Shame on Elizabeth Warren

Gotta love this thread! There is some funny stuff in here :)

Ed Schultz was in seventh heaven, lionizing Elizabeth Warren [new first name 'Sheriff'] for the way she grilled financial regulators for failing to take big banks to trial.

Just one teenie-weenie factoid Ed failed to mention: those two regulators he showed Warren scalding during his MSNBC show tonight were appointed by, yup, President Barack Obama.

Schultz's Dirty Secret: Regulators 'Sheriff' Warren Scalded Are Obama Appointees | NewsBusters
 
Last edited:

Elizabeth Warren is my best choice for President of the United States, when it comes to just women. I think she has a heart and that's what counts.
That figures. You must be an Indian too, huh? LOL!!!

I'm a sixteeth American Indian, if that's what you mean. I always thought it gave me the ability to not be like stupid and greedy White people, but that's just my opinion about myself.
 
I hope that she serves her term well.
I don't think she'll do time for lying about being Cherokee for affirmative action purposes.

Nobody cares about that particular talking point. She's in and doing a great job.
She's been a senator for three weeks ffs! On well, Obama won an election and a Nobel Peace prize for being black and not being Bush, so I suppose the standard has been set.
 
I don't think she'll do time for lying about being Cherokee for affirmative action purposes.

Nobody cares about that particular talking point. She's in and doing a great job.
She's been a senator for three weeks ffs! On well, Obama won an election and a Nobel Peace prize for being black and not being Bush, so I suppose the standard has been set.

Love the way you wingnuts attempt to minimize her importance. Just another example of your contempt for women. Maybe if your side of the aisle did some work, they'd be recognized as well. But they don't.
 
Nobody cares about that particular talking point. She's in and doing a great job.
She's been a senator for three weeks ffs! On well, Obama won an election and a Nobel Peace prize for being black and not being Bush, so I suppose the standard has been set.

Love the way you wingnuts attempt to minimize her importance. Just another example of your contempt for women. Maybe if your side of the aisle did some work, they'd be recognized as well. But they don't.
On, stop whining. The only thing I hold in contempt is self-righteousness and self pity.

You do understand that reflex whining is not held in high esteem by most on either side of the aisle, as you put it.
 
She's been a senator for three weeks ffs! On well, Obama won an election and a Nobel Peace prize for being black and not being Bush, so I suppose the standard has been set.

Love the way you wingnuts attempt to minimize her importance. Just another example of your contempt for women. Maybe if your side of the aisle did some work, they'd be recognized as well. But they don't.
On, stop whining. The only thing I hold in contempt is self-righteousness and self pity.

You do understand that reflex whining is not held in high esteem by most on either side of the aisle, as you put it.

Neither is complaining about the Democratic stance every freaking issue. It's really getting old and tired, meathead.

You really live that username, you know?
 
Love the way you wingnuts attempt to minimize her importance. Just another example of your contempt for women. Maybe if your side of the aisle did some work, they'd be recognized as well. But they don't.
On, stop whining. The only thing I hold in contempt is self-righteousness and self pity.

You do understand that reflex whining is not held in high esteem by most on either side of the aisle, as you put it.

Neither is complaining about the Democratic stance every freaking issue. It's really getting old and tired, meathead.

You really live that username, you know?

Well, if the dems weren't soooo, Anti-America, on every single issue....
 
Elizabeth Warren is a champion of everyday working people and it doesn't matter if they're liberals or conservatives or whatever. It's in her blood and every time she speaks, you can feel it underneath her words.

I don't care what party you regularly vote for, but that's a quality that is sorely missing in a lot of the legislators we send to Washington.

She wasn't standing up to the bank regulators; she was making a critical point. She even began by thanking them for having to sit there before her "because I sat there and I know how difficult it is", she said. The point she was making was that banking regulators have basically been rendered impotent to carry out their jobs because they're either bought off or because tools that might help them have been watered down.

We saw up close what happens if something isn't regulated well.

I don't care what political stripes you wear, but when she made the point that the law appears to more effectively go after the little guy than it does over the big-time crooks, that's the truth of it.

Amen for her. She's on our side. It's an American thing, not a liberal or a conservative thing. Amen for her.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Every one of the fuckers in my last post should be swinging from the end of a rope. They are thieves with police protection and its past time for some street justice. They need to be lynched since the government won't put them in prison where they belong.

As for Elizabeth Warren, she hates rich people. She gave a "you didn't build that" speech identical to Obama's.

A person who hates our capitalist system should not be guarding it.

And..........pffffffffffffffft!
 
I was watching it. Fantastic. Imagine, asking the people who are supposed to protect us from unscrupulous bankers how many have gone to "trial" and they couldn't name a single one.

