Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Matt Taibbi: Obama's Big Sellout

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
FourScore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 12:01 AM
Original message
Matt Taibbi: Obama's Big Sellout
Obama's Big Sellout
The president has packed his economic team with Wall Street insiders intent on turning the bailout into an all-out giveaway

MATT TAIBBI
Posted Dec 09, 2009 2:35 PM

Watch Matt Taibbi discuss "The Big Sellout" in a video on his blog, Taibblog.

Barack Obama ran for president as a man of the people, standing up to Wall Street as the global economy melted down in that fateful fall of 2008. He pushed a tax plan to soak the rich, ripped NAFTA for hurting the middle class and tore into John McCain for supporting a bankruptcy bill that sided with wealthy bankers "at the expense of hardworking Americans." Obama may not have run to the left of Samuel Gompers or Cesar Chavez, but it's not like you saw him on the campaign trail flanked by bankers from Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. What inspired supporters who pushed him to his historic win was the sense that a genuine outsider was finally breaking into an exclusive club, that walls were being torn down, that things were, for lack of a better or more specific term, changing.

Then he got elected.

What's taken place in the year since Obama won the presidency has turned out to be one of the most dramatic political about-faces in our history. Elected in the midst of a crushing economic crisis brought on by a decade of orgiastic deregulation and unchecked greed, Obama had a clear mandate to rein in Wall Street and remake the entire structure of the American economy. What he did instead was ship even his most marginally progressive campaign advisers off to various bureaucratic Siberias, while packing the key economic positions in his White House with the very people who caused the crisis in the first place. This new team of bubble-fattened ex-bankers and laissez-faire intellectuals then proceeded to sell us all out, instituting a massive, trickle-up bailout and systematically gutting regulatory reform from the inside.

How could Obama let this happen? Is he just a rookie in the political big leagues, hoodwinked by Beltway old-timers? Or is the vacillating, ineffectual servant of banking interests we've been seeing on TV this fall who Obama really is?

Whatever the president's real motives are, the extensive series of loophole-rich financial "reforms" that the Democrats are currently pushing may ultimately do more harm than good. In fact, some parts of the new reforms border on insanity, threatening to vastly amplify Wall Street's political power by institutionalizing the taxpayer's role as a welfare provider for the financial-services industry. At one point in the debate, Obama's top economic advisers demanded the power to award future bailouts without even going to Congress for approval and without providing taxpayers a single dime in equity on the deals.

How did we get here? It started just moments after the election and almost nobody noticed.

'Just look at the timeline of the Citigroup deal," says one leading Democratic consultant. "Just look at it. It's fucking amazing. Amazing! And nobody said a thing about it."

Barack Obama was still just the president-elect when it happened, but the revolting and inexcusable $306 billion bailout that Citigroup received was the first major act of his presidency. In order to grasp the full horror of what took place, however, one needs to go back a few weeks before the actual bailout to November 5th, 2008, the day after Obama's election.

That was the day the jubilant Obama campaign announced its transition team. Though many of the names were familiar former Bill Clinton chief of staff John Podesta, long-time Obama confidante Valerie Jarrett the list was most notable for who was not on it, especially on the economic side. Austan Goolsbee, a University of Chicago economist who had served as one of Obama's chief advisers during the campaign, didn't make the cut. Neither did Karen Kornbluh, who had served as Obama's policy director and was instrumental in crafting the Democratic Party's platform. Both had emphasized populist themes during the campaign: Kornbluh was known for pushing Democrats to focus on the plight of the poor and middle class, while Goolsbee was an aggressive critic of Wall Street, declaring that AIG executives should receive "a Nobel Prize for evil."

But come November 5th, both were banished from Obama's inner circle and replaced with a group of Wall Street bankers. Leading the search for the president's new economic team was his close friend and Harvard Law classmate Michael Froman, a high-ranking executive at Citigroup. During the campaign, Froman had emerged as one of Obama's biggest fundraisers, bundling $200,000 in contributions and introducing the candidate to a host of heavy hitters chief among them his mentor Bob Rubin, the former co-chairman of Goldman Sachs who served as Treasury secretary under Bill Clinton. Froman had served as chief of staff to Rubin at Treasury, and had followed his boss when Rubin left the Clinton administration to serve as a senior counselor to Citigroup (a massive new financial conglomerate created by deregulatory moves pushed through by Rubin himself).

Incredibly, Froman did not resign from the bank when he went to work for Obama: He remained in the employ of Citigroup for two more months, even as he helped appoint the very people who would shape the future of his own firm. And to help him pick Obama's economic team, Froman brought in none other than Jamie Rubin, a former Clinton diplomat who happens to be Bob Rubin's son. At the time, Jamie's dad was still earning roughly $15 million a year working for Citigroup, which was in the midst of a collapse brought on in part because Rubin had pushed the bank to invest heavily in mortgage-backed CDOs and other risky instruments...

