I just saw this post at Paul Krugman’s blog: “The Unbearable Pettiness Of Being Rich” The post is a response to a column by Andrew Ross Sorkin about how Wall Street bankers are “deserting” President Obama in droves. Sorkin writes (emphasis added):
…what is surprising is that some of the president’s biggest supporters have so publicly derided his policies, even at the risk of hurting their ability to influence the party in the future. Issues like the carry-interest tax on private equity or the Volcker Rule have become personal.
Why so personal? The prevailing view is that bankers, hedge fund mangers and traders supported the Obama candidacy because he appealed to their egos.
Mr. Obama was viewed as a member of the elite, an Ivy League graduate (Columbia, class of ’83, the same as Mr. Loeb), president of The Harvard Law Review — he was supposed to be just like them. President Obama was the “intelligent” choice, the same way they felt about themselves. They say that they knew he would seek higher taxes and tighter regulation; that was O.K. What they say they did not realize was that they were going to be painted as villains.
Andrew Ross Sorkin
Good Lord! What do these bankers want anyway? The Obama administration has bailed their banks out with billions (trillions?) of taxpayer dollars and has kept any future regulation of the finance markets to a minimum. What Republican would have done more? And yet, they are turning on him because Congress insisted on at least trying to make it *look like* they cared just a tiny bit about the serfs?
And these people supported Obama because of their egos?! Lots of us thought they had actually made a calculated decision to support Obama because they knew he would give them what they wanted. And now we learn it was all about Obama’s ivy league credentials and snob appeal?
But wait…didn’t Hillary Clinton attend two ivy league schools too?
Now check this out from Krugman (emphasis added):
Andrew Ross Sorkin’s column today makes Wall Street honchos sound like spoiled kids; they went for Obama because he seemed like their kind of guy, then turned on him with a vengeance because they think he’s looking at them funny.
Based on what I know, that’s about right.
I talked to some financial-industry backers of Obama back during primary season; they really didn’t know or care much about policy issues, but were in love with Obama over his style — and also over the prospect of being in his inner circle, something they knew wouldn’t happen with Hillary. Now they’re mad because they don’t feel that they’re getting enough stroking.
I wish Krugman had revealed this little tidbit during the primaries. Maybe he did write about it then–does anyone know? If I can find anything I’ll update this post.
Reactions?
Like this:
Filed under: Barack Obama, Politics, Wall Street and the Bonus Class, we told you so Tagged: | 2008 Democratic Primaries, Andrew Ross Sorkin, bankers, Barack Obama, ego, greed, Hillary Clinton, Paul Krugman
Krugman: Bankers
Translation: Hillary is not a doormat.
The quote describes the essence of discrimination. You are not like me therefore, I do not trust you.
The fools were dead wrong about Hillary anyway. They should have checked with members of the Senate, both Republican and Democrat who learned not to make assumptions about her.
How were they wrong about her? They expected her to be tougher than Obama and she would have been. She wouldn’t have lived in fear of them like Obama does.
I meant that they were wrong about her because she has shown the ability to get along with people who were all set to think of her in terms of how she was defined by the media. The Senators she worked with quickly learned to respect her. I think the banksters would have done the same. I’m not saying she would have jumped on board with them, but they would have learned that she’s not as scary as she was portrayed in the media. Like Big Dawg has said, once people get to know her, they love her.
Oh, I see. That isn’t how I interpreted what Krugman said. He said the finance industry people knew they wouldn’t be “insiders” in a Clinton administration. And I think that’s true. Because Hillary knows how to take their money and still put them in their place. Obama was a slick newcomer and they knew it.
Krugman was saying that’s the real reason they picked Obama, not what they told Sorkin.
B-I-N-G-O, bb!
It’s like that quote that myiq always uses. I can’t remember the whole thing right now…
yup, she admitted at yearlykos that she took lobbyist money and didn’t do their bidding. No one gave her credit for that. Now we have an administration that never met a lobbyist they didn’t love.
Just because you meet with lobbyists doesn’t mean you have to give into their demands. Sometimes, you can learn from them.
Confirms what I thought. Obama = enabler; Hillary= rehab. They should have gone with the girl and would have been on the road to recovery.
Gosh, doesn’t Paul have dreamy eyes?
That is a really cute picture, isn’t it?
[The Obama administration has bailed their banks out with billions ]
TARP occurred under Bush.
But with the agreement of both candidates.
Yes, Obama was involved. He and Paulson were best buddies at the time.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Economy/story?id=6626721&page=1
But what about the AIG deal? That was arranged by good old Timmy Geithner. Why did Obama appoint him if Obama disapproved?
Obama made fun of McCain for viewing the financial crash as an emergency, but he whipped votes for Bush’s TARP behind the scenes (and behind closed doors, as is his wont). However, once it passed, he claimed credit for getting it passed.
So you’re saying Obama has done nothing for the banks?
You’re new here, aren’t you? Maybe you should introduce yourself.
TARP was under Bush, but Obama was left to distribute billions of dollars from that fund, and he did pleased the bankers with no strings attached. AIG funneled billions of dollars to GS.
Obama was involved when discussions about the meltdown took place. He was in the meetings with Bush, Paulson, etc. And Paulson sat with Obama, not McCain.
His ‘Office of the President Elect’ was heavily involved with that deal.
hmmmnnn, I guess Ben has nothing else to say.
I think Ben was just a hit and run. Too bad. I like it when the trolls try to argue with us.
TARP was dead, Paulson was given the dead flea infested rat CPR to no avail…Candidate Obama took over the ministrations of this creature asking for house members to give blood.
Nobody will ever forget Obama’s heroics in saving Bush’s policies.
I get scrubbed here regularly because I am critical of Hillary’s pre-SoS foreign policy, but on the domestic front, she’s golden to me. TARP wouldn’t have happened without Obama’s intersession, had Ms Clinton been rightfully nominated, Democrats wouldn’t be staring political oblivion in face right now.
Obama prevented necessary reforms of an elitist government, he’ll go on to be a wealthy “inspiring” speech giver, with a nation in ruins, oblivious to his role in the destruction.
