|
| Watching this short video makes me know that if Warren ever runs for the presidency I'll go out and knock on doors to get her elected. She repeatedly asks the most obvious question of the bankers who participated in the fiscal debacle from which we have not yet recovered and they simply cannot answer her. Rock on, EW! |
Here is a link that might be useful: Smart women RUS
Follow-Up Postings:
|
| As much as I know about her so far, she has my full support. And I look forward to learning more about her as she gains more political maturity and experience. Exciting to think we may be watching the rise of a new star on the political scene. Kate |
|
- Posted by duluthinbloomz4 zone 4a (My Page) on Fri, Feb 15, 13 at 18:01
| Anyone who thought (or hoped) she'd be subdued on the Senate Banking Committee as a first termer got their lunch eaten. With Liz unplugged, I'll bet Wall St. and the K St. lobby bunch were all reaching for a bottle of Poland Springs water - this time the 16.9 oz size. |
|
| Great questioning and I could hear the howling about destroying the economy if any one of them had to go to trial. Wasting government resources yeadda yadda yadda. Take the $2 Billion settlement and go work for them in a couple of years! |
|
 |
|
| She was very good. I hope the District Attorneys, Attorneys General and US Attorneys take note. Fining the banks clearly doesn't work, it's become the price of doing business, and it's probably deductible. |
|
- Posted by nancy_in_venice_ca SS24 z10 CA (My Page) on Fri, Feb 15, 13 at 22:04
| Brava! |
|
| This lady is so incredibly bright. To bad they would not listen to her when she tried to blow the whistle on the financial meltdown. I believe she has an amazing career ahead of her. |
|
- Posted by youngquinn VIC Aust (My Page) on Fri, Feb 15, 13 at 22:30
| what an argument for socialism. Too big to fail means too big for trial. Australia did not have the financial meltdown...none of our banks failed...our deposits in banks were guaranteed by the federal Government. Being socialist means having Big Governemtn...and sometimes having big Govenemtn in our faces....that is the price we pay for greater economic security . The federal Gov regulates the Australian banking sector...and it is one of the strongest in the world. Too big to fail I guess means just that. How many Americans would have been WORSE off if some of these big banks HAD been pursued? change your system, then enforce the banks working within it. and as far as Me Elizabeth Warren, she seems to have the right idea and also has a great communication style. I also hope she does well and reaches a point where she can influence federal policy at a high level. |
|
| Compare the performance of Elizabeth Warren with the angry confrontational cross-exam of Senator Hagel by the GOPers secret weapon, the new Senator from Texas. Hagel may have received money from North Korea? Really? Oh yes, Cruz is a rising superstar in the GOP according to Rubio...and he is Hispanic too! wow. |
|
| I first noticed Elizabeth Warren on the old Countdown with Keith Olbermann show , and immediately was impressed with her. She's an extremely intelligent woman, and her soft spoken demeanor will take her far and set her apart from some of her lunatic counterparts in the Senate. |
|
- Posted by ronalawn82 z9FL (ronalawn08@gmail.com) on Sat, Feb 16, 13 at 5:10
| pidge, I listened with disgust to the GOP representatives' haranguing of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Ms. Warren after she was nominated to head the agency. I concluded that the flimsiness and vehemence of their arguments must mean that both the Agency and Ms. Warren (jointly and separately) must be good for people like me and mine. It is almost poetic how both the Bureau and Ms. Warren have been put in place separately. Ms. Warren will get my vote over Ms. Clinton or Mr. Biden because I believe that times and things will change faster than they two can.