MORE AT: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31234647/obamas_big_sellout/print
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Vinnie From Indy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 12:11 AM
Response to Original message
1. The audacity of truth!
Don't forget Howard Dean! He was told to hit the road as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhaTHellsgoingonhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #1
26. "Waiters," this is exactly what you don't get about Obama
Edited on Fri Dec-11-09 08:58 AM by WhaTHellsgoingonhere
We don't have to give him another week, month, or year or two. He had defined his presidency before it even began: Bill Clinton's third term.


EDIT: Thought I was responding to OP :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tblue37 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #1
27. And Wes Clark. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidwparker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
79. wouldn't it be funny if he ran in 2012. Dean!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arctic Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
2. I am starting to wear out my pom poms cheering all this change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TacticalPeek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:04 AM
Response to Original message
3. "There was concern that a broad grant to ban abusive swaps would be unsettling," Frank explained.

Fuck this shit!

:grr:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
man4allcats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
118. That one got me, too.
"Unsettling?" Please! Give me a break! Unsettling is living paycheck to paycheck with no money in savings, with retirement wiped out and with a mortgage that is two months in arrears. Now that's unsettling!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thickasabrick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:17 AM
Response to Original message
4. OMG.....this is huge. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
5. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:32 AM
Response to Original message
6. It's all eleven dimensional chess, played by an unequalled master..
Obama is thinking a dozen moves ahead, he has more information than us and is smarter than us.

We are all just pawns in the great game.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:28 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. Obama is juggling nitroglycerin peddling backward on a unicycle he inherited from George Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 06:04 AM
Response to Reply #11
21. Nice imagery. At some point, people will no longer believe this
and will begin to see it as an excuse. Let's skip the excuses. President Obama is not on his training wheels anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuvuj Donating Member (874 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #21
67. yea...the bike fell over?
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #11
24. Yeah, and he recruited a bunch of arsonist firebugs to help him catch the nitroglycerin
And personally I wish he'd start pedaling *forward* not backward..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 05:03 AM
Response to Reply #6
18. I get it, but some people still believe this and it is getting really old.
My expectations level has pretty well bottomed out except for my expectation to be disappointed again with our Democrats, both the President and Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:36 AM
Response to Original message
7. When you explain to your grandchildren why they're eating cat food, show them this article.
While everyone was crowing about Obama playing chess, nobody asked who, exactly, he was playing against.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Dude!

+1:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 03:37 AM
Response to Reply #7
17. ++1 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #17
33. +++1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire1sKid Donating Member (223 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
44. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chimpymustgo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #7
63. Oh SHIT. Post of the month. (and who was getting PLAYED).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pokercat999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #7
81. Off topic but I had to respond....they already are eating
cat food. I heard on NPR this AM that several tons of chicken parts not fit for human consumption made it's way into the school food program and was served to children. The "standards" used by the fast food industry, BK, McDonald's, Jack in the Box, etc are a higher set of food standards than those used by the USDA for school food so this isn't a one time occurrence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #7
96. Someday,
I would like to quaff a couple of beers with you and shoot the shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:40 AM
Response to Original message
8. Bookmarked for later.. K&R
Taibbi is fast becoming my favorite real journalist..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:44 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. pls read this too:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:23 AM
Response to Original message
10. Damn, 55 unrecs for this. A lot of people are afraid of the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:45 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. Lots of Key Board Commandos
DLC and Hillary for President types.

Bill Cliton/Jamie Rubin Crafty Warriors against (insert Islamic Racial Epithet here)Heads
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 05:05 AM
Response to Reply #10
19. Truth is truth regardless of Recs or UnRecs, but how do you count UnRecs?
There is way too much obsession here at DU about Rec/UnRec when they are only good for 24 hours yet you can always kick a thread near the top of its forum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #19
30. Thread's on the Top Tens page, under Just Recs
Though I think I got the count wrong. There's another thread of almost the same name listed there as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:20 AM
Response to Reply #10
23. They know it, they are just afraid to acknowledge it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #10
34. Where is the unrec counter?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #34
41. You can calc the unrecs if the post is on the Top Tens page
This one is on the Just Recs list. Easy math (which I fucked up in this case :dunce: ).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. I have been to the greatest page, Seen the top 10 list, and still not seen the unrecs count.
Please enlighten me. I really want to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. There's a "Just Recs" list
Edited on Fri Dec-11-09 02:35 PM by jgraz
If a post appears on that list, the TOTAL recs are listed. Go back to the post, get the NET recs and subtract from TOTAL.