Yes! It did occur under Bush. But guess who was whipping for the ORIGINAL “let’s give into the bankers’ demands or they might hurt us” version with absolutely no strings attached?
Did I hear you say Barack Obama? I can’t hear you, speak up!
You would be correct. Barack Obama want to pass the first no strings attached TARP. Isn’t that cool and groovy?
Yeah, I didn’t think so either.
You may need detox before you can play with us.
Oh yeah, Obama has “really” leaned on the financial class. He’s bailed their asses out with how many gazillions? And then has the audacity to ask for crumbs back?
What a folk hero!
This is just more excuse-making for the Obama Administration. He’s the tough enforcer and now he’s getting the heat. Boo-hoo!
He’s getting the heat from the middle-class because he’s been squeezing them out of existence. And if the financial class isn’t happy then they’ll never be happy without the complete destructive control of the Nation’s economy. Serfdom, here we come.
They want their egos stroked. Go to a shrink. Or trade places with the unemployed for a moment of reality. They don’t like the role of “villian?” Then stop behaving like a pack of wolves.
I’m so weary of these “revelations” from the so-called experts. Krugman included. To quote John Smart’s tag line:
We knew Obama was a fraud before it was cool.
Amen, and well said. I think it’s just another Sorkin to Krugman sympathy ploy for The One.
Too late.
And thanks for the John Smart line! I love his blog…..read it every day.
You don’t find it interesting that Krugman says bankers chose Obama over Hillary because she wouldn’t cater to them? I thought it was interesting.
I wouldn’t want to make you “weary,” but how is this excuse-making for the Obama administration? Are you referring to my post or to something Krugman said?
Could you be a little more specific?
Thanks.
I thought that was interesting, too.
Krugman was pretty clear during campaign that Hillary’s health plan was much better than O’s.
He has always seemed to have more respect for Hillary and her policies than he does for O.
That has been my impression. There may be something important that I’ve missed.
But of course he along with all of us got stuck with The One, and I imagine he has hoped for the best, and tried to help make things work, but his exasperation often peeks out in his writing.
Boston, I’m not criticizing you or the post. I’m simply expressing my frustration with these public personas waxing eloquent over what went wrong in 2008 when an inexperienced, fast talking Senator from Illinois presumably fooled the “best and the brightest.”
If they fell for the spin then they weren’t so smart afterall. How come we saw the truth, trotting down the pike big as life? If they thought Obama was one of “them” then it begs the question: do they all consider themselves over-educated conartists? I could easily answer that one :0).
To me, all of these articles from the professional/creative class now expressing dismay over POTUS and his failure is just one big whine. The evidence was on the table early on: inexperience is not a virtue. And when you elect a man to high office without investigating him or his accomplishments [or lack there of], then don’t be surprised at the results.
I’m angry at them, not you. I’m angry at the lost opportunity. And the idea that the financial class isn’t getting stroked enough or are upset because they’re being cast as villians? Boo-hoo. That’s what happens when you go for surace qualities rather than substance.
As far as excuse-making for the Obama administration, I’m referring to this:
“They say that they knew he would seek higher taxes and tighter regulation; that was O.K. What they say they did not realize was that they were going to be painted as villians.”
How many times has Obama come out and ripped the bankers for creating the biggest Ponzi game in the Universe? Or insisted that the games they played and continue to play have been based on their risk-taking and our [tax payer] liability? The much heralded FinReg bill will not prevent another meltdown. Obama hasn’t done squat with his Presidential muscle, so I fail to know what they’re complaining about. And comments like that cast Obama as a “man of the people” when all evidence points to just the opposite.
As for Krugman? I don’t think it’s any grand revelation that Hillary was edged out because she wouldn’t “play along.” The powers-that-be wanted an empty suit, a flexible team player, and that’s exactly what they got.
And the games go on: corporate backers win; we lose.
As I said, my frustration is with the situation, not you or the post.
Besides, I love your columns.
Your points are excellent BB and I love your “shorter” version of what the bankers said: “Hillary is not a doormat.”
I even think Professor Krugman agreed with this and that’s exactly why he supported Candidate Clinton over Candidate Obama in the primary. Because she was the strongest candidate. (Like many Democrats, he transferred his support to Obama after that, but I think he hoped Obama would be better than he has proved to be.)
djmm
Krugman should have made a huge stink out of this during the election but I totally buy that what he’s saying happened because as I’ve said all along about the Dem elites–I think they too just supported Obama because of a) their corporate masters thought Obama would be a better tool for distracting the public from what is really going on, and b) they (ie Dem elites) feared Hillary becoming president would mean diminished relevance for them.
Thats what I think. If he really talked to these people and got this impression, he should have written about it then. As I said, maybe he did. But I can’t recall reading it.
absolutely right Wonk!
I also think congress saw him as a gravy train able to raise lots of mony for their campaigns.
So the Bankers became Obots the same way all the children did – they got The Bam.
And now their wittle weelings are hurt. How pathetic.
“wittle weelings” made me lol. Good one.
theyre’ all wee -weed up
LOL that’s the one!!
I remember reading a woman who worked on Wall St writing and talking about Obama hanging around all the time after he was elected to the Senate. He would go to their parties and social functions, and suck up to the bigwigs at their offices. She thought he was a schmoozer, hustler, and fake. He was there most weekends and not going home to Chicago. That stuff is not available any longer online because I have looked. So Krugman is suggesting that Obama convinced the Wall Streeters that he was one of them? That he infiltrated their club and conned them into thinking he was something that he isn’t? Then when he got what he wanted, their money, their time, and connections he dropped them. Is not this Obama’s entire history. He gets what he wants from people then just moves on climbing over their wrecked lives.
In no way do I feel sorry for the Wall Streeters. But hasn’t Obama done this to every group and only associates with groups so that he can get something from them? I see him as the ultimate user.
Obama has done nothing policy wise to cause Wall Street anger.
?
I think they may feel conned anyway. He has revealed himself in some way not to be one of THEM. Who knows? Strange things piss people off. They got what they paid for but it is biting them in the behind.
How is it biting them in the behind? Are you serious?