|
|
| rona, I agree. What Hillary did was make it clear that a woman could make a viable run at the presidency and that a woman will someday sit in the Oval Office. But I don't that woman will be Hillary, much as I like and admire her. It could, however, be EW. |
|
| I have to agree with pidge. Hillary put 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling (to revive some post-campaign rhetoric), but it will be a younger, up and coming woman who will be the immediate beneficiary. Warren may well be that woman. But Hillary will retain her amazing popularity as a result of that amazing run she made for the White House and for her superb performance as Secretary of State. I don't want to get into agism or anything like that, but if Hillary were 10 years younger, I'd still be betting on her as the first woman in the White House. Kate |
|
| Until we change our election that is up for sale. Elizabeth Warren will never be our President. Money may not buy love but it buys elections. I am proud of EW and it was a feel good moment but sad as the truth is that is as much as we will get. |
|
| Perhaps, mar quest--but who's to say what she will be able to do? |
|
| She needs the votes. I do not see the filibuster minority Senate or the do nothing House acting on the good for the country. That body of our government serve at the feet of the money. There has been huge progress at least as to the fines through the Democratic State Attorney Generals. While the Republicans State legislators were sending probs into the women and working on denying women's rights, the Democratic State AGs were going after the banks. If Beau Biden had not pushed so hard they would not have had to pay half of the fines the Banks have payed. Delaware AG Beau Biden Sues MERS |
Here is a link that might be useful: AG Beau
|
- Posted by youngquinn VIC Aust (My Page) on Sat, Feb 16, 13 at 16:32
| why do you say that Hilary is too old when you have had male presidents elected older than she would be in 2016? |
|
| Other than Reagan (and he was too old, unfortunately), I'm not aware of presidents elected when they were 69 years old. But maybe I'm wrong--and maybe Hillary at 69-70 wants the hassle of running the world's superpower and being a target for everyone upset with anything. Myself, I was happy to retire at 69-70--but you are right. Some people may not be. But I still remember the mistake we made in re-electing the elderly Reagan who was beginning to show signs of Altzheimers. Kate |
|
- Posted by youngquinn VIC Aust (My Page) on Sat, Feb 16, 13 at 20:37
| Yes Reagan as President was very scary for the rest of the world! I was mistaken then if he is the only president elected at the age of 69. My apologies.
|
|
| Wasn't McCain 71 or 72 when he ran in 2008?. I agree that Reagan had dementia his second term. I think the average 70 year old would be hard put to take on the vigorous role of president. But then everyone is different. |
|
- Posted by youngquinn VIC Aust (My Page) on Sun, Feb 17, 13 at 4:35
| Yes I just looked him us and he was 72 when he ran for pres in 2008. But then , he didnt win |
|
- Posted by littleonefb z5MA (My Page) on Mon, Feb 18, 13 at 21:28
| OH boy, I'm on the fence with this one. I'm from MA and Elizabeth Warren is well liked, well respected and her constituents are quite pleased with her win and having her in the Senate. I personally worked very hard to get her elected and am thrilled she is right where she is and I believe she will do an excellent job as our newly elected Senator. She is now our Senior Senator since John Kerry became Secretary of state, and we have a temporary Junior Senator Cowan, appointed by our governor until the special election to elect a new Senator. Warren is an extremely intelligent woman, well versed in banking etc. and will most definitely make her mark in the Senate and will serve the people well; both the people of MA and the entire country. That being said, I am torn. I would love to see her as President of the United States, but I would also love to see her continue as our Senior Senator. Part of me thinks she could be far more affective, far more powerful in the Senate than in the White House and the other part of me feels exactly the opposite. As for age between Hillary and Elizabeth. HIllary Clinton was born in Oct. 1947 and is 65 right now. Elizabeth Warren was born in June 1949 and is 63 right now. That means that in 2016, Hillary would be 68 and Elizabeth would be 66. Not sure that would make much of a difference and not sure if age is an issue at all. If either women where going to run for president though, 2016 would be the only shot that would have. I doubt the electorate would want to elect another president in their 70's. Between Ronald Reagan and certainly what appeared to be some dementia is his second term, and I personally thought he was in his first term as well, and John McCain in his early 70's 4 years ago and he appeared to not be fully with it then, and certainly doesn't now, IMHO, I personally think it could be iffy for both women in 2016 and pretty much out of the question any time after that. Right now I'm just going to sit back and enjoy watching and hearing Elizabeth Warren in DC and work to elect our Junior Senator, whom I hope will be Ed Markey. |
Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum. If you are a member, please log in. If you aren't yet a member, join now!
Return to the Hot Topics Forum
Instructions
- You must be a registered member and logged in to post messages on our forums.
- Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review the contents and make changes.
- After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
- It is illegal to post copyrighted material without the owner's consent.
- HTML codes are allowed in the message field only.
- No advertising is allowed in any of the forums.
- If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
- If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.