BTW, you can figure out unrecs from three of the four top ten lists. Just Recs is the easiest, but it's about as simple to do the math from New and Hot or On The Fence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #10
68. I guess so. Considering it's been debunked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #68
69. You should look up the work "debunked". I don't think it means what you think it means.
If you actually read the article and Ferholz's critique, you'll see that the article is not so much "debunked" as pecked at by little birds suffering from OCD. Nothing Ferholz lists weakens the central premise of Taibbi's article.

Funny how the Obamapologists are grasping at any straw to convince themselves that President McDreamy hasn't sold them down the river. I predict fetal positions and thumbsucking by next April.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. You should go look up the worth "truth."
You're using it wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #70
71. Um... I didn't use the word in my post, but thanks for playing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #71
73. #10
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #73
74. If you have to explain it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BREMPRO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #69
100. wow... the critique is a clear eyed factual debunk of Taibbi's errors
from a respected liberal publication and not only undermines his central premise, but his crediblilty. Your partisan blinders are denser than the strawman "Obamapololgist" you claim are "grasping at any straw". Take a moment to examine your own bias and intellectual honesty. Your argument and dismissal of this critique does a disservice to liberal integrity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #100
110. Once again, it's helpful to actually read the article we're discussing.
Maybe then you could show one factual statement that undermines Taibbi's central premise. Go ahead, just paste it right in here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BREMPRO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #110
115. the whole critique- there is no reason to post it if you actually read and understood it.
What do you consider his central premise?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #115
117. Pardon me while I die of not-surprise.
You said the whole critique was a "clear-eyed factual debunk of Taibbi's errors" that "not only undermines his central premise, but his crediblilty".

Given that, you should be able to post one single fact in the article that does anything to undermine the central premise (Hint: it's right in the title of the article).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:43 AM
Response to Original message
12. reading fire dog lake is making me sick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 03:16 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Thank you for that link --
I am not going to read it tonight - but maybe I can stomach it in the morning.

BTW some people say that if it were not for Obama marshalling key Democrats to vote for the Bush Bankster Bailout in fall of 2008, it would not have occurred.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #12
38. Yes, thank you for the link.

Marked for later reading.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #12
56. Here's link to video of Obama's Speech to Hamilton Project
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:52 AM
Response to Original message
15. Obama's 9/11, so to speak
oh man, this has to be the political scandal of the century. The unfathomable level of corruption here is just off the charts and seemingly unprecedented, like the Bush administration on steroids. if this story ever grows legs in the MSM and isn't simply ignored, I think the Goldman-Citigroup administration will be toast. as in kaput!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pjt7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
93. it should bring them down
but I think too many people are on pain-killing/numb drugs or can't comprehend this betrayal.

Hope I'm wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #93
99. I hope the scandal leads to the end of the
corporate-controlled, anti-democratic two-party monopoly that dominates our government and politics with an iron fist. good riddance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BelgianMadCow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 05:25 AM
Response to Original message
20. a really tough read, that article. Check this out:
"Neil Barofsky, the inspector general charged with overseeing TARP, estimates that the total cost of the Wall Street bailouts could eventually reach $23.7 trillion."

And meanwhile, the developed countries are debating giving 10 billion to developing countries over three years, to stimulate fast action against climate change.

The difference is so staggering I think my head is gonna explode.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CRH Donating Member (671 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #20
80. Excuse me, could you provide a link to the 23.7 trillion.

I'll google myself, but I think that figure assumes every bad mortgage, residential and commercial, written between 2003 - 2007 will fail and not be resold in a recovering market.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CRH Donating Member (671 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #20
90. Never mind a July article, here is the link, ...
Never mind found it here and the 23.7 billion is questionable and dated.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aY0tX8UysIaM

~~ snip ~~

July 20 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. taxpayers may be on the hook for as much as $23.7 trillion to bolster the economy and bail out financial companies, said Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for the Treasurys Troubled Asset Relief Program.

The Treasurys $700 billion bank-investment program represents a fraction of all federal support to resuscitate the U.S. financial system, including $6.8 trillion in aid offered by the Federal Reserve, Barofsky said in a report released today.

~~ snip ~

~~ again snip ~~

Treasury spokesman Andrew Williams said the U.S. has spent less than $2 trillion so far and that Barofskys estimates are flawed because they dont take into account assets that back those programs or fees charged to recoup some costs shouldered by taxpayers.

These estimates of potential exposures do not provide a useful framework for evaluating the potential cost of these programs, Williams said. This estimate includes programs at their hypothetical maximum size, and it was never likely that the programs would be maxed out at the same time.