There is a Volcker Rule, albeit a watered down one. I think Geithner and Summers pretty much promised them that it wouldn’t be there ata all. But, some of the reforms that got through–including Blanche Lincoln’s stuff–hardly came with whole hearted support from the White House.
“not one of them” ?? I don’t understand… could you clarify? Obama is their guy. imho it’s kabuki that they (Wall Street) are angry with him. The only reason they may be truly angry with them is their con job isn’t working anymore and Obama is no longer an effective spokesmodel to carry out their agenda.
I agree. I think they picked Obama because they knew he would cater to them. And he did. Unfortunately for them, this isn’t a dictatorship yet, and a few tiny reforms went through. Obama didn’t realize that nothing he did would ever be enough. They used him to get what they wanted, and now they’ll use a Republican President to get even more.
Part of it might be also that Obama is not a multi tasker and he tires easily so he probably has not puttting any energy into to them,social energy.
I think he is basically hunkered down within his bubble.
Don’t ya just keep remembering the SNL 3:00 AM sketch? Remember how the actor was freaking out at how hard it all was? I think that is his basic state of mind. People think he is aloof and cool but that is a personality he developed early in life to deal with his identity,I don’t think it always reflects what is going on inside.
BINGO!!!
Could it possibly be that Ozero has completed his mission
to destroy the D brand which was why he was selected in the first place? Did people disregard the rage and need for revenge from
from those who selected Bu$hit that he was labeled a
dullard, bafoon? Did you think the Bu$hit cabal died or
disbanded? Has Ozero originated, developed, extended
any democratic issue with any teeth or notable result?
Why in heaven’s name would they feel conned – they are now assured to get back with a Rethug in office. Ozero was never a leader – just a puppet repeating what he is told (of course
you have to use totus to give speeches – the man has no
inner thoughts, core values, issues D or R – integrity). Maybe
they will fuss for bunraki theater….jmo…but that is all it is.
TFH theory
I need to read more..
yes bunraku, kabuki, theater, whatever you want to call it, that’s what this is. Gotta get outside of Plato’s cave and see what the shadows we’re seeing are really about.
If Wall Street is mad at all it’s because Obama couldn’t keep the show going long enough.
Good point, Wonk. They probably expected the progs to remain enamoured of him a lot longer. Obama made the mistake of being too blatant–he should have thrown them a few more bones and they might have bought it.
I’ve suspected this from day one. You can’t upend liberal philosophy the way Obumbles has without being a plant. Obumbles is the evidence that there is a cabal that runs this country from the shadows. Bush II was the first one that really had me suspiscious. I could never figure how the American people could elect such a dullard without something being behind it. Even Nixon, who was as corrupt as my ass is black, was an intelligent man. But Bush and Obumbles?? My intellect is ahead of theirs in terms of both management and policy. That’s a horrible leader.
Now in terms of Hillary, my intellect in terms of management and policy is probably around 25-35% of hers on the best of my best days. THAT is what I want in the White House.
Asshats.
Hillary 2012
Which is why Hillary said she just didn’t want to see us fall backwards …. she saw what was happening and that we had to reverse it… she sounded the alarm. This is not a game!
The Ds work for the bankers just as hard, but have to create theater and talk bad about lobby money. It’s not about policy. The bankers see an opportunity to back the Rs, who don’t apologize that they work for any lobby with power. That’s the only difference. The Ds are into theater. The Rs don’t have to.
That’s not very smart. When there isn’t anyone providing cover, then it just looks like highway robbery–like it did under Bush. Then Americans start getting mad.
Is not this Obama’s entire history. He gets what he wants from people then just moves on climbing over their wrecked lives
Indeed it is and anyone not too lazy to google for 5 mins could have known that years ago . ….I’m bored with those just getting it about BO ….pathetic
Krugman was repeating things he heard from people in the finance community. Did you read his post?
Yep, and it reminded of the Wall Streeter who thought he was a fake and hanger on. It sounds like Obama told them whatever he thought they wanted to hear, schmoozed them up, and convinced them they were bosom buddies. Now he is too busy to play golf with them. These people are still in high school.
I don’t think Obama is too busy to play golf with them though. I think Wall Street is just doing what the did with Bush. They backed the shit out of Bush too and then when public opinion soured they were all behind Democrats and Obama. The only difference is public opinion has soured on Obama much sooner than it soured on Bush.
Wall Street is always looking for escape route and another PR shiny object to distract with. With all the CDS amongst the elites, I suspect Bill Clinton’s election was a mistake that they didn’t intend for to happen.
There is no way they expected Clinton to win. Bush I was truly “one of them.”
Don’t you think too that Wall Streeters are embarrassed to be associated with the rethug party? They just aren’t cool. Why would they have to when there was a Dem they could manupilate. Now he is turning out to be inept and because of his failures power is shifting. They will follow the power.
That’s true. Lake Lady. A lot of Wall Streeters are registered Dems. I never knew that before 2008. They thought Obama was “cool,” so they bought him.
I think Wall Street was only temporarily not wanting to be associated with Bush after Katrina and everything unraveled from there. Dems were just a lifeboat for Wall street when they needed to make an escape from the horrible mess they themselves made with Bush. So they got behind Obama, thinking they could use the “historic”/pop culture nature of everything with him as a huge distraction (look the first black president is doing xyz for the first time!) from what was really happening where people weren’t looking. But, the distraction’s not working right now. I think maybe if anything, that’s what might be irking the elites. I can’t see what problem they have with all the wealth transfer he’s overseen to Wall Street.
With all due respect to Big Dawg, I think the elites would have gotten their way in 1992 if not for the renegade elite member Perot, who, like the Clintons, was not born into the elite.
Conning people into believing he’s something he’s not seems to be Obama’s one strength. If you want to call being a con artist a “strength.”
You quote some wall streeter talking about Obama hanging around….no reference or proof for this at all – unbelievable. As a matter of fact, my professor lived very near Obama in Chicago – i spent almost every weekend working with the woman and trust me, Obama rarely missed a weekend with his family in Chicago.
Such armchair psychologists here – you just believe every little nugget thrown your way and then run with it, making up stuff as you go along.
yep
It takes ovaries of steel to ve this unpopular.
