Now is it true that this law was dropped into an appropriations bill at the last minute with no hearings?

What Shaun is pointing out is that Gramm has consistently supported laws that have proved detrimental to this country. It's one thing for Clinton and others, including Obama's economic adviser, to support deregulation- and a case can be made for deregulation. Perhaps it went too far and we need to re-examine it, especially if Wall Street corporations expect government guarantees to rescue them when they get into trouble. Certainly Bush has supported deregulation and has this laissez-faire attitude so our current problems are caused by government actions beyond the passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, signed into law by Clinton.

At the end of the day perhaps we all have some responsibility towards the current economic conditions- after all the American public knew that Bush had a hands-off policy towards business and voters knew that Bush wouldn't help them out as individuals if they ran into problems… if voters wanted a different direction then they could have voted for politicians with a different philosophy.

At any rate, whatever actions others may have taken to play a role in the current conditions, Shaun (I think- at least this is the way I interpret it) is arguing that people should understand that McCain is getting major advice from Gramm- someone with a hand (well, his whole body) in the current crises and that Gramm's philosophy has proven tragically flawed many times over many years.

Shaun might have mentioned how others contributed to our current crises- and the list would be long. But the posting wasn't to explore the many factors that went into the making of the the mess we're in. The point of the posting was to point out how one individual with a flawed philosophy that hasn't changed over the last couple of decades has been more influential than most in shaping the policies that have gotten us to this point.

If we want to move beyond our current political philosophy( and direction of the country) then McCain should not be in bed with Gramm whose beliefs have put us in this mess and that Gramm has not shown any inclination to change his firmly held beliefs. In fact last week McCain was calling for rmore of the same to get us out of our predicament- deregulation.

If the American public really wants to continue down this path that we're on then they'll vote for McCain.

I think news organizations need to educate the country about the people who are giving McCain (and HIllary and Obama) economic advice. I don't advocate such close scrutiny for all advisors, but Americans top concern is the economy, the importance of the economy to all of us and given that we're heading towards a recession I think a responsible media would point out that McCain's advisors advocate more of the same to get us out of this mess. Personally I think it's like someone throwing gas to put out a fire and when the fire doesn't go out, they throw more gas on it, believing that because the gas is a liquid (and liquids puts out fires) they just need more gas thrown on it…. It's not as though Gramm has learned from his past mistakes and now wants to try water to put out that fire.

If Americans believe that deregulation and government bailouts of corporations while the government rolls back protections for individuals will solve our current financial problems, then they'll vote for McCain. But Americans should understand the choices.

So while I see Shaun's point that Gramm is a terrorist in pinstripes, I wouldn't have gone so far as to call Gramm a terrorist, even though his ideas have proven to be detrimental to the country. Gramm doesn't really want to ruin the country, like a terrorist. But Gramm doesn't believe that his philosophy his hurting the country. Perhaps Gramm is just looking out after the interests of the wealthy, and doesn't care about the average guy, which is hit hardest by his policies.

Selectively ignoring the Gramm's involvement in Enron is dishonest…but the fact that both Obama and Clinton are somewhat affiliated with Gramm's sort of people is discouraging, but McCain should know better but doesn't. Gramm as President mimics President Hoover in not ponying up to the crisis that's hit the middle class which is far larger than the sub prime crisis: falling incomes, increased fixed costs esp. from dishonest mortgage holders, and the inflationary spiral due to bail outs of major wall street firms (who should have been regulated), printing of more money to fund the various wars Bush et al have subjected us to…in general not a pretty picture for the middle class due to the economic terrorism promulgated by the likes of Gramm.

This blog is called The Moderate Voice. I assumed that that meant the posts would reflect reasoned, moderate points of view. This post is anything but, and no amount of misdirection will change that fact.

But, hey, it's been a long time since I visited and I guess things have changed. More is the pity.

My, what a turn this place as taken. Calling Phil Gramm a terrorist is moderate? Let's leave aside all the problems with the post in general – Protein Wisdom lays those out better than I could. No, let's just talk about someone – anyone – comparing the actions of a US Senator to those of real terrorists.

Despicable to say the least. The very least.

Joe, you don't have to take my advice of course, but I would rethink having this guy post here. What he said is shameful.

Mullen chose not to do any of those things because the the tagline for “The Moderate Voice” really should be “Moderate, but reliably Lefty.” And once you have chosen to mislead people as to who you are, the rest follows naturally.

http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=11707

Isn't the real story bad enough?