~~ end excerpt ~~

That figure is already obsolete and is not a likely scenario if you continue reading at the link. Though this recovery will be slow and incomplete (IMHO), a recovery is indeed in its infancy. This is not to say the future standard of credit of the average american will ever be the same, but the eventual standard of living will be near the level before the crisis, for a person who lived simply, without debt or significant credit.

Future sustainable energy and lifestyle will have far more future effect and potential peril, than the present economic crash and muted recovery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:06 AM
Response to Original message
22. The Ugly Truth. But let's call this for what it is: ENRON Part 2 or is it Part 3 or Part 4...?
We've been screwed over so many times I've lost count. :argh:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spiritual_gunfighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
25. This is a dupe post
I posted it earlier in the day. Please check if something has been posted in the future, not cool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FourScore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #25
28. sorry about that , sg.
I kicked and recommended your post. I didn't see it last night because it was in the Presidential forum. I should have checked more carefully on the greatest page, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spiritual_gunfighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. Its okay it happens
it is an article that should be read by as many people on DU as possible so its all good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #29
40. Agreed.
I'm going to post it again tomorrow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #40
62. Good! I Saw The First Post AND All Those Who Were Dissing Taibbi!
I don't know how many here actually read him, but he's been one that I actually depend on for truth. He's done some very impressive work at Rolling Stone for a long time. I remember him writing some very good articles about Kerry way back in 2004! So when many here do their name calling about him, perhaps they should check his background.

When I began reading him quite some time ago I got the impression he was a Democrat, but MY kind of Democrat. Don't know if he actually calls himself one or not, however he's always been more Democratic friendly than otherwise IMO!

So for him to write this type of stuff means a lot to me, and frankly I believe him MORE than what is being spewed out from D.C.! What I can't believe is this... I fell into line and worked hard for Obama, even if I didn't agree with him on some big issues. There wasn't a real choice anyway, but when some say "well, that's what he campaigned on" it may be true, but now looking back, the wording seems fuzzy!

I DO feel betrayed even knowing that BEFORE the election he had been a person that many in Congress had slated VERY EARLY OB to push him as the nominee! The game started way back in 2004 and he got a lot of people on board at that time! A person could go on and on about various points in time, but it would take too long.

The game was played so very well, it's just too bad Democrats are unable to play "hardball" and fight back against so much, when it's quite evident that when they put their minds to it, they REALLY CAN GET SOMETHING DONE! Obama didn't get here without a LOT OF HELP from them! If Democrats wanted to get something done for "we the people" I really believe they could do it... I just don't think they WANT TO!

There are some who still stand for something, but just a VERY FEW. And those few are being told to "silence" themselves or pay the price if they don't go along! I really believe this now.

Outta here, I can't read anymore for today but I'm sure there will be MORE tomorrow. Each day it seems there's another "new" bombshell and I'm getting used to it. And so many here call us names because we "dare" to no agree with what is going on! I wonder what it will take for some to look behind the curtain!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #28
36. On contrary, thank you very much for posting this again!

I haven't seen SG's post either, and neither have many people! You've nothing to apologize for! This stuff needs more exposure. I don't care if it will get reposted many times - the more the merrier! :)

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #25
37. Absolutely nothing uncool about it. See post #36.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #25
48. dupe posts are perfectly acceptable in GD, just not in Latest Breaking News.
With the sheer amount of postings in GD, we can't expect every DUer to go hunting through to check whether something's already been posted.

On the other hand, if it's in LBN and it's a dupe, you can just hit the alert button and the moderators will combine the two threads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
31. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
32. When a presidential candidate won't take public funds so he can keep his donors hidden,
what to do you expect?

Remember that for next time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #32
39. Exactly. That should have been the first warning sign.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #32
58. THAT was a sign. NO Democrat would forego public financing,
yet you had cheerleaders like the Daily Kos thinking it was a good idea. WHERE did all of Obama's campaign money come from? It couldn't have all been from small donors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #58
66. Things that make you go, "Hmmmm":
A rookie Senator from Chicago shows up at the Iowa Caucus with a Hundred Million Dollars and an Up and Running Political Machine......

...maybe someone should have asked some questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #66
112. Many of us that were on the ground in Iowa did ask the questions and we were sending out Alarms
and we were screamed down and told to stfu!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #58
82. There were lots of cheerleaders, mostly campaign operatives and many of them on this board
who have mysteriously vanished. There was a point in time when it was practically impossible to post objections without being attacked by party operatives and by hardliners like a certain pair of "cats" I remember. People who questioned the campaign, including the public financing question, were denounced as many things, often as racists. The election of 2008 was an evil time on this board.

