Still pretending like its not a Republican bill originating in Congress and named after its Republican authors. Bill Clinton did not appoint those Congressmen. Did you forget to mention them once again? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm–Leach–Bliley_Act The banking industry had been seeking the repeal of the 1933 Glass–Steagall Act since the 1980s, if not earlier. In 1987 [under Reagan] the Congressional Research Service prepared a report that explored the cases for and against preserving the Glass–Steagall act. Respective versions of the legislation were introduced in the U.S. Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the U.S. House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa). The third lawmaker associated with the bill was Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R-Virginia), Chairman of the House Commerce Committee from 1995 to 2001. Democrats agreed to support the bill after Republicans agreed to strengthen provisions of the anti-redlining Community Reinvestment Act and address certain privacy concerns. Your statement suggested that it was all Clinton's work, which is truly ignoring history. I pointed that out and you are still blowing a gasket about it. I love it.
Why are you ignoring history Red? The article I listed had definitive evidence of Clinton's fingerprints. Even the Wiki article notes Democat involvement. Blowing a gasket is what you're doing hanging onto the thinnest thread and failing miserably. I love it.
Listen carefully. I'll write slowly for you. No one has claimed that Clinton did not support the bill. Got that? Can I make it any more plain? Are you with me so far? What is changing history is your assertion that the bill was "Clinton's legacy", with no mention whatsoever of its Republican authors, Republican heritage (going back to the Reagan era), and Republican sponsorship. I pointed that out because you have persistently failed to. They had to make changes to get democratic support, just as many bills do. Your suggestion that the bill was Clinton's is simply untrue and misleading. And partisan. Why are you ashamed of the Republican bill so much that you must try to recast it as Clinton's.
'War against poverty' in 1960s was actually 'War against incentive and getting a job.' It made minorities prisoners on a precinct plantation that the Dems now own.
Watch the video imbedded in the article I cited. This is a victory lap for him. Yes the Rs were deeply part of it as were his cabinet Larry Summers Robert Rubin and others. He took credit for welfare reform an idea of the Rs he was dragged kicking and screaming to. Same with the balanced budget actions. He made a claim of these R initiatives as his as he did this. He celebrated this as his for years...until his (and the Rs) darling became a problem child and his wife had to look out for E Warren & Bernie Sanders on the left. Neither he or you can have it both ways. He claimed it at the time and for years. It's his baby as much as you hate it.
@Winston1 bro, you wore his ass out enough, let him up. He protects this place like it is his domicile and you just can't win ever. The rest of us know you are right and have enjoyed the ass kicking
Yes, Clinton had his hand in repealing Glass-Steagall, this is common knowledge. The Republicans and bank lobbyist had pushed for such a repeal for many years before it actually happened. That said, the economy of the 90's was considerably different than the economy in which we live today and there is no way to compare apples to apples. Clinton and Gingrich did a lot of very good things economic-wise for the country back then but in an effort to keep pushing the envelope I personally believe they took things a step too far by repealing Glass-Steagall. This is the part that is too often overlooked when making comparisons from one generation, president or administration to another. Times change, the economic needs and worries change and the actions required to remedy those issues changes with them. But none of this is the problem today. Politicians in this country makes choices based upon the time that they live with an eye on the future and, hopefully, the past. 20 years is a long time in a capitalistic economy and what drives the economy back then likely does not today. The difference between now and then is that once upon a time politicians could come together around a consensus for what was best for the country and move forward. Today gridlock keeps us from making the appropriate changes to previous law to make them more reflective of the modern economy so we sit around bitching about the decisions that were made 20-30 years ago while the economy suffers. To lay it totally on Clinton and call it his baby is disingenuous and intellectually dishonest, plain and simple. There were decades of efforts to marginalize the law so the blame should be spread around......Clinton included. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...of-glass-steagall-caused-the-financial-crisis