But wait…didn’t Hillary Clinton attend two ivy league schools too?
*******
No… but a “Seven Sisters” school IMHO, has more prestige than some of the Ivy League
I knew someone would point that out, but come on. Close enough. And she got her law degree from Yale.
OT: This is creepy. I just got a call from Bank of America about my credit card debt, which I faithfully pay down every month with more than the minimum payment. They asked about my employment, my income, my house and my savings, and they have cut my credit line. (I don’t use the card which I was close to maxing out anyway.) I have been given a number for debt management services, which I will call.
Dak – am I about to lose my house and my savings, or what?? Please answer!
Just curious. Did you answer their questions?
I answered as to my employment, income and house, but not my savings.
Are you absolutely sure it was really BOA? You didn’t give them your account number, did you?
that was my question….
My thought also. I bank at BOA and have never received a call like that.
Branjor – if you bank online you may want to first check your account and second, change password, etc.
I did not give them any account numbers. I also wondered if it was BOA, but her information as to my debt and payments was so accurate I thought it probably was, though she didn’t mention my BOA account number. I am going to call BOA in a while to make sure before I call the debt management service number she gave me.
Dee – I never received a call like that from them before either – but I was also never so in debt before.
I only bank online occasionally, as I am still in the dark ages and usually send the payments by snail mail, but I will check my online account.
Good question…I was phished about a year ago. Had a call on my answering machine from Social Security Adm. Called back to a very convincing automated answering system. The person that I talked to knew all of my info but phished me for place of birth.
About a hour later, I realized that I had probably been “had” and traced the phone number (phoney) then notified all credit card companies, etc.
Call BOA and check with them if they really called.
If it was really them ask them why they called and, imo, sound mad.
If it wasn’t them then tell them someone may be trying to steal your identity.
that was my thought too … I’ve never heard of BOA doing that. I’d call them back immediately and find out if they actually did do that
If the Debt services place asks you for money, I’d talk to a lawyer before paying anything. Those places can be horrible rip-offs.
Thx, warning taken.
I also think you should call BOA to make sure they really called you.
Branjor, everyone knows our debt load and payments. They buy that info from the credit reporting monsters. My mom sold her house recently and you wouldn’t believe the personal info included on the junk mail she’s received. It’s some scary shit!
Maybe it was the Debt services place running a con?
Dak is busy today, so she might not see your comment for awhile.
They can’t take your house, etc. when you have been making your payments. Even if you had missed payments, you would be a very long time from getting sued. People are defaulting left and right. They are probably getting nervous and checking on people’s ability to pay. But they can’t do anything to you if you are current with your payments–except raise your interest rates which is not a small thing.
You might even be able to make a deal with them to reduce the amount you have to pay.
Whew! Thanks, BB.
It would be good if I could make a deal with them to reduce the amount.
Did they say anything about your interest rate?
Yes, they said they might reduce it.
Really? Maybe they are building up to making you an offer. As soon as you know for sure it was BOA, you should call the Debt services place and see what they are offering.
Remember these banks are really still on the edge of failing, and millions of Americans can’t pay their bills at all. They’re trying to get every cent out of people that they can.
Everyone, thanks for the help! I’m going to make the call now…
yeah, sorry, I had a meeting at UNO this morning. Sheesh, they’re now talking a 35% cut for next year and they’ve given notice to half the department (including tenured staff) they won’t have jobs next year. DEPRESSING as HELL.
oh no! (((kat)))
That’s such a tragedy for education in LA! Penny wise and pound foolish is the order of the day.
He doesn’t care. He’s shooting for the VP position on the next Republican ticket. He can’t run as son of Reagan if he doesn’t shrink the number of public employees. That means doctors, nurses and teachers.
Asshats. Do you need me to come there and slash some tires?!?
I dunno … I can’t imagine the state troopers are going to let you do that to Jindal’s SUV but I’m just hoping some swamp savvy Cajun takes him on a pirogue tour and leaves his ass there
You mean {{gulp}} with the alligators??
LOL
What are they trying to do? Wipe out education? I don’t get it, we on the North Western hemisphere are already falling behind. Why? This is as you stated, depressing as hell.
no, he’s just trying to get to higher office on our backs. he knows full well what he’s doing
Dak, I’m so sorry, that *is* depressing! I guess they don’t want as many people to get higher educations as have been getting them. What is happening to us?
Comment above is not nested where I intended it to be.
Excuse me, comment below. it’s been a looong afternoon.
he’s said we graduate 10,000 too many four year graduates a year because that’s how many kids leave the state and go where there’s opportunity. Rather than bring opportunity here, he’s going to either incarcerate them or pawn them off as serfs to the hotel and gas and oil industry
How utterly backward of him. Who knows what it will take to get some forward thinking implemented in this country for a change.
Hi everyone, I’m back!
I called BOA and found out that it *was* them on the phone. You can’t be too careful these days because of identity theft and various cons, so I wasn’t about to do anything before verifying. They referred me to a consumer credit counseling service called Money Management International. Since it was BOA, I let this company do an exhaustive assessment of my finances, income, expenses and debt. They said I could get a reduction in my APR and smaller monthly payment amounts and now I just have to decide if I can get a better deal from them or by working with my credit card companies individually. I’m not sure which would be better yet. If I went with the MMI program, the fee for it would be $30 per month. They will send me a summary of their findings and recommendations in the mail plus details about their program.
Whew, I am bushed!
good, I’m glad at least you weren’t conned … be careful of those fees!!! They add up! Especially as your balances go down!!!
I’d try to do it on your own!
Yes, that would be $360 per year over about a 5 year period, and with lower balances it probably wouldn’t be worth it. I’ll have to see what the cc companies will do individually.
I would call BoA right away. That caller could have obtained that information about your debt & payments by pulling a credit report on you. Have you ever obatined your credit report from http://www.annualcreditreport.com? It is the only truly free one, and the 3 reports will show who has made credit inquiries.
Thanks, QED, good website! MMI also referred me to it.
They got me! Bof A forecloses on 45,000 every third month,
is my understanding. They get 100,000 from the FDIC for each one according to a you tube a friend sent.
