Obama Is Going To Win.
Love From The Uk Xxx I Love You All At Bloggingheads

Pretty interesting discussion. 24 minutes in and I haven't heard Peter actually answer any of Jonah's arguments. He seems more keen to argue against arguments that he asserts "conservatives always make". Bottom line seems to be that Peter is on the side of centralizing power ("put all your eggs in one basket and watch that basket", as Mark Twain said) and Jonah wants to leave people alone to fight it out, trusting that none of them will be able to achieve the kind of dominance that can be handed whole, via political means, to the government. As I said, pretty interesting.

Bob Please help! Jonah must be stopped. We must have standards! His arguments are patently insane. For the love of god, its time to take a stronger regulatory hand in the Bloggingheads schedule.

I think you're right. Obama is going to win. Any idea what that is going to mean for the county? Think Obama has any idea? I console myself with the thought that he actually does not. That he has probably thought no further than the overwhelming and difficult task of what it take to get there.

How to I qualify for being one of the "little guys" that liberal principles justify standing up for? That sounds pretty good for me. I'll be for government intervention in the economy if I can be on that side of the line.

Quoting NYC_Consultant: His arguments are patently insane.

Do you happen to have a link handy, to save some time, or do you mean all of Mr. Goldberg's arguments? Where does one file for an insanity patent, I wonder--there must be a number of government departments that have sufficient expertise...

I doubt there are anywhere near 54 floors of the welfare state in the USA. My sense living here is that you are pretty much on your own.

I agree conservatism is in a sad state right now. I think for them to form a new republican party after Obama is president for 8 years they need to distant themselves from the crazy jesus freaks and become more libertarian.

Don’t think I can listen to Jonah for any length of time any more, even knowing Peter will slice and dice him. But Jonah, this is for you:
The final two paragraphs of a WSJ story, a narrative of a crucial few days on Wall Street during the aftershocks of Lehman’s collapse.
Three days later, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley applied to the Fed to become commercial banks -- a historic move that ended the tradition of lightly regulated Wall Street securities firms that take big risks in the pursuit of equally big returns. To some, the government's decision to resort to a bailout represents a tacit admission: For all officials' desire to allow markets to punish the risk-taking that engendered the crisis, banks have the upper hand. "Lehman demonstrated that it's much harder than we thought to deal effectively with banks' misbehavior," says Charles Wyplosz, an economics professor at the Graduate Institute in Geneva. "You have to look the devil in the eyes and the eyes are pretty frightening."
My emphasis.

http://snipurl.com/3ygi3"

And when I said Republicans need to become more Libertarian, especially the anti-war part of the platform

Oh well, if I grit my teeth and hold my gorge, and squint, I can enjoy seeing Jonah’ bluffing bluster tempered by whining and groveling.
And then there can be genuine entertainment in witnessing it, in his claiming now that regulation is enacted at the instigation of big business (it being the case that bb seek to shape regulation most certainly). Jonah has been betrayed by big business. Poor Jonah.
A toothless attack dog who can only bark and whine. Thank Heaven for Peter, who is capable, were Jonah capable of learning, of educating Jonah in the ways of democracy and civic life.

I thought Jonah seemed pretty rational throughout the discussion. The only real whopper was to conflate classical liberalism with conservatism.

Quoting themightypuck: I thought Jonah seemed pretty rational throughout the discussion. The only real whopper was to conflate classical liberalism with conservatism.

Part and parcel of Jonah's "black is white, up is down, left is right, right is wrong" campaign. Of course Jonah would say "Right is right!", but that just makes my point all over again, doesn't it?

Laughable on its face! Speaking of faces, I'd bet that Jonah's pretty bummed now that the coin he flipped back in high school came up 'conservative'.

Quoting Ray: Laughable on its face!

Speaking of faces, I'd bet that Jonah's pretty bummed now that the coin he flipped back in high school came up 'conservative'.

Given that he's the son of Lucianne, I'm sure that coin was flipped prenatally.

Cripes this guy can't even remember the quotes he quotes. Jonah is a notional libertarian he has notions of how it all is suppose to work, but
can't quite put it together accurately historically, or factualy. This makes Jonah a Blowhard I mean corporations trend conservative republican in there leadership because they are mini kingdoms themselves. The more educated one is the more liberal one becomes.
why?
see the definitions of liberal and conservative. (really look them up) thanks

And I don't need Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee to tell me about it. What can I say other than it's hard to find two pundits wrong so often over the years about so much. Jonah, btw, has grown up immensely recently and now routinely makes sense. I credit his kid. Peter is a peculiar bird. He chirps incessantly about the obvious and still somehow manages to get the big stuff wrong. The record shows Dems are frequently much more responsible than Republicans, until they get the same chance to get their snouts into the trough, that is. Then, watch out! Peter yapped, and whined and wagged his tail with Josh Marshall, Matt, Richard Cohen and all the rest when Bush unleashed 'shock and awe' upon Iraq. Once in the mess, he lectured the rest of us to just clap. Now Peter is in such a rush to see Dems butch it up, he'll likely drive right past the recruiting centers again on his way to the Chosen One's 'restore America's image abroad' rallies. Jonah and the 101st fighting keyboarders are finally going to get some relief. We can expect Josh Marshall and Peter to argue that others go

a serious question: when did 'shameless' and 'shameful' start to mean the same thing? they used to be antonyms! an example: http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/148...0:50&out=00:53 is this the new "i could care less," when a word or phrase somehow takes on its exact opposite meaning?