But those of us with eyes did say to ourselves the following:

1. No public financing? WTF.
2. Voting for FISA? WTF
3. Donnie McClurkin? WTF
4. Rick Warren? WTF
5. Bill and Hillary Clinton racists? WTF


And many many other WTF moments. Those of us with eyes are not surprised at most of what Obama has done, although I admit shock at the nakedness of the corporate giveaway in the health INSURANCE bill. I saw those mandates and realized that they don't even have to pretend to honor the promises they made to their voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
taught_me_patience Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
35. huge K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Torn_Scorned_Ignored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
42. Kicked
and recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
45. "They don't care about you at all, at all, at all." - George Carlin on Who Controls America
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
47. K&R - Taibbi knocks the facts out of the park-home run!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
50. K&R. I have been trying so hard to hold on to some hope.
Didn't even notice the early moves to dash them. Except the treasury appointments. And then the peculiar courting of Republicans, even though their administration had really hurt our national and economic security.

President Obama didn't have to be a big progressive to pass FDR-type legislation. That's what my hopes were riding on. FDR's New Deal had positive economic results. Put people back to work and we'll spend the money. The economic meltdown and wasteful wars and deferred infrastructure maintenance of the Bush Gang Rule gave him very practical reasons to go all FDR, in a 21st century way. It could have been so beautiful.

-- Medicare for all would have been the most practical and compassionate way to bail out taxpayers after they'd bailed out big finance. It is also a mixture of public and private elements, which could have been easily promoted as a bipartisan plus. Easy to sell-- low overhead and high patient satisfaction rate; ask your elders about it.

-- If anyone had a mandate, President Obama did; private insurers had to spend millions to turn desperate people against Medicare-type public options for health care. Corporations have spent millions to sow doubt about the empirical evidence of climatic destabilization. Most of us want more green engineering; we know oil is a limited resource and fossil fuels pollute the atmosphere.

-- We also know the economic balance is way out of whack. The rich have gotten richer and the middle class has fallen into poverty as so much US manufacturing, and then other jobs, have been outsourced.

-- Prompt withdrawal from the Bush Gang wars would have been the most ethical and economical way to distance his administration from their war crimes. Serious prosecution of those war crimes would have prepared our country to make the significant changes we need to reverse the atmospheric deterioration that has destabilized the global climate.

Therefore, that amicus brief in support of John Yoo, issued by the Obama Admin DOJ, hit me like a ton of bricks. I thought people might walk out of the Nobel address after that had happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #50
51. yeah, 'support' of John Yoo?! there's a red alert in the face
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #51
53. Definitely not change I can believe in. //nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #53
61. But, it's change you can make believe in!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
52. Obama is more of a traitor than we could have imagined. He's been bought and sold.
Plus, he's ruining it for every young person, especially of color, coming behind him who may be an honest progressive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hardrada Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #52
64. Good point. His could have been a transformative presidency
instead of a hostile hijacking of democracy for the oligarchs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike K Donating Member (539 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #52
65. The Amicus Brief:
When President-elect Obama was asked by a reporter if he intended to facilitate investigations or prosecutions of any members of the Bush Administration he said he had no such plans but would not stand in the way of any actions that might arise. This brief leaves no doubt as to who and what Obama really is.

While the action against Yoo is a civil tort, not a criminal procedure, it is certain to uncover facts which would unavoidably result in criminal charges -- which undoubtedly is why Obama is intervening. Because if Yoo is squeezed by an efficient prosecutor he is sure to implicate Cheney and even Bush, himself, who Obama is really protecting.

Obama is far too wise and experienced to not know how this unmistakable affirmation of his duplicity will affect the prospect of re-election in 2012. So I'm wondering whether he doesn't care or if he so egotistical as to believe he can just point his chin in the air and run his bullshit game over us again.

Either way we could be looking at a probable Republican presidency. Because Reagan is why we got Clinton, and Clinton is why we got Bush, and Bush is why we got Obama, and so it goes. Each time the pendulum swings the arc is greater. And the next swing could reach the limit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #65
101. Succinct and to the point. Good post.
You're on the money, Mike. I hope he wakes up to the damage he's doing to us and to our democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scarsdale Vibe Donating Member (228 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #52
123. Taibbi has found his niche playing to gullible people who love to feel outraged.
He's basically the Rush Limbaugh of the left, with less facts and more hyperbole. I'm sure he'll do a piece on TAPI pretty soon and you can be fantastically outraged at shadows yet again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #123
124. Did you read his piece?
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scarsdale Vibe Donating Member (228 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #124
128. Of course I read the piece.
I just am not convinced by overblown numbers about the bailout that are unsubstantiated by any conceivable real-life situations, nor am I convinced by his tendentious generalizations and flimsily constructed guilt-by-association hand waving. I went through and read the article again and counted seven times where he was factually wrong or disingenuously misrepresented the reality of a situation, based just on my prior knowledge.