They can foreclose while you are still paying all of your bills? How does that work?
I don’t understand this comment:
“They get 100,000 from the FDIC for each one according to….”
The post was about a credit card.
100,000 what?
Branjor was asking if she would lose her house and all her savings because of this, and I told her no one could take her house when she was paying her bill every month. I’m no expert, but I think that’s still true.
Right now, many people are defaulting on their credit cards and the credit card companies are offering deals to help them pay at least something. I thought maybe BOA was approaching people who are close to maxed out in the hopes of keeping them from defaulting.
Before the recent credit card “reform” went into effect, these companies were increasing people’s interest rates up to 30 and 40%. I don’t know if that has changed. That seems counterproductive–who can pay that? It encourages people to just give up and default, declare bankruptcy or whatever.
are you talking lowering your credit limit? I’m not sure what you’re saying either
I apologize for the diversion of this thread. Thanks, everyone, for all the help.
That’s OK. What are friends for?
I sleep days, so I’m not always so alert in the daytime.
Some months ago, I got an automated call, allegedly from my bank, telling me my bank card had been compromised or something like that. (I was awake already, but my brain was still running on impulse drive; the warp engines had not yet been engaged.)
The call then asked me to punch in my card number. I almost bit on it, but the call forgot to specify credit or debit card–so I could not answer. I called my bank to find out which card they meant and was told it was a scam. I was so zonked I would have bitten on it if the call had specified which kind of card. I merely got lucky.
I think it’s real interesting Wall St is setting up the narrative they were had by Obama . That’s a lie…so what’s their plan for the puppet known as BO . ?
I saw Mort Zuckerman being interviewed a few weeks ago. He kept saying over and over again that Obama is anti-business. Mort was unhinged.
He was repeatedly asked what Obama policy/ legislation had caused his anger and he could not answer it.
My thought – “Obama is just not that into you.” Seriously, Mort’s feeling were hurt and he could not acknowledge that his heart was broken by the guy he thought loved him unconditionally.
Was Mort one of Obama’s schmoozees? Let see if he and the others go through the five stages of grief.
Perhaps they’ve just realized that the tide of public opinion has changed, and they are considering their next move?
You bet. Between an R and a D, the rich will choose an R. Obama was only necessary in 2008 when Hillary might win. I don’t believe Wall Street has any feelings whatsoever.
Spot on.
Sadly, I agree. The one chance for the people was not to be countenanced – ergo Obama.
Good point!
They cannot be on the side of the loser. Sands are shifting fast, they can read polls and they must be astonishing bad for the Democrats, so all they got is he isn’t really one of them. He hurt their feelings. I cannot stop grinning at the inanity of it.
Wall Street donations to Republicans for the mid-terms – 68% .
DCCC and DSCC is shocked because they felt they spent enough time on their knees servicing these guys. Apparently the Republicans just give better blow jobs.
Seems to me the Repubs are busy buying the House and Senate for Obama. It will be there gift to Obama with the message – do what we tell you to do or we will beat you in 2012.
Unfortunately this makes things look just about impossible for Hillary in 2012. If they fear her, they’ll just throw all their money behind the Republican.
Yep.
Let ‘em. Enough is enough. Its going to take people like the non-Obot posters to go out NOW and change minds. I am betting heavily on the fact that we will be in so much pain as a result of Republican/Obumbles policy that common sense will re-emerge in our collective psyche.
It will all hinge on women. If women throw 40% support accross party lines for Hillary, she will win. Or this country will perish,
Hillary 2012
Honk.
Honk, Honk
Oh, thanx a HEAP for those mental images, Dee.
Now where did I put that economy-size bottle of brain bleach?
So the Bankers became Obots the same way all the children did – they got The Bam.
And now their wittle weelings are hurt. How pathetic.
**********
I found it rather odd that during Bush/Cheney, the Dems wailed and cried about the rethug agenda but it always seemed to pass. The Dem battle cry was “we need money for majority then we can change the direction..blah..blah…” well Dem majority, same result, the corporate agenda still advances…Dems response “It’s not our fault…we need money for the Presidency”….Dem President, Dem Congress….the corporate agenda moves even faster.
So far, the evidence seems to indicte that we have a single party system which is in power to advance the international corporate agenda despite the severe damage that is being done to the future of this Country. The banksters, etc. got what they wanted from the Dems and Obama…After less than two years, the Obama party is now political dead meat and big money will bankroll the Republican Congress and Presidential candidates.
All of the bullshit that Obama is a Socialist Muslim or that Obama wants to do the “right thing” but is prevented by (fill in the blank) is just swill for the bases of each party.
But one always wonders why politics is the cheapest game in town. The return on investment for buying a politician is HUGE. By donating a few million to a candidate or even a hundred million to an entire party (or both parties), the bought pols create legislation that benefits the corps to the tune of BILLIONS. So much cheaper than marketing and advertising.
Just an example how much did pharma/insurance “donate” in order to bring about the huge windfall of mandated insurance plus the ability to write a bill with no cost restrictions and an exchange to dump the high risk people into? How little did it cost to get government subsidies for Medicaid patients so they can buy private insurance? HOW MUCH will that be worth in the long run?
That’s actually the irony, these pols act like elites, but they can be bought for just 13 pieces of silver and bring an entire superpower down with them.
SHV: Dead on!!!
Yep. That’s Obama and his supporters.
I feel like I’ve been Redundant Robby for nearly three years now but I’ve said all along, Obamanation is a spoiled brat high school culture. Cool groups and snotty smug ridicule, popular kids passing notes (Journolist anyone?) and deceitful plotting. Immature inexperienced know-it-alls with poor judgment, no sense of responsibility, vain, dismissive, indulgent … I could go on and on.
It’s real super cool when the cool guy drapes his arm across your shoulder and you both laugh while you help him kick the smart competent girl off the platform. But it’s less cool when you hear the cool guy turn on you. And that’s how it happens.
And I am not impressed that Sorkin or Krugman or any other Obama apologist writes about it now. It’s too friggin late. Even if all of them write and talk about it ad nauseum now, it’s too late for all the big things we could have done in 2009 and 2010. Can I say asshats here? Asshats!