Republicans must be "livid". How dare the Democrats for holding banks "accountable".

WTF is wrong with you people? She apparently is on the warpath but what did she actually say? How about I walk up to a policeman and ask him how many people did he arrest today? Who does she want prosecuted and for what law broken? Is she saying that the regulators, under the Obama administration, have failed to regulate because they have no put anyone on trial as were in the Bush administration?

Besides the FACT that the democrats have been in control for 6 disastrous years and Obama got his Wall Street reformed passed you blame yet another Obama fail, as witnessed by the posts in this thread, on Republicans. Whow does that take a whole bunch of denial.
 
Elizabeth Warren is a champion of everyday working people and it doesn't matter if they're liberals or conservatives or whatever. It's in her blood and every time she speaks, you can feel it underneath her words.

I don't care what party you regularly vote for, but that's a quality that is sorely missing in a lot of the legislators we send to Washington.

She wasn't standing up to the bank regulators; she was making a critical point. She even began by thanking them for having to sit there before her "because I sat there and I know how difficult it is", she said. The point she was making was that banking regulators have basically been rendered impotent to carry out their jobs because they're either bought off or because tools that might help them have been watered down.

We saw up close what happens if something isn't regulated well.

I don't care what political stripes you wear, but when she made the point that the law appears to more effectively go after the little guy than it does over the big-time crooks, that's the truth of it.

Amen for her. She's on our side. It's an American thing, not a liberal or a conservative thing. Amen for her.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2F6YkBa_Tig

So, is she pointing out a glaring failure of the Obama administration?
 
Elizabeth Warren's Aggressive Questioning Prompts Anger From Wall Street

Sen. Elizabeth Warren's (D-Mass.) meeting with bank regulators Thursday left bankers reeling, after the politician questioned why regulators had not prosecuted a bank since the financial crisis.

At one point, Warren asked why big banks' book value was lower, when most corporations trade above book value, saying there could be only two reasons for it.

"One would be because nobody believes that the banks' books are honest. Second, would be that nobody believes that the banks are really manageable. That is, if they are too complex either for their own institutions to manage them or for the regulators to manage them," she said.
POLITICO Morning Money - POLITICO.com

SHE’S BACK! WARREN TERRIFIES BANKERS IN FIRST HEARING — Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) generated serious fireworks in her first big Senate Banking Committee hearing, asking tough questions of regulators, repeatedly peppering them to identify the last time they brought a big Wall Street institution to trial rather than settling. There were no real answers. She also earned significant ire from bankers with her line that one reason big banks mostly trade below book value may be that “nobody believes” their books are honest. Most of the complaints came on background or off the record given that these bankers have to deal with Warren in the Senate for at least six years and perhaps much longer and are (apparently quite justifiably) freaked out at the prospect.

She repeated one question.

A lot.

My guess is it is all she could remember.

I wonder if she knows how many times settlements are made instead of trials. I wonder if she knows how expensive and how risky are trials. I wonder if she knows she really isn't native American.
 
Elizabeth Warren's Aggressive Questioning Prompts Anger From Wall Street

Sen. Elizabeth Warren's (D-Mass.) meeting with bank regulators Thursday left bankers reeling, after the politician questioned why regulators had not prosecuted a bank since the financial crisis.

At one point, Warren asked why big banks' book value was lower, when most corporations trade above book value, saying there could be only two reasons for it.

"One would be because nobody believes that the banks' books are honest. Second, would be that nobody believes that the banks are really manageable. That is, if they are too complex either for their own institutions to manage them or for the regulators to manage them," she said.
POLITICO Morning Money - POLITICO.com

SHE’S BACK! WARREN TERRIFIES BANKERS IN FIRST HEARING — Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) generated serious fireworks in her first big Senate Banking Committee hearing, asking tough questions of regulators, repeatedly peppering them to identify the last time they brought a big Wall Street institution to trial rather than settling. There were no real answers. She also earned significant ire from bankers with her line that one reason big banks mostly trade below book value may be that “nobody believes” their books are honest. Most of the complaints came on background or off the record given that these bankers have to deal with Warren in the Senate for at least six years and perhaps much longer and are (apparently quite justifiably) freaked out at the prospect.

what? no title saying she is PUNK?
oh that's right she is a Democrat..I forgot she can be a bully jerk
what a bore of a woman
 
Last edited:
Every one of the fuckers in my last post should be swinging from the end of a rope. They are thieves with police protection and its past time for some street justice. They need to be lynched since the government won't put them in prison where they belong.

As for Elizabeth Warren, she hates rich people. She gave a "you didn't build that" speech identical to Obama's.

A person who hates our capitalist system should not be guarding it.

Except Warren doesn't hate the capitalist system.

She hates crooks.
 

Forum List

Back
Top