"Why I Am No Longer A Brain Dead Liberal"
 

That is the March 2008 title of an article written in the Village Voice when it outed Pulitzer Prize playwright David Mamet and presented in a WJS article May 28-29). Mamet reference some of liberals sacred cows "diversity is a commodity", "college is nothing more than socialist camp", "liberalism is like roulette addiction". He also says that" Hollywood liberals embraced communism because they hadn't invented pilates yet".

His conversion started with recommended reading by his rabbi. His first reading Whittaker Chambers "Witness" documenting Chambers turning from communism. Mamet also cited the folowing readings: "White Guilt" by Shelby Steele, "Ethnic America" by Thomas Sowell, "The Instinct of the Herd in Peace and War" by Wilfred Trotter, "The Road to Serfdom" by Frederick Hayek and " Capitalism and Freedom" by Milton Friedman.

He came to realize that "real diversity is intellectual". "Whatever its flaws America is the greatest country in the history of the world". The "free market always solves problems better than government". "It is the job of the state to be just not to render social justice". In his novel Secret Knowlesge he wrote "there is no perfect solution to inequality only tradeoffs".

He states that liberal believe everything is always wrong, global warming, second hand smoke, etc. and something must be done...The temptation to believe everything can be fixed is a fatal flaw...He used as an example calling to have your pluming fixed on a Saturday

He recalls being in Toronto and reading an interview, reprinted from the Chicago Tribune , with Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn discussing the bombing in the 1950's. And the reporter asked are you regretful about that and Bill Ayers say No no no. Mamet then got on a plane and while on the plane
learned they blew up NYC (Sept 11, 2001)

This was a great interview of David mamet byBari Weiss page A13

Rubicon; this is a good article I remember reading some time back. Thanks for bringing back to my attention. As a child of the '60's, I definitely relate.

You neglected to post a link to the article, so I'll link it for you.

http://www.villagevoice.com/2008-03-...-dead-liberal/

The free market alwasy solves problems better than the government?

Well, there's a good argument for solving MANY problems better - BUT...

This last fiscal crisis is because of an unregulated free market - specifically the toxic credit swaps that nearly brought every bank in the world down.

Much of the toxic credit swaps were there due to the GOVERNMENT forcing the issue and insisting that certain loans to certain folks be made. Perhaps if the Govt had not gotten involved...well, who knows

Once again I am recommending viewing the DVD, Inside Job, narrated by Matt Damon. It's available from NetFlix. After watching you may ask the same question I did. Why aren't these characters that move from Administration to Administration in prison?

Watch it and be prepared to be really ticked off.

I find that very hard to believe. Yes, it IS a policy of the government (and has been practically since the Revolutionary War) that private sector home ownership is encouraged. There have been plenty of quotes about that being the backbone of the economy. No argument there.

However, in all those hearings, I never once heard a bank CEO say "You made us do it". What I *have* heard was that there was so much money being made in mortgage-backed-securities (MBS) that the bankers got greedy. They wanted more and more loans being written but that everyone with *good* credit already HAD their mortgages so the only way to 'grow the business' was to loan to people who shouldn't get loans. The other major contributing factor, as I read over and over, was that there were too many people out there who thought real estate could never go down. (Idiots!)

So I ask you, sincerely, where you get the idea that the government 'held a gun' to the heads of these billionaires. I'd like to read that for myself.

So.....now you are the scarecrow?

Richielion: I don't know how to 1) link articles to TOTV 2) nor how to cut and paste previus posts as DaleMN did with my post above? I did reference the WSJ May 28-29 and the page in my comments as that is where I gathered the info.

Ialso noticed a few members critical of the statement that capitalism resolves problems better than government by pointing to the housing meltdown, debt swaps, etc. However we are still better off for we have remedies and/or jail terms waiting for violators which is better than socialist countries or monarchs wherein if you pointed to their leaers/kings malfeasance you would be jailed. socialist are so much better educated on how to cover up fraud and waste and have niffer places like Siberia to send complainers

New York Times article of 9/11/2003 on shot-down attempts to oversee Fannie & Freddie
 

Good reading here, in the New York Times on Sept. 9, 2003, on how the Bush administration attempted to do something about it before it hit the fan, but the usual "saviors" and "champions of the little guy" in Congress mocked, saying there was no problem:


New York Times
New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/bu...ted=all&src=pm

You have to go all the way down to the last two paragraphs to find it, but I wold hardly call it "mocking". Even so, those words by Narney Frank show that he didn't agree with the numbers (quoted earlier in the article) that said FNMA and FDMC were overleveraged. His comment about a new agency being able to reduce affordable housing is either taken out of context or completely off the mark because the loans don't determine whether or not a house is affordable. That's determined by how much HOUSE there is. Are you building a 2BR ranch or a McMansion?

Still, 5 years before it hits the fan, someone was out there ringing a warning bell.