Zaladonis, I always find myself nodding in agreement when I read your comments.
Me too. This has been going on for more decades than I care to remember, it’s just gotten more blatant in the past few years since the AGE of OBAMA.
I work with a lot of the Private Equity types, and I definitely think Krugman has it right, for the men at least. They all thought Obama was “one of them”. The only one they wanted more than Obama was Romney, but since it was clear pretty much from the beginning that Romney did not stand a chance in the Republican primary, they all jumped on the Obama band wagon. Many of the women actually were Hillary supporters, but women make up such a small percentage in this area that they unfortunately don’t carry a lot of influence.
I would also point out that, from a policy standpoint, they are all generally pretty happy with the way things have gone so far. Sure, they pick at a few of the more symbolic, toothless regulatory changes, but that’s just for fun. They know the regulations that were passed are essentially meaningless, and they know that Obama only allowed it to keep the Obots in line.
I think they’ll stick with Obama unless Romney starts looking like he could win the Republican primary in 2012. If that’s the case they will definitely jump ship.
Thanks for sharing your insights, dk!
No problem. I think a lot of Obots would be amazed at how small a blip on the radar screen the final FinReg bill was to these people, for example. It really doesn’t change their business model (and potential for profits) in any meaningful way. It’s a joke.
I really appreciated your insights here, too. It confirms my thinking that in 2012 that a GOP empty suit like Romney winning is probably slightly worse than even Obama winning. both are almost equally bad, but I have this nagging suspicion that a Romney winning would be even worse. It’s another PR distraction for Wall Street all over again.
I’m not sure. If there is a Repub in the WH, at least libs will stay vigilant, and hopefully, fight back. As it is now, with 0 in office, people are charmed/guilty/feeling foolish/standing by their man/etc. They’re bamboozled and way too silent on way too much. Or they protest, but always give him a free pass. He’s the perfect vehicle for the powers that be, or whatever you want to call the financial cabal that runs our country and government.
I think Erica’s point is well taken. Also, I don’t really know whether, structurally, Romney will be able to get away with much more than Obama has been able to get away with.
On the one hand, Obama theoretically should feel more pressure from the left, as it is supposed to be his base (but we’ve seen little evidence of that). On the other, the left might actually be more vocal and, in Congress, more willing to go out on a limb against a Republican President than they have been on a DINO President. So, it would probably be more or less a wash.
I can’t really imagine anyone being worse than Romney.
Oh, I hate Romney too. But I don’t see a Romney presidency being all that distinguishable from an Obama presidency.
I just think it’s marginally worse in the sense that going from one empty suit to another starts up the cycle of distraction all over again and takes that much more time for everyone to wake up to the fact it’s an empty suit, that’s all.
I’m not sure an Elephascist (aka GOP) Prez would be worse. No Elephascist Prez could gut Social Security–the Chimperor tried it, at the height of his popularity, with his party controlling both houses of Congress–and got his @$$ handed to him. The Malefactors Of Great Wealth need a treacherous DINO for that task.
This article from April 2007 was the eye-opener for me. Note the comments from Robert Wolf. ( Wolf played golf with Obama at Martha’s Vineyard last summer. I don’t know if he had “access” this summer though, poor baby. )
http://nymag.com/news/politics/30634/
Yves at Naked Cap. says they don’t like Obama anymore because he plans to tax hedge funds at regular income levels. I find this difficult to believe if only because Obama hasn’t even committed firmly to letting the Bush tax cuts lapse. Maybe even the possibly is a turn off. It’s a lot of money.
I don’t think Obama will let the tax cuts lapse unless he is forced into it.
He may end up being forced into letting the tax cuts lapse, but I the Hedge Funds are pretty confident that they will end up having enough loopholes to keep them in a good position.
That figures.
Glad to hear that. I’ve been losing sleep worrying about them. ( Snort )
My understanding is the Bush tax cuts are not about hedge funds. Hedge funds have long been taxed at a much lower rate. I think 15%. This is what hedge fund managers pay in income tax. My point is if he isn’t even firm on letting the Bush cuts expire why would anyone worry he’d push for taxing hedge funds as regular income?
unless it’s related to the capital gains tax change
I understood your point. Sorry, I was just speaking in shorthand, I guess–just agreeing with you that he’s not fighting ending the tax cuts so why would he fight for anything else. He never fights for anything that would help the middle/working classes.
Obama’s being bailed on by the bankers because they can see the handwriting on the wall – he will not have a 2nd term…
Now they must turn on him so they can set up a Republican puppet.
The Dow is under 10,000 right now. Let’s see where it finishes….
A lot of what Krugman says is dead on. I agree with him on this too. Hillary got screwed and the lying cheating hypocrite Obama “won”
I thought that the vilifying of the Financial Industry was only kabuki anyway. It upset them?! I assumed they were laughing all the way to the bank.
I also do not really believe that the ivies thought that Obama was like them. What he was, and is, is a wanna be. I think that they felt that he was in the club (had the degrees from the right place) but was not really a member of that social set. And a wanna be is always the most avid member. Yes. They thought he would really go along with them. Hillary had no need to do so.
I totally agree, Fran.
me too
I don’t know precisely what you mean by kabuki, but to understand Obama’s behavior re Wall Street (and everything else) one has to understand he’s a narcissist and sociopath.
He uses people, he doesn’t care about anyone or any institution or any cause — he’s committed to only himself and his own agrandizement.
A few years ago buddying up to Wall Street fatcats and being let in made him feel big, part of the club he wanted to be part of. Then after a while the thrill of that faded as he became bigger than they were. He moved on, tossed them aside like he tosses aside everybody who is no longer useful to helping him feel big. He didn’t fight for potent financial regulations because he doesn’t care a hoot about that, not because he wanted to help Wall Street buddies (that’s Timmy Geithner’s deal). He vilifies Wall Street when vilifying Wall Street will advantage him, but it’s meaningless because he doesn’t care a hoot about them.