Quoting NYC_Consultant: Bob Please help! Jonah must be stopped. We must have standards!

His arguments are patently insane. For the love of god, its time to take a stronger regulatory hand in the Bloggingheads schedule.

I second that. Bob's becoming more and more loose about who he lets on BH.tv. In some cases that is good as it can result in pleasant surprises. But Jonah Goldberg is a "known quantity" debasing the credibility of BH.tv. He doesn't belong here. Bob should wise up. There are many better spokespeople for the "niche" JG is nominally representing. Please, Bob, have some compassion for your audience. EW

I wish Jonah were right and that we could blame gov't for this crisis. Unfortunately we can't and as a former libertarian that is painful to admit. I'll agree that the collapse of Fannie and Freddie can be blamed on the gov't since those are neither fish nor fowl. But the failures of the banks and investment banks around the country cannot. They are failing because they own mortgage backed securities which were *not* issued by Fannie and Freddie. Those securities were poorly underwritten and tremendously leveraged. Those faults are entirely of the private market. Probably the most you can say is that Fannie and Freddie *possibly* stabilized home prices through out the years and the price stability induced the mortgage modelers on Wall Street to think that housing never suffered a significant price decline. The modelers extrapolated from the price stability and thought that real estate mortgages were a sure thing and thus underwriting quality wasn't important and furthermore, those mortgages could be leveraged to the hilt. The result was an explosion of investment in mortgages that is now being painfully unwound. So

There's a Hannity-and-Colmes flavour to these Goldberg-and-Beinart conversation, in that Beinart is perennially the weak participant.

Quoting AemJeff: Given that he's the son of Lucianne, I'm sure that coin was flipped prenatally.

He might have inherited his blowhardiness, but he clearly has no feeling for the principles he espouses. He only cares about scoring points in the game; it doesn't matter to him which side he's on.

Quoting Eastwest: I second that.

THAT...THAT...that...that...tha...th..

Quoting Eastwest: Please, Bob, have some compassion for your audience.
EW

ENCE...ENCE...ence...ence..ce

September 30, 1999 (NYTimes)
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
By STEVEN A. HOLMES In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among
minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is
easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from
banks and other lenders. The action, which will begin as a pilot
program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York
metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home
mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough
to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they
hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring. Fannie Mae,
the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under
increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand
mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt
pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in
profits. In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage
companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans
to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes,
credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for
conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that
charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to

Amanda Carpenter *possibly* knows.

All seem to agree that these "toxic instruments" are central to this crisis. I heard earlier this week that Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac together are responsible for 44% of the securitized sub-prime mortgage debt in the financial system. Assuming that is accurate, doesn't it rate more than a footnote for these two GSE's in trying to understand what went wrong? It seems to me that as long as the government is intervening in the market to the extent that they are then there is really no way to exonerate that intervention if something goes wrong (or deny it credit if something goes right either). The web of causation is simply too complex.

...to you?
..at least listen to the point where they talk about Jamie Gorelik getting a $700,000 bonus. How much can you all choose to ignore in an effort to get Mr. Vaporware elected?

Quoting popeyethesailorman: How to I qualify for being one of the "little guys" that liberal principles justify standing up for? That sounds pretty good for me. I'll be for government intervention in the economy if I can be on that side of the line.

Just be in the bottom 99% of earners. Otherwise, you're stuck voting for McCain.

Quoting Whatfur: ...to you?

..at least listen to the point where they talk about Jamie Gorelik getting a $700,000 bonus.

How much can you all choose to ignore in an effort to get Mr. Vaporware elected?

I don't know who you're listening to, but most people agree that FMFM was a bipartisan effort -- both good and bad. The thing is, FMFM is not really the important component of the collapse. Their mission statements have bipartisan support, even if they were also bipartisan forms of patronage. But you've gotta put them in perspective, because they really aren't 'the problem' here. The regulatory environment of the credit markets is the meal. FMFM is a side of fries.

Given the scale of the mis-management of the last 8 years, the fiction that the next president will not be raising taxes on all but a handful of Americans (those in jail) has always been testament to the a. imbecility
b. gullibility
c. cynicism
of the bhtv borg? These intellectual giants have evidently taken a hard look all the new data about the impeding financial meltdown and concluded: 'Won't change a fucking thing!" Hilarious! Bailing out Wall St will not have any effect on your taxes if you vote for the Chosen One. True! Americans aren't dumb. But, just like folks all over the world, Americans believe what they want to believe. Remember: invading Iraq won't cost US taxpayers a nickel. Folks bought it. Why? Cause they wanted to. Talk about your the willing suspension of disbelief. Time to break out the popcorn.

Granted, the Republicans are in poor shape. On the other side of the coin, the Democrats are ascending but getting power again hasn't born much fruit (if any). With the upcoming elections and the results being larger majorities they will have to deliver on something. Their excuse now if they have one is the ultimate bogeyman George Bush. After November they won't have that one to use anymore. John