Barney Frank – MSNBC The Ed Show Trancript “We Are Trying On Every Front To Increase Government in the Regulatory Area” - Frank's 2010 Opposition

A video surfaced yesterday from an MSNBC program via Real Clear Politics - in the video Ralph Nader and Barney Frank, Massachusetts 4th District U.S. Representative, have a back and forth on the regulation of derivatives. Simply put, a derivative,

“Derivatives are financial products, such as futures contracts, options, and mortgage-backed securities. Most of derivatives' value is based on the value of an underlying security, commodity, or other financial instrument.
For example, the changing value of a crude oil futures contract depends primarily on the upward or downward movement of oil prices.
An equity option's value is determined by the relationship between its strike price and the value of the underlying stock, the time until expiration, and the stock's volatility.
Certain investors, called hedgers, are interested in the underlying instrument. For example, a baking company might buy wheat futures to help estimate the cost of producing its bread in the months to come.
Other investors, called speculators, are concerned with the profit to be made by buying and selling the contract at the most opportune time. Listed derivatives are traded on organized exchanges or markets. Other derivatives are traded over-the-counter (OTC) and in private transactions.”

Nader speaks to Frank about his role in the deregulation of mortgage securities, (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac), and goes on to blast him for his support of a bill that allows exceptions on categories of these derivatives.

This is an abridged transcript (given Rep. Frank’s “unique style of speaking”):

Nader: “In 2000 you voted for a bill that continued the deregulation of the burgeoning derivative racket and now he’s supporting a bill that has a huge loophole in terms of exempting trillions of dollars in certain categories of derivatives, and he hasn’t (interruption from Frank) he didn’t support a categorical ban on the use of derivatives”

Frank: Well first off all Ralph - (*insults)
“I had overwhelming Republican opposition to any regulation of derivatives and some democrats - we fought hard for it – we are establishing a great framework for the regulation of derivatives – we are moving forward in that ad we’ve done as much as we can politically - the fact is we had a political situation – the real irony – the right wing took control of government and ruined it they gave it a bad reputation and now that “we are trying on every front in to increase the role of government in regulatory area”, we run into this public opinion that says hey, those are the guys that screwed up Katrina so the frustration is that they are benefiting from their own (word could be) incompetence.”

“We are trying on every front to increase the role of government in the regulatory area”

One comment appeared on Real Clear Politics that sums that statement up nicely: “Power deludes and absolute power deludes absolutely.

The Bill over which Ralph and Frank were arguing:
An article explaining the bill which passed the House, from DSNews, (here) goes into some depth explaining how the bill is “watered-down”, and goes into the exceptions referred to by Nader.

Barney Frank, whose memory is on any given day, either selectively partisan, selectively self-serving, has not acknowledged at any time, that there was opposition to his continued support for continuing deregulation, he is also holding fast to partisan speak – 2010 is an election year, and Frank does face opposition in his district.

Barney Frank on the Campaign Trail (since 1972) Faces Opposition from one Conservative – Earl Sholley and one “Republican”, Keith Messina. Messina, who originally began his campaign as an Independent, has since jumped onto the “Republican” label. Messina however, is not a conservative. (Shades of the New York 23rd!)

Frank has decided to take his campaign online: In a recent series of videos, Frank answers questions on issues that were presented through the blog Reddit.com In Frank “speak” – one of the 5 videos are featured below – the balance are on YouTube here From why the Lesbian and Gay Community should not bother with protests, to why the Democrat Controlled Congress with a like minded President have not made good on their campaign promises, Frank goes into detail to “explain”.




Frank faces opposition in the 4th District from Earl Sholley, a conservative populist candidate running as a Republican. Sholley has his own campaign videos on YouTube, which appear to speak in plain language, about common sense solutions, and without partisan diatribe.



Keith Messina , a newly minted Republican candidate for the 4th Congressional district, has a video below. In a recent article from the Boston Globe, Mr. Messina “promised a fresh perspective” and went on to say that he “supports federal recognition of same-sex marriage.”



Since 1972 Barney Frank has developed a left-of-center reputation and been responsible for legislation and oversight that has not only impacted his own district, but the entire nation. The voters in the 4th district have choices - (see above), there is simply no excuse for those in the 4th to continue to impose this brand of politician on the rest of the country. Those outside the state of Massachusetts are encouraged to donate to the opposition cadidate of your choice. Research is suggested.

New York’s 23rd District, Doug Hoffman takes Lead in Latest Poll – Pawlenty Endorses. The Nation Trends Conservative - Analysis

Doug Hoffman, New York 23rd Conservative Candidate - image Madison County Courier

Doug Hoffman, Conservative Candidate for the New York 23rd Congressional District, has now taken the lead according to a poll conducted by the Conservative Club for Growth. Hoffman receives 31% of the vote, with Democrat candidate Owens at 27% and the Republican Candidate, Dede Scozzafava at 20%, the balance of those polled remain undecided with just over a week until the election. Tim Pawlenty has become the latest in a string of Republican heavy hitters, to endorse Hoffman. Pawlenty, who is considered a considered a potential candidate for the 2012 Republican Presidential race, gave Hoffman his endorsement on Monday. Pawlenty joins Sarah Palin, Steve Forbes, Rick Santorum, Fred Thompson who have endorsed Hoffman over the Republican Candidate, Dede Scozzafava, who is considered to be too moderate. Former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich has endorsed Scozzafava – Gingrich is once again, considered to be a possible candidate for the 2012 Republican ticket.