A more thorough threshing of the "facts" is at http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=12&year=2009&base_name=oh_matt_taibbi

Once you take away the "facts" from the piece, all you're left with is conspiratorial grandstanding and splenetic opinionating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #128
129. Nice response at AP. I'm still not so sure that O hasn't baited and switched himself because
he's so lazy faire, (double meaning intended) or because he's now co-opted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DebbieCDC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
54. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #54
57. And now there's "no money" for job creation? Cute.
But why should Taibbi be shocked? Why should ANYBODY? Anyone who ever looked at Obama's career knows he is a neoliberal right out of the Democratic Leadership Council playbook.

It's just a statement of fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnceUponTimeOnTheNet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
55. K&R. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
59. Was candidate Obama
a Trojan horse?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blindpig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #59
116. Perhaps another kind of Trojan.....

considering the way we're getting screwed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CRH Donating Member (671 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
60. After reading the entire piece, ...

It is difficult to comment on much of it without much research.

If one ascribes to the appointments of good ole boy Wall Street professionals as inherently evil there is certainly lots of smoke before possible future fires. The article does paint a bleak insider influence picture, but at the same time perhaps prematurely inflames expectations of doom of yet to be enacted legislative reform, even before it is passed in its final form.

I found the comments of Rubin's various failures concerning when in context to him being the architect of proposed reform. Much of the past deregulation that caused the meltdown does land on his doorstep, and his tenure a Citi was beyond malfeasance. About all the good one could say of this, is if his intentions are honorable, he has a wealthy experience of what not to do.

There are a couple of points this author and others seem to infer that are disputable, or at very least need more time to ascertain. Example, the all encompassing statement of bailing out the largest Wall Street banks costing the tax payers countless billions, paints a picture with a broad and undiscriminating brush. Not all money lent to all banks will be lost, in fact the grand majority will be repaid. There are exceptions to this, not all of AIG will be repaid, but in large it is not accurate to assume that all the billions in TARP are a give away, and in fact some say small profits could eventually be realized.

There are other presuppositions in other areas of this article that tend to take the bleakest possible outlook of eventual outcome, and for me will take more research to agree to the same conclusions.

All in all a thought provoking article that needs more study before extensive comment, and periodic review of its predictive clarity in retrospect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
72. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Torn_Scorned_Ignored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
75. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnceUponTimeOnTheNet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
76. This thread has 149 recs and 74 posts. 2400 views.
That says something in and of itself.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #76
77. Actually, it has 182 recs, according to the Top Tens page.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnceUponTimeOnTheNet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #77
85. That makes 33 Unrecs. Rather telling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #85
87. And the other thread of the same name had 45.
Lotta people afraid of the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnceUponTimeOnTheNet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #87
89. It is disheartening. Reality hits us in the face sometimes, unpleasantly.
I so wish the President would throw under the bus the likes of Bernanke, little Timmy, and Summers.

We are not being served well with the likes of this leading the economic "recovery".
Credit Default Swaps, notwithstanding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
78. What I find so enlightening is....
Michael Froman who was named on 11/5/08 to help Obama with the Financial nominees was not only a Citicorp Executive, but his CLASSMATE AND FRIEND from Harvard Law.

Obama has always been a $$$$ dude. Remember when he was a 'Commmunity Organizer,' his wife was pulling down $300,000/year so he could add to his 'liberal' resume and appear is if he cared about people.

The fact that he sent his Campaign Strategists to Paris and 'Siberia' speaks volumes.

His entire campaign was a lie...a complete fraud.

When do the DUers who knew he was lying and were banned get to come back?????

Plus he wouldn't even have lunch with the King of Norway...a long established tradition when receiving the Nobel Prize which now is just a fucking joke. 'War is Peace.'

Can we do a recall? A do over?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BREMPRO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
83. blah blah blah- more conspiratorial partisan hyperbole from Taibbi.
there are few objective facts and broad omissions in his cynical narrative of events. For example, the economic team he demonizes as architects of the meltdown has been widely reported for over a year that they have recognized their mistakes and been consistent in calling for more stringent regulation. The financial reform bill that just passed the house actually has teeth (including a financial consumer protection agency promote by Elizabeth Warren) and it's ridiculous to argue that it strengthens Wall Street and won't help us avoid future meltdowns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #83
86. "been widely reported"
By who? You?