Wall Streeters are no more fond of being tossed aside and vilified after being used than anybody else is, and they’re pissed at Obama for dissing them. They’re also not happy that he’s failed to get the economy stable and humming – Wall Street does not like uncertainty and they liked having small investors, who’ve largely pulled their money out of the market.
Krugman’s basically right. The thing to know about Wall Street is that it’s an emotional place where clubbiness and loyalty reign supreme, and for several years now it’s been run mainly by spoiled kids with a high school mentality. Obama played them, took their lunch money and used the power of their posse to get in with the Really Big Gang and then ditched them at the door of the Really Big Club, and they’re sulking about it.
Who are the Really Big Gang?
How did Obama play them? And, where is the lunch money?
Eh, I think these guys have just wrung the Dems dry and are moving back to where the getting is always good.
Same here. Besides, if there is a really big gang, it’s either the CIA/military or guys like David Rockefeller. There is no way Obama is in with either of those groups.
The really big gang is the President of the United States, the White House, international movers and shakers, top of the top. When I worked at Goldman, a big prize for a Partner, or anybody, was having a framed picture on his office wall or on the mantel at home, of him standing beside the President, or a story about being invited to the White House and all the Big Muckety Mucks he’d schmoozed with. Those guys on Wall Street, no matter how many millions they make in bonuses, are mostly a bunch of wannabes.
How did Obama play them, where’s the lunch money? In his coffers, in his Rolodex, in his power, in his feeling of bigness. He spent it on his campaign and paying for goodies for himself and others he wanted to impress or pay back or pay off.
Again, though, to understand how and why Obama plays people and what he takes from them, one has to accept that he’s a narcissist and sociopath, and understand what that means. He doesn’t care about the Democratic Party or what anybody can accomplish in Congress or the WH; Obama cares about Obama and feeling big. He took their money and their support and the legitimacy that gave him, the edge over the Clintons that he and Michelle craved. Then he was done with them. If he ever needs them again he’ll try to play them again. Will he get them again if he needs them? Who knows. Some people get fooled again and again.
David Rockefeller? I don’t know how much power that old man has at this point.
The really gang is the top of the top financial elite (not the executive schnooks on Wall Street), the Fed, members of the Bilderberg group.
I wrote a post about Obama being a Narcissist years ago. Everyone here already accepts that. The President can’t do a damn thing without cooperation from the CIA and the Military-Industrial complex. Several Presidents have found that out to their surprise, and one died because he wouldn’t listen.
I just used David Rockefeller as an example of the super-wealthy power elite, but he practically *is* the Bilderberg Group.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Rockefeller#Bilderberg.2C_Council_on_Foreign_Relations_and_Trilateral_Commission
BB, Obama doesn’t WANT to do a damn thing — unless it benefits him personally. He doesn’t care about Wall Street or anybody on Wall Street. Anyway that’s my opinion based on Obama being a narcissist and on what he has/hasn’t done.
David Rockefeller, I know he’s been very important with that gang for decades but as I said he’s very old now and I wonder if he gets around much anymore. I don’t know, I’m not in that crowd. But it seems we agree about who the Really Big Gang is, no matter the names of the members.
I’m glad we agree–on Obama and the big gang.
I agree.
right now I’m thinking if the Repubs win big in November and they investigate the heck out of O then that tells me Wall Street is through with him. If they hold back and don’t investigate O as much, then Wall Street still has some use for him, and then that’s when I’ll think O winning will be marginally worse than the GOP winning. jmho. but right now so far it looks like Wall Street is kinda nervous how usueful Obama can be if the people aren’t buying his PR this early into the game.
IMHO – Wall Street has eyes. They have watched W2 jettison everyone from “Grandma the Closet Racist” (the woman who raised his ungrateful @ss) to “Jeremiah the Audacious” (the man who supposedly taught him to hope, brought him to Jesus, acted as a surrogate father…but mainly lent him his black bonafides and Chicago street cred), the nanosecond it was beneficial to him.
At his core Teh 0ne is a self centered narcissist who serves only himself. The corporate elite has recently awakened to the fact that “Lord Obamorte” has no friends or allies. He has tools and assets. He has no core constituency or core principles. He has Pawn to sacrifice and cards to play.
I agree that up until now, most of the contention between the admin and the financial sector has been theater and slight of hand but I think Bonus Class/Ivy League/Corporatist Elite has realized that with this guys Sasha and Maliah would be wise to watch their backs (harsh, but i am just making a point).
Wallstreet has seen the bus and they are very afraid.
Okay, some one on twitter just twitted to me and labeled me in this manner.
Can any one make sense of this at all?
How can I be so far left that I’m moderately right?
That’s batshit crazy. No way around it. I assume they would argue it works the other way around, Someone can be so far to the right that they actually became moderately left. Yea, crazy. I don’t think there’s really an answer to that. And I don’t think they’re trying to be deeply philosophical either. I think they’re just playing some game, or doing some propaganda for a particularly nasty, corporatist agenda based group of oh, I don’t know, we’ll call them, Obots.
I think we’re seeing a new approach. They saw how well the GBeck system worked. That is, completely incoherent nonsense that just leaves any thinking person with their jaw hanging open. I’m starting to think this is the newly adopted Obot methodology. Just spew batshit crazy, incoherent stuff, like the crazy tweet you got, and bingo, you win and you can give GS even more money and power and remove even more civil liberties. Woohoo!
They already tried that back when they were defending Obama for having a virulently anti-gay gospel singer who claimed to be cured of his homosexuality represent him at rallies.
Oh yea. Well, trying to make sense of Obots can cause headaches. I recommend heavy drinking.
she’s an Obot and she was trying to defend HCR … i said it was basically an insurance industry windfall profits plan and a rebaked version of the Heritage Foundation’s version to compete with ‘Hillarycare’ …
guess she didn’t like that and considered me ‘far left’ because of it
then came this one in response to my exclamation that I was hardly far left
Pay no attention to the one behind the curtain. You don’t have to explain yourself to anyone – anyone who is familiar with your work knows exactly where you stand, and an Obot? Who cares what an Obot thinks these days- honestly they are past their best before date.
Besides, how is being far left a problem here? Or does she mean “professional left”, the group we’re all supposed to hate now, and discount anything they say out of hand.