Why the split?

As happens in the two major political parties in the United States, there are various sub-factions within each party, all holding several basic tenants, but at the same time, disagreeing on many – neither party is, as of this writing, cohesive. The Democrat Party includes progressives, and moderates, as well as the newly minted “Blue Dog” Democrats, which are, from all intents and purposes, Republicans. The Republican Party has the moderate or Beltway Republicans and then the more focused conservatives, both fiscally and socially, that drive the vote. In addition there are several up and coming parties, including the Libertarian and American Conservative Party, all of which are drawing new members from both major political parties. Hoffman is a candidate of the New York Conservative Party, a separate entity, which was founded in 1962, after members of the Republican Party in New York, felt disenfranchised, and formed their own entity. The New York Conservative Party has been influential in races in New York State, electing James Buckley to the Senate in in 1970. (An extensive overview of the New York Conservative Partycan be found here at the University at Albany.

The Political Landscape

There has been a shift in the political think of the American populace, to the right – according to a recent Gallop Poll

“Forty percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 20% as liberal. This marks a shift from 2005 through 2008, when moderates were tied with conservatives as the most prevalent group.”

Gallop explains that the reason the shift is significant is that independents, are weighing in as holding more Conservative views, a 29% shift towards conservatism since 2008. Given that independent voters, (which make up a significant part of the electorate, especially in certain states (see Massachusetts with over 50% of the electorate designated as unenrolleds), and that those voters generally choose a candidate based upon identity, not party affiliation, it would then follow that conservative leaning candidates will be given the nod in the 2010 and 2012 elections.

The Evangelical Factor

A leader of what is dubbed “the right-wing, Evangelical factor”, (often erroneously tied to the Republican Party although, often responsible for Republican Candidates wins or loses, for that matter), James Dobson, made a stunning argument, or one might say prediction of today’s political landscape in 2007 in discussion with Fox New Talk show host, Sean Hannity. In a nutshell, Dobson argued that if the evangelicals did not endorse any Republican political candidate, and a left-of-center Democrat were elected President, the backlash to liberal politics over a period of several years, would result in a sweep of conservatism in 2012.
As one looks as polls on races in 2009 and 2010, Real Clear Politics, it is apparent that the nation is trending conservative in their choices.

Boston - Obama Draws Crowd of 4,000 in Cambridge – LA Times Offers Scathing Review of Obama on the Campaign Trail

The Boston Globe, reporting on Obama’s recent visit to aid embattled Massachusetts Governor, Deval Patrick, spoke of the “large” crowd of 4,000 that was filled with enthusiastic young people (the President spoke at MIT), also noting that there were a few protestors in the mix, among them, anti-war protestors. (You Tube Video of the President's Motorcade and Protestors below tell a different story, with very few supporters lining the street, and perhaps an under reported number of protestors doing the same) The Globe’s pool reporter, Matt Visor, covered the Presidential visit, citing the fundraiser and the fact that it would generate approximately $600,0000 to the Patrick Campaign, as well as Tim Murray (Lieutenant Governor) and the Massachusetts Democrat Party.

One has to understand that the President was in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in one of the bluest States, where a Presidential visit would draw crowds from both the University and elsewhere. The University alone has approximately 10,000 graduate and undergraduate students (Source MIT), therefore, it appears that the majority of the “crowd of 4,000” was local to Cambridge.

This begs the question – is the party over?

Apparently, this has been occurring elsewhere, and is now referred to as ”Obama Hangover” by those very incumbents who the President is attempting to “help”. The main point of his visits to the various states has been fundraising, but to what end? The race that may be the easiest for him to “aid” would be New Jersey, where incumbent Corzine, comes the closest (poll wise) to staying in his job, although he has dismal approval ratings. His trips to Massachusetts, Connecticut and specifically Virginia, may be, for all intents and purposes, a lost cause, as Virginia appears to be lost and with New Jersey, the outcome will be settled in two weeks, Massachusetts and Connecticut, although elections are in 2010, may be an even harder sell, with Chris Dodd and Deval Patrick facing extremely tough campaigns with very uncertain outcomes. The lack of independent crowds lining the streets to welcome the President to their specific state is what may be most telling – outside of the fundraisers and the on-campus visit, there appears to be little to no interest in the President – with the exception of media coverage.

The Los Angeles Times converge of Obama hitting the campaign trail, entitled “Hello, Boston! Obama stumps for troubled pal, Gov. Deval Patrick, then on to help troubled Chris Dodd” is a scathing review of the President on the campaign trail, going into the fact that fundraising is primary, and that he is bringing in less than stellar results, along with a question as to “how much is this costing the taxpayer?” Interesting to see the growing critics coming from, for all intents and purposes, “mainstream media”, but more so the lack of enthusiasm in general for a sitting President perceived as being such a “rock star”. It is the “American Idol Syndrome” that allows for Andy Warhol’s, 15 minutes of fame, that may why those pesky “masses” aren’t appearing in droves when the President in any given state for a “Drive By”, the rest of the populace has been steadily losing patience, as his approval ratings are under 50%, a far cry from the robust 65% he enjoyed on his inauguration day, only ten months ago. This tells us that the President, as head of his political party, has lost the all-important and growing Independent (or Unenrolled) voter who will, in all likelihood, decide the races in New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Virginia.

"Crowd in Boston for Obama's Motorcade"


Protestors in Boston