Summers and Geithner have fought every piece of regulation for their Wall Street buddies. Every. Single. One.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BREMPRO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #86
97. more willful ignorance and opinions based on hearsay. They have consistently supported reform
Edited on Fri Dec-11-09 09:42 PM by BREMPRO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #97
105. Next time, you might try actually *reading* the articles you link to
And if you *do* read them, try not to credulously lap up everything the government and the MSM tell you to believe, mkay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BREMPRO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #105
114. why would you assume i didn't read them? That's a lazy way to deflect an argument
your turn- provide evidence that your statement that Summers and Geithner have fought every single regulation proposed. They have critiqued some of them, but not outright opposed and agreed with the general principles of increased and effective government regulation and capital requirements to prevent another financial meltdown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #114
119. I assume you didn't read them because I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt
The other options are b) you didn't understand them or c) you're just being dishonest.

If you had actually read them, you'd have seen that none of those articles offers a single, concrete proposal to address any of the key issues that led to the meltdown. Are we capping executive pay? No, because http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/geithner-opposes-caps-on-executive-pay/">Geithner opposes it. Are we instituting a transaction tax that could tamp down rampant derivative speculation? No, because http://www.truthout.org/topstories/110809mr02">Geithner opposes it. Should we use some of the bailout money to shore up our failing infrastructure? No, because (say it with me) http://dc.streetsblog.org/2009/11/19/defazio-summers-geithner-oppose-using-bailout-money-on-infrastructure/">Geithner opposes it.

Have banks pay into a fund to prevent future collapses? http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/10/fdic_head_differs_with_geithne.html">Geithner opposes. Allow bankruptcy judges to adjust predatory mortgages? http://washingtonindependent.com/50303/treasury-skips-cramdown-hearing">Nope. A strong consumer protection agency with broad powers to regulate fraud? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32984436/ns/business-us_business/">Not so much. Or how about just instituting tougher controls on banks that have already been bailed out? You guessed it -- http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/business/economy/10bailout.html">Geithner opposes.

Are you starting to get the idea? Propose any minimal, consumer-focused regulation and, more likely than not, Geithner will step in the way. In your previous post, you stated that "(Geithner and Summers) have consistently supported reform and stricter regulation and done so publicly and privately." Read the above collection of articles. Is that what counts for you as "consistent support"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BREMPRO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #119
130. I appreciate that you at least provided links and an argument instead of just
Edited on Sun Dec-13-09 12:25 AM by BREMPRO
deflecting my points. I don't appreciate the sarcastic insulting tone of your presentation.

All you've really proved in your "geithner opposes" orgy is that you can find articles that suggest Geithner advocated for less regulation than others in the administration, but not for less regulation that we have now or that is advisable or possible to accomplish under the circumstances. Your implicit implication that everything opposed by Geithner was bad ignores the fact that there were thoughtful, deep, difficult and substantial arguments among advisers on what the best regulation policy would be in reaction to this entirely unprecedented crisis going forward. It also ignores the nature of power in our country, and the compromises that are needed to be made to accomplish anything.

The balance of regulation vs. encumbrance of regulation is a valid one. Your implication is that he simply was simply a sell out to banks. The reality is likely that he understood the intricacies of bank operation and was concerned with policies that could in the long run be more detrimental to taxpayers and the financial health of the institutions and the treasury. The reports from your links are that he was simply more convincing in his arguments, that other's arguments were less compelling, and he therefore prevailed in many of the decisions.

from the NY times article you linked:

"In an interview on Monday Mr. Axelrod did not deny that there were differences of opinion as the policy was being crafted or that he had taken a harder line on issues such as executive pay restrictions, as other participants to the discussions recalled. But he said he was ultimately satisfied with the final product put forward by Mr. Geithner.We had a great and productive discussion and as a result we came up with a good set of guidelines and rules, he said. I didnt come away disappointed in any way.


"In internal discussions, Mr. Geithner is said by officials to have raised the lessons of countries that forced banks to make loans and adopted other, more interventionist measures. Those strategies, he said, wound up costing more and undermining their governments credibility. He concluded the wiser course would be to provide economic incentives to encourage lending.

Some Democrats in Congress who have been given previews of the outline of the plan said it struck the right balance.

They want to make sure the plan is a balance of carrots and sticks, which are needed substantively and politically, said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, vice chairman of the Joint Economic Committee. They are using every tool in the book because the problem is so vast, but they are also tailoring their response to the individual needs of each institution.

One size does not fit all.