The church of Obot is like many religions. The main thing you want your members to do is not think. They need to spew stuff you tell them to spew, but it would all come crashing down if they think. So you need to help them by telling them there are groups that are driven by satan (aka, professional liberals) that if you listen to them, you might be pulled down to hell. Heck, they’ll even make some sense at first. But notice by looking at their eyes that they’re not as happy as you. They don’t have that mindless happy look you have. Don’t trust them.
The Obama Fan Base has been roused to defend The One? Even assigned blogs to monitor? Tweeters to be set straight?
That makes no sense.
It makes perfect coming from an Obot. I know you will recall they can not discuss and do not understand policy.
So – the tweetbot just picked some words from the daily word list and thought it would make her sound like she understands something she has no possible chance of understanding.
Words just Words.
True, we should develop some kind of automatic comeback along the lines of their old one: “go read his website, moron.”
LOL. My favorite is when you say an obvious well known fact, or something that has been discussed ad nauseam, you get: link please.
what a riot coming from an Obot since that statement reminds me of dear leader’s hopenchange primary pandering to the left but actually teetering on the cusp of his true moderate Republican self.
Wait, I thot we were batshit crazy birther republicans in disguise. Now we’re Birkenstock wearing, fruititarian, commie treehuggers?
Where’s myiq? We need to get new T-shirts made.
I know … I just can’t keep up with.
Interesting letter from a UC prof to his students — reminded me of a comment I read that we’re living through the downward slide of an empire, and it’s evident by libraries being closed, fire stations being closed additional days of entirely, police and teadhers being laid off, class sizes getter larger and then larger again, furlough days for public employees if not outright lay offs. etc., etc. (The orignal observer was far pithier and succinct.)
Via Pruning Shears’ This Week in Tyranny. linking to Obsidian Wings.
I figure we can all agree to feeling swindled, but this guy is point to the adults who did it to California.
So these kids parents are responsible for what Reagan and the rest did to CA? Maybe they should find another way to finance the school than the property tax. There’s a limit to what people can pay on top of a mortgage, etc. when real wages have gone down in the past 30 years!
As an alternative, they could stop silly things like paying $378 million to turn the Ambassador Hotel into a high school. That in a district with a $640 million deficit before doing it and a near 50% drop out rate.
Some things are too idiotic to let go..
If you are interested in the oval office make-over the pics are here.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129550839
Most people when they have their place remodeled just live with the mess or move in with realatives. The Obamas – they evacuated to the most elitist spot in the country.
The change out was paid for with donations but I think the optics are totally wack and if I didn’t have a job or couldn’t pay for my meds or my family had lost their health insurance coverage I would be totally pissed.
The oval – its just l-o-v-e-l-y.
realatives = relatives
To be perfectly honest, I think it looks kind of boring and bland. Everything is beige or brown. Why not a have just little bit of color?
Agree – much about nothing.
Did you catch this:
“Obama had long been making small changes in the Oval Office, aided by California designer Michael Smith, but held off on a broader redesign until now, mindful of the nation’s economic distress.”
Has the economy picked up? No one told me.
He doesn’t get it.
Oh, so that’s why the decor makes me Depressed.
About my schedule for 8:00 pm this evening –
I can’t decide if I want to shave my cat, refill ink cartridges in my white living room, or go snipe hunting with a 4 year old who is not in on the deal.
What are your plans?
I was thinking we could have a live blog where Rico serves cocktails and we post silly videos with the sound off on the TV set in the background.
I’ll be too drunk to care about anything. If California passes the ganja law, will Rico sell those interesting cigarettes?
How do you know he doesn’t already have them under the bar?
You know, I haven’t visited California for several years….
No comment
H/T to Political Wire
I liked the comment at PPP though:
Excerpts of tonight’s Obama speech on Iraq war: “We have met our responsibility. Now, it is time to turn the page.”
*********
Saw the above on CNN breaking news……time to turn the page?????
Brought to mind a young Iraq war vet that I saw about 2:00 AM at a cross roads gas in “no where” Mid-West.” He was obviously a home-town boy local and was talking with the young cashier. He had be severely burned and also sustained blast injury. He was missing a leg part of one hand and fingers from the other. Face and head was all scar tissue, ears gone, etc.
Obama wants to “turn the page” on the tens of thousands like that veteran, not to mention the families of the KIAs. Typical Obama, he has turned the page on each stage of his life and tried to erase his tracks…I guess he figures all of the Vets can do the same…A total lack of empathy…a fu*cking Sociopath or to be accurate, Anti-social Personality Disorder.
Yep.
I have a feeling this little song and dance, which the WH seems to think is going to sound really good, “I kept my promise!” –like we’re really that stupid– will be about as welcome to people in the military as a kidney stone.
Something else I’ve noticed about sociopaths is the more they get away with, the more grandiose they become about what they can get away with.
The enemy of my enemy is temporarily my friend….
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/08/previewing-ohio.html
Dear Leader is speaking now. Is anyone listening?
He just said practically exactly what George W. Bush said when he wore the flight suit! Is O wearing a flight suit?
Live blog up!!!
But wait…didn’t Hillary Clinton attend two ivy league schools too?
Yea, but she has scary lady parts.
And guts.
As others have stated, the Wall Street mob is a club.
Obama, for whatever reason, knows he needs to go on the attack against the Wall Street mob, because they are hated by 3/4th’s of the population. They believed that he would be their friend. As we have seen with Obama, his ‘friendships’ are limited to what he gets for himself. Hillary would have been a far superior President.
Obama is not a Democrat and neither are the people who voted for him in the primaries.
That’s all you need to know.
In 2007 Obama gave a speech on Wall Street that made them feel he was “one of them. It’s when the purses wee opened to this unknown – and he has 100 million before most knew he was running.
During the bailout, the GOP-ers in Congress were against, and voted so, in spite of McCain’s asking them to support it. It was the Dems – supporting Obama that made that happened – at his insistence.
Krugman did write plenty against Obama – especially during his “Reagan is a revolutionary – Social security – entitlement in crisis” period.
But, no. I would remember if he ever said something about Wall Street loving him during the campaign