is willing to go to any extreme to discredit the Tea Party movement. It show how corrupt and dishonest some people on the Left are. A favorite tactic is to claim that any right wing fringe person is a part of the Tea Party when they have absolutely no credible proof of the truthfulness of that accusation.
    .
    Since they can not come up with any actual proof of violence or anything else radical about the Tea Party, they are going to manufacture it.
    .
    Kind of reminds me of my studies about Communism in College. “The End Justifies The Means”.
    .
    Anything is justified because the end is so beautiful that it’s OK the lie, cheat or anything else if it will help reach the ultimate goal. Stalin and Mao believe this and each was responsible for 10s of millions of deaths but that was OK because the end was so good and beautiful.

  • connectedtraveler

    It would be very easy to change the reform bill to fit these demands and there would be stronger reform in the process but the fact is that no side wants strong reform.

    The way this is set up both sides will use the reform mantra to tear the other side down and nothing effective if anything at all will be done.

    I’ll believe there is a strong reform movement afoot when derivatives are banned, when mark to market is returned, when accounting standards do not allow for multiple sets of books one for the tax man, one for investors, one for the Fed and one for Congressional hearings etc, when Glass-Steagall is reinstated, when a banks size is limited etc etc.

    The banks and their play dough money machine, the Fed run Congress.

  • fedupinfla

    Amazing!!

    Hey Mitch? Considering you accept money from the same company that doomed their employees to death because making a profit matters more than their safety, I REALLY suggest you keep your tainted mouth shut…

    http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/04/massey-energy-owner-of-ill-fated-co.html

    Oh, and while you’re on that site, you might want to check out WHO his donors are and who is pulling his strings!

  • tugar04

    THE GOP’S CONTINUED………OPPOSITION !…..

    The GOP’S opposition to: “Financial Reform,” will allow the Wall Street Banks and Investment companies to continue to put the screws to America, with sub-prime lending, loans being issued to unqualified applicants, knowing these loans are ripe for foreclosure action !

    And they (the GOP) is not opposing Wall Streets’s present policies, just for the sake of opposing them ! They receive FAT PAY BACKS from these companies, and anyone they stand up to support !…. By opposing changes to: “Financial Reform, Health Care, etc., Wall Street investment companies, and Health Insurance companies will reward a congressmen handsomely, for their support ! ……………. THAT’S IT IN A NUTSHELL, PLAIN AND SIMPLE !

  • tugar04

    You would oppose something too, if you were being paid to oppose it !…………. YOU GO MITCH !

  • kbanginmotown

    My thoughts exactly.
    .
    Also:
    “Bit by bit, bipartisan negotiations in the Senate over financial regulatory reform have broken down.”
    .
    …may also be referred to as “moving the goalposts,” which has been a depressingly familiar GOP tactic these past 14 months.

blog comments powered by Disqus