I wish we lived in a world where money did not influence politics, but it is just a reality. You can gnash your teeth at the evil bankers and compromised politicians, or you can try to constructively work to improve the system with the limits imposed by that power. Obama has been shown to be an idealist in his speeches and a realist in his polices. The observation that his policies don't reach the soaring idealism of his speeches, does not mean he's a failure or a sellout, but simply a realist who recognizes that to accomplish substantial sustainable change, and shepherd legislation through congress, compromises must be made. As the Firedog Lake critique wrote: "Given this Congress and the power of the banks, its somewhat remarkable that the bill is as good as it is" This is what Obama understands and why this is a victory despite it's shortcomings.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nc4bo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
84. Oh boy oh boy oh crap....
Been saying this for over a year now and some people are still trying to explain the obvious.

Well, I just read the first 5-6 paragraphs or so and I'm seeing bloody red all over again.

Excellent piece that I need time to read thoroughly.

Geezus.

Kick and Effin' R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pjt7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
88. Why doesn't our Press ask Obama
about this every single day?

Please be a part of America's restoration, not a major part of it's destruction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnceUponTimeOnTheNet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #88
91. The Press wants to run the Nation.
No Questions Asked.


Less at a White House Press Conference, "Why did the AP not report on this?" re: Cheney shooting some guy.
The facts were nearly buried by the "AP".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pjt7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #91
94. I just hope a coupe of good men or women
ask this 24/7.

Only takes ONE to change this Nation for the better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
INdemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
92. Now ..we are not stupid .we as in ..all of us here on DU
Do we really need to read an article for us to know that Obama has shifted to the far right? I knew GW was a corporate puppet. As it turns out Obama is also a corporate puppet.(maybe even more so) Its just that Obama can give a great speech and can really hand out the bullshit..So far Obama was right about one thing that I can see.He said if the healthcare reform bill failed he would probably be a one term President..Is is 2012 yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HCE SuiGeneris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 09:23 PM
Response to Original message
95. And the beat goes on,
and the beat goes on...

I am so very tired of getting beat on. :hangover:

My pitchfork tines are honed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllyCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
98. I'm 2/3 of the way through this article and have put it down
because I'm so pissed off. Just cannot believe we fell for this again. It will happen with health care and is happening as we type in the House as they try to make it easier for the banksters to rip us off!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pjt7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #98
102. Shame Obama family & close friends
I can't believe Michelle's brother (Craig) would go for this bulls$it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cowcommander Donating Member (679 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 10:49 PM
Response to Original message
103. Follow the money, follow the money
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #103
106. There was one guy devoted to that more than anyone else on the planet
Edited on Fri Dec-11-09 11:48 PM by chill_wind
(re: Wall Street and the FED ) and sadly we won't be hearing further from him:


Mark Pittman
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=anOj_XTh.8yo

His (Bloomberg's) suit continues on, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CRH Donating Member (671 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #106
121. Ugh, I'm now living abroad and hadn't heard of his passing, ...

In the past I read many of his articles, and with each passing one my eyes opened wider. He will be sorely missed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #121
122.  Audit Review. Mark Pittman CJR Interview from last February
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CRH Donating Member (671 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #122
126. Thanks, copied the link and read the article, ...

All we receive on cable here is CNBC, only on rare occasions Bloomberg is available. Every time I see Charlie Gasparino pimping his new Wall Street bad boys book, I want to puke. Where in the hell was he, and what was he reporting, when Pittman was chronicling the many MBS, CDS, OBS, short derivatives, Goldman short MBS bets, and other abuses unfolding from 2000 on? This crisis was a long time in building and there were few beacons to truth.

Thanks again for the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #126
127. Anytime :-)
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
104. tough read...i knew wall street, congress and the white house were incestuous
even i wasn't expecting it to be THAT flagrant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenTea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
107. Excellent, Excellent article, read the WHOLE article for ones self BEFORE
Edited on Sat Dec-12-09 12:06 AM by GreenTea
one begins to pontificates to cover & make excuses for the obvious bullshit.

Thanks Rolling Stone & Matt Taibbi, again, another interesting story right on the money article, as all RS & Taibbi pieces are.

Take the time to read it all.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31234647/oba...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
d3m0l1sh3r Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 12:11 AM
Response to Original message
108. This stuff makes it harder to defend him
Against republicans. I still do, but it gets harder. Too bad both parties are bad now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David Zephyr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
109. Kick.
Matt is not alone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iwillnevergiveup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 12:41 AM
Response to Original message
111. Actually, my heart sank
when Rahm got his appointment. That was very early in the game. Lord help us....maybe those who receive Nobel Peace Prizes become magically more peace-like as they gaze upon them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blindpig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 07:48 AM
Response to Original message
113. kick

The ugly truth becomes impossible to deny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
keep_it_real Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
120. THE QUESTION IS: Is Obama A Big Sellout?
After reading the article do you think, believe Obama is a sell out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulliver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-12-09 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
125. What Taibbi lacks in talent and accuracy....
...he makes up for in looks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 03rd 2020, 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC