Tuesday, February 05, 2013

Republican Idol Worshippers and their Criminal Politics

Conservative Republican Idol Worshippers and their Criminal Politics

By Michael Hoffman
www.revisionisthistory.org

"Fatto v'avete dio d'oro e d'argento;
e che altro e da voi a l'idolatre,
se non ch'elli uno, e voi ne orate cento?"

("You have made gold and silver your god; and
what difference is there between you and the idol-
worshipper, except that he prays to one, and you to a hundred?")

--Dante, The Inferno

Christians in Idaho have been recommending in their churches that, in the wake of Obama's re-election victory, their fellow congregants should consider fasting and doing penance.

This would be salutary if there was a similar call to fast and do penance after the Republican victory in the House of Representatives. Instead, these Christians insinuate that the Republican victory in the House was a good thing and the election of Mitt Romney over Obama would have been even better.

This perverted mentality is the result of paying little or no attention to what the Bible calls the root of all evil: the love of that all-American idol, money, and the criminal politics which that idolatry engenders.

Republican fondness for making the world safe for usury, and dropping bombs on Muslim children and pregnant women in faraway lands, is not a cause for fasting and doing penance among the proud Pharisees so convinced of their righteousness that they choose between Democrat abortionists and idolatrous Republican war mongers, and make their preference known in subtle and not so subtle ways in conservative churches across the land.

As economist Paul Krugman points out, this month many Republicans in Congress are working hard to ensure that the defrauding of the American people by the Money Power will not be impeded by the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In the presence of this criminal politics, will there be any call for Christians to fast and do penance in reparation for the greed that reigns supreme in a Republican party which seeks to enhance the opportunities of buccaneer capitalists to defraud the poor, including expectant mothers who have not yet decided on an abortion? 

Woe to those who make unjust laws,
to those who issue oppressive decrees,
to deprive the poor of their rights
and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people,
making widows their prey
and robbing the fatherless.
What will you do on the day of reckoning,
when disaster comes from afar?
To whom will you run for help?
Where will you leave your riches?
Nothing will remain but to cringe among the captives
or fall among the slain. 

--Isaiah 10: 1-4
Friends of Fraud
By Paul Krugman
New York  Times • February 3, 2013
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/opinion/krugman-friends-of-fraud.html?_r=0 

Like many advocates of financial reform, I was a bit disappointed in the bill that finally emerged. Dodd-Frank gave regulators the power to rein in many financial excesses; but it was and is less clear that future regulators will use that power. As history shows, the financial industry’s wealth and influence can all too easily turn those who are supposed to serve as watchdogs into lap dogs instead.

There was, however, one piece of the reform that was a shining example of how to do it right: the creation of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a stand-alone agency with its own funding, charged with protecting consumers against financial fraud and abuse. And sure enough, Senate Republicans are going all out in an attempt to kill that bureau.

Why is consumer financial protection necessary? Because fraud and abuse happen.

Don’t say that educated and informed consumers can take care of themselves. For one thing, not all consumers are educated and informed. Edward Gramlich, the Federal Reserve official who warned in vain about the dangers of subprime, famously asked, “Why are the most risky loan products sold to the least sophisticated borrowers?” He went on, “The question answers itself — the least sophisticated borrowers are probably duped into taking these products.”

And even well-educated adults can have a hard time understanding the risks and payoffs associated with financial deals — a fact of which shady operators are all too aware. To take an area in which the bureau has already done excellent work, how many of us know what’s actually in our credit-card contracts?

Now, you might be tempted to say that while we need protection against financial fraud, there’s no need to create another bureaucracy. Why not leave it up to the regulators we already have? The answer is that existing regulatory agencies are basically concerned with bolstering the banks; as a practical, cultural matter they will always put consumer protection on the back burner — just as they did when they ignored Mr. Gramlich’s warnings about subprime.

So the consumer protection bureau serves a vital function. But as I said, Senate Republicans are trying to kill it.

How can they do that, when the reform is already law and Democrats hold a Senate majority? Here as elsewhere, they’re turning to extortion — threatening to filibuster the appointment of Richard Cordray, the bureau’s acting head, and thereby leave the bureau unable to function. Mr. Cordray, whose work has drawn praise even from the bankers, is clearly not the issue. Instead, it’s an open attempt to use raw obstructionism to overturn the law.

What Republicans are demanding, basically, is that the protection bureau lose its independence. They want its actions subjected to a veto by other, bank-centered financial regulators, ensuring that consumers will once again be neglected, and they also want to take away its guaranteed funding, opening it to interest-group pressure. These changes would make the agency more or less worthless — but that, of course, is the point.

How can the G.O.P. be so determined to make America safe for financial fraud, with the 2008 crisis still so fresh in our memory? In part it’s because Republicans are deep in denial about what actually happened to our financial system and economy. On the right, it’s now complete orthodoxy that do-gooder liberals, especially former Representative Barney Frank, somehow caused the financial disaster by forcing helpless bankers to lend to Those People.

In reality, this is a nonsense story that has been extensively refuted; I’ve always been struck in particular by the notion that a Congressional Democrat, holding office at a time when Republicans ruled the House with an iron fist, somehow had the mystical power to distort our whole banking system. But it’s a story conservatives much prefer to the awkward reality that their faith in the perfection of free markets was proved false.

And as always, you should follow the money. Historically, the financial sector has given a lot of money to both parties, with only a modest Republican lean. In the last election, however, it went all in for Republicans, giving them more than twice as much as it gave to Democrats (and favoring Mitt Romney over the president almost three to one). All this money wasn’t enough to buy an election — but it was, arguably, enough to buy a major political party.

Right now, all the media focus is on the obvious hot issues — immigration, guns, the sequester, and so on. But let’s try not to let this one fall through the cracks: just four years after runaway bankers brought the world economy to its knees, Senate Republicans are using every means at their disposal, violating all the usual norms of politics in the process, in an attempt to give the bankers a chance to do it all over again.

- - - - Advertisement - - - -


and then review it on Amazon!

***

3 comments:

Eric Robinson said...

It’s extremely unfortunate that Christians, comprising one third of the world’s population, have been divided and sapped of their accumulative force, a force which could otherwise decimate the avarice which strangles society today.

I have to wonder if the majority of the world is illiterate when it comes to reading old English. Even atheists, many of whom support social causes (palliatives), should be able to look at the New and Old Testaments’ contents and be in awe of the ancient wisdom that they’ve blindly forsaken.

Saddened said...

Michael Hoffman relying on Paul Krugman for support? Now I've seen everything!

In seriousness, I suppose this demonstrates your openness to truth whatever the source.

Michael Hoffman said...

Dear Saddened

Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

Mr. Krugman proved himself correct, at least on Feb. 3, that is.