Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
The Hill: Why Elizabeth Warren should be the next president
Why Elizabeth Warren should be the next president
12/23/14
...The 2008 financial crisis, not terrorism or any other recent threat, posed the greatest risk to this country since the Cold War.
...A champion of the free market, even Greenspan acknowledged that not only did he not see the crash, but certain aspects of deregulation that he and others espoused actually helped cause this financial catastrophe.
If you feel this vantage point is merely “populist” hyperbole and Warren’s position on the spending deal isn’t warranted, then read what David Ignatius wrote in a 2008 Washington Post article about Hank Paulson’s real time view of the crisis:
"What's agonizing for Paulson is that he says he saw the storm clouds gathering two years ago when he became Treasury secretary…
He also warned about the growing use of derivatives -- financial instruments so complicated that they confuse even the people who buy and sell them -- and how they posed a fundamental risk to the markets.
"…If Bear Stearns had been allowed to collapse, for example, what would a bankruptcy judge have done with the billions of dollars in derivatives contracts -- and what would the other parties in these contracts have done in assessing their potential losses?" $22 trillions of dollars in lost wealth later, has our country learned the pitfalls of allowing Wall Street to engage in the same behavior that led to 2008? According to Warren in an NPR interview, the recent bill exemplified America’s dangerously short-term memory:
"Republicans slipped in a provision at the last minute that would let derivatives traders on Wall Street gamble with taxpayer money and then get bailed out by the government when their risky bets threaten to blow up our financial system.
“You know, it was literally never introduced in the Senate. It had no hearings. There was no discussion about this. And let's keep in mind about this provision, this is a provision that Citigroup lobbyists literally wrote. And then, just to make sure that everybody got the point, Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan, personally made phone calls to House members to push for this change.
...America needs a president who isn’t intimidated by Wall Street. We need a president willing to save Wall Street from itself and save the American people from another future filled with economic catastrophes and bailouts.
Elizabeth Warren, not Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush, should be president in 2016.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/presidential-campaign/227904-why-elizabeth-warren-should-be-the-next-president
12/23/14
...The 2008 financial crisis, not terrorism or any other recent threat, posed the greatest risk to this country since the Cold War.
...A champion of the free market, even Greenspan acknowledged that not only did he not see the crash, but certain aspects of deregulation that he and others espoused actually helped cause this financial catastrophe.
If you feel this vantage point is merely “populist” hyperbole and Warren’s position on the spending deal isn’t warranted, then read what David Ignatius wrote in a 2008 Washington Post article about Hank Paulson’s real time view of the crisis:
"What's agonizing for Paulson is that he says he saw the storm clouds gathering two years ago when he became Treasury secretary…
He also warned about the growing use of derivatives -- financial instruments so complicated that they confuse even the people who buy and sell them -- and how they posed a fundamental risk to the markets.
"…If Bear Stearns had been allowed to collapse, for example, what would a bankruptcy judge have done with the billions of dollars in derivatives contracts -- and what would the other parties in these contracts have done in assessing their potential losses?" $22 trillions of dollars in lost wealth later, has our country learned the pitfalls of allowing Wall Street to engage in the same behavior that led to 2008? According to Warren in an NPR interview, the recent bill exemplified America’s dangerously short-term memory:
"Republicans slipped in a provision at the last minute that would let derivatives traders on Wall Street gamble with taxpayer money and then get bailed out by the government when their risky bets threaten to blow up our financial system.
“You know, it was literally never introduced in the Senate. It had no hearings. There was no discussion about this. And let's keep in mind about this provision, this is a provision that Citigroup lobbyists literally wrote. And then, just to make sure that everybody got the point, Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan, personally made phone calls to House members to push for this change.
...America needs a president who isn’t intimidated by Wall Street. We need a president willing to save Wall Street from itself and save the American people from another future filled with economic catastrophes and bailouts.
Elizabeth Warren, not Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush, should be president in 2016.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/presidential-campaign/227904-why-elizabeth-warren-should-be-the-next-president
34 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
How does she feel about Chained CPI or similar measures designed to "extend the life" of social security? How does she feel about "raising the cap" on FICA contributions? Raising the retirement age?
How does she feel about Paul Ryan's proposal to voucherize Medicare?
How does Elizabeth feel about reining in CO2 emissions?
How does Elizabeth feel about Net Neutrality?
I am with Elizabeth on Wall Street. But I hear very little about other important issues.
I would like to hear some specifics.
We won't get fooled again. 
Not the stuff campaign slogans are made of.
Merry Christmas!! 
It's bad enough that people demand items to retail for less than cost, which means the only possible solution is to go to China. With the TPP, the job loss in this country will be staggering.
Happy New Year RiverLover! Let's hope it doesn't suck!
After what we have been through.............
Keep it up RiverLover. When I have more time I will be pushing hard for her election as POTUS.
Instead of the regression of it like we see now.
Letter from Liz on the pipeline proposed in MA..."But our aim must be to reduce reliance on carbon based fuels, and than means careful consideration of clean energy alternatives as well as other natural gas pipeline alternatives that do not create wholly new infrastructure. For example, upgrading our old, methane- leaking pipes can help provide affordable power for businesses and consumers without threatening our families and our state.
Before we sink more money in gas infrastructure, we have an obligation wherever possible to focus our investments on the clean technologies of the future -- not the dirty fuels of the past -- and to minimize the environmental impact of all our energy infrastructure projects. We can do better -- and we should."
http://www.berkshireeagle.com/columnists/ci_26322123/sen-elizabeth-warren-we-can-do-better-than
Before we sink more money in gas infrastructure, we have an obligation wherever possible to focus our investments on the clean technologies of the future -- not the dirty fuels of the past -- and to minimize the environmental impact of all our energy infrastructure projects. We can do better -- and we should."
http://www.berkshireeagle.com/columnists/ci_26322123/sen-elizabeth-warren-we-can-do-better-than
Also,
Elizabeth Warren Comes Down Hard Against Global Warming, Separates Herself From Hillary Clinton On Climate Change
On Friday, December 20th, Democratic U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren finally separated herself clearly from former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, regarding the issue of climate change and global warming. Here is the story:
TransCanada Corporation wants to build the Keystone XL Pipeline to carry oil from Alberta Canada's tar sands to two refineries owned by Koch Industries near the Texas Gulf Coast, for export to Europe; and Hillary Clinton has helped to make that happen, but Elizabeth Warren has now taken the opposite side....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/elizabeth-warren-comes-do_b_4483753.html
On Friday, December 20th, Democratic U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren finally separated herself clearly from former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, regarding the issue of climate change and global warming. Here is the story:
TransCanada Corporation wants to build the Keystone XL Pipeline to carry oil from Alberta Canada's tar sands to two refineries owned by Koch Industries near the Texas Gulf Coast, for export to Europe; and Hillary Clinton has helped to make that happen, but Elizabeth Warren has now taken the opposite side....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/elizabeth-warren-comes-do_b_4483753.html
And unfortunately, this would be used ag her by the rethugs in their "jobs vs the environment" crusade. But this is what they would use ag any Democrat running. And luckily her views on fracking aren't as extreme as mine, because if she wanted no fracking like me, she'd lose in a landslide. And that genie is already out of the bag anyways. We frack, but we could make it safer & that is what she is pushing for...
Warren wants to focus more on developing renewable energy in preparation for a shift from the fossil fuels she sees at the root of the problem.
"I believe we need to get serious about climate change, and we can start by ending the subsidies to big oil companies and investing in clean energy," she said. "Right now, we're losing out on these investments to other countries."
Warren sees the Cape Wind offshore wind project as a step toward that shift to renewable power. She says the 130-turbine project planned for Nantucket Sound, which aims to be the nation's first offshore wind farm, will provide both clean energy and good jobs.
Brown says he supports wind power, but Cape Wind is planned for the wrong location. He says Nantucket Sound is a national treasure and compared the Cape Wind project to building windmills in the Grand Canyon.
Warren's focus on developing renewable power drives opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, which would transport heavy tar-sands crude oil from Canada to Texas' Gulf Coast refineries.
"We should be making investments to grow the clean energy economy, not continuing to support dirty fuel," she said, dismissing claims the project would be a major job creator or drive down gas prices.
Brown counters that the pipeline will, in fact, create thousands of jobs and help suppress gas prices.
He's also enthusiastic about fracking, a technique that's recovered large reserves of natural gas by pumping volumes of water, plus sand and chemicals, deep underground to break shale apart and free the gas. Brown says it can be done safely and help achieve energy independence.
Warren, though, believes fracking poses possible health and environmental risks, particularly to the water supply. Fracking, she says, should be subjected to federal safe drinking water laws.
"I believe we need to get serious about climate change, and we can start by ending the subsidies to big oil companies and investing in clean energy," she said. "Right now, we're losing out on these investments to other countries."
Warren sees the Cape Wind offshore wind project as a step toward that shift to renewable power. She says the 130-turbine project planned for Nantucket Sound, which aims to be the nation's first offshore wind farm, will provide both clean energy and good jobs.
Brown says he supports wind power, but Cape Wind is planned for the wrong location. He says Nantucket Sound is a national treasure and compared the Cape Wind project to building windmills in the Grand Canyon.
Warren's focus on developing renewable power drives opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, which would transport heavy tar-sands crude oil from Canada to Texas' Gulf Coast refineries.
"We should be making investments to grow the clean energy economy, not continuing to support dirty fuel," she said, dismissing claims the project would be a major job creator or drive down gas prices.
Brown counters that the pipeline will, in fact, create thousands of jobs and help suppress gas prices.
He's also enthusiastic about fracking, a technique that's recovered large reserves of natural gas by pumping volumes of water, plus sand and chemicals, deep underground to break shale apart and free the gas. Brown says it can be done safely and help achieve energy independence.
Warren, though, believes fracking poses possible health and environmental risks, particularly to the water supply. Fracking, she says, should be subjected to federal safe drinking water laws.
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/10/sen_scott_brown_elizabeth_warr_1.html
Common sense & smart politics.
