Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

Obama's Top Economic Adviser Is Greedy and Highly Compromised

By Matt Taibbi, True/Slant. Posted April 10, 2009.


Among the payoffs Larry Summers received: $45K from Merrill Lynch days before he joined Obama's team. And it gets worse.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

"But Summers, a leading architect of the administration's economic policies and response to the global recession, appears to have collected the most income. Financial institutions including JP Morgan, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch paid Summers for speaking appearances in 2008. Fees ranged from $45,000 for a Nov. 12 Merrill Lynch appearance to $135,000 for an April 16 visit to Goldman Sachs, according to his disclosure form." -- Washingtonpost.com

So I guess that $45,000 speaking fee from Merrill Lynch wasn't technically a bribe because Summers wasn't named to Obama's economic transition team until Nov. 24 — a full 12 days later. I'm sure Larry Summers had absolutely no inkling whatsoever that he was going to be one of the key advisers to the new administration on Nov. 12.

It likewise makes perfect sense that Merrill Lynch, a company just months removed from having to be rescued from bankruptcy by an 11th-hour, pseudo-state-subsidized buyout by Bank of America, would decide to spend $45,000 on a speaking appearance by Summers because, well, they really valued his economic expertise and his proven ability to rally the troops with his stirring rhetoric.

It certainly had nothing to do with the fact that a) it was eight days after a Democrat was elected to the presidency; b) Summers had a long history of being one of the key policymakers in Democratic Party politics; and c) Merrill was absolutely not going to survive more than a few more months unless taxpayers forked over another 20 billion or so to cover the giant hole in Merrill's balance sheet that was, at that time, still being hidden from Bank of America and its shareholders.

And how about that $135,000 appearance for Goldman Sachs in April, when Summers was already involved with Democratic Party politics again? That wasn't a surreptitious campaign contribution at all!

But you have to give Goldman credit: it sure is thorough. It literally leaves no stone unturned.

One has to love the sequence of events here. Back in 2004, Goldman chief Hank Paulson goes to SEC chief William Donaldson and petitions to have lending restrictions relaxed for the top five investment banks. Donaldson rolls over, the restrictions are relaxed, and it's a disaster, as the top five banks immediately overleverage themselves — two of the five, Bear Stearns and Lehman, would actually collapse, at least partially as a result of being insanely overleveraged.

In the midst of this disaster, Paulson is named Treasury secretary. He does nothing about the worsening financial crisis until it is far too late, then allows one of Goldman's biggest competitors, Lehman, to fail while at the same time intervening on a huge scale to save AIG, which just happens to owe Goldman a ton of money.

When AIG is bailed out, its government regulator is not in the room, but the new chief of Goldman, Lloyd Blankfein, is. In fact, Goldman Sachs ultimately receives about $13 billion of the money paid to AIG by the government in the bailout, reportedly getting paid 100 cents on the dollar for its AIG exposure, despite the fact that the bank claimed it wasn't going to suffer severe losses if AIG collapsed.

Later, another former Goldman executive, Ed Liddy, is installed as head of AIG -- which just happens to get bailed out twice more, the last time to the tune of $30 billion.

The last two bailouts of AIG take place after a former Goldman chief, Robert Rubin (who, incidentally, helped start this mess by ramming through a series of i-banker wet-dream deregulatory moves as Treasury secretary for Clinton in the 1990s), is named to the Obama transition team, joining Summers (who had already taken $135,000 from Goldman that year) and Timothy Geithner (a protege of another Goldman alum, John Thain, former president and chief operating officer and notorious scumbag).

When it comes time for new Treasury Secretary Geithner to name a chief of staff, he chooses Mark Patterson, who is less than a year removed from working as a lobbyist for … Goldman Sachs. Patterson's great contribution to society as a Goldman lobbyist was opposing a 2007 measure introduced in the Senate by presidential candidate Barack Obama to rein in executive compensation.

I remember watching Obama the presidential candidate give a speech in Mason City, Iowa, in 2007. Obama had made a big show of not having registered lobbyists working for his campaign, and he promised that lobbyists "won't work in my White House." The line was a hit and became part of Obama's stump speech. I must have heard it two dozen times.

A little over a year later, he put a registered lobbyist of a bailed-out investment bank into a job whose primary responsibility is administering bailout money.

It gets worse. According to a Glenn Greenwald piece I just read, even Gary Gensler is a former Goldman employee. That absolutely blows my mind. Genlser is Obama's choice to head the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, whose purview is the derivatives market. The CFTC was the battleground where ages ago Rubin, Summers, and then-Rubin aide Gensler teamed up to whack CFTC chief Brooksley Born, who had serious concerns about the burgeoning derivatives market, in particular the credit-default swap market. Rubin overturned Born's recommendations, and derivatives were freed from most regulation. That economic Alamo led almost directly to the AIG disaster.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: larry summers, merill lynch

Matt Taibbi is a writer for Rolling Stone.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
What Does Obama Know an When Did He Know It ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Apr 10, 2009 12:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"There are virtually no news stories on the just concluded (5 – 8 June 2008) Bilderberg meeting, in Chantilly, Virginia. This is not newsworthy, because nobody important attended... only people like Bernanke, chairman of the FED, the president of World Bank, Condoleezza Rice, Director of the National Security Agency... and Obama and Hillary."
~

"Obama's Office Won't Deny Senator Attended Bilderberg
Senator Barack Obama's office has refused to deny that the Democratic nominee attended Bilderberg last night following reports that he and Hillary Clinton were present at "an event in Northern Virginia."

~~~~

Of course the original cover story was that Obama and Hillary met at Feinstein's DC home to chat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: MSM hardly noticed a thing ... Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Money Talks
Posted by: DrBrian on Apr 10, 2009 12:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's no coincidence that the same corrupt insiders who have destroyed the economy with their greed and political influence games keep getting appointed to run the economy. Wall Street contributes a lot to politicians, and gets 1000 fold returns on that legalized bribery. Obama owes them for their largesse during the campaign, and apparently thinks this takes precedence over the well being of the voters who actually put him into the Oval Office. Money talks.

He'll pay dearly for it, however, because in the 2012 Democratic primaries his economic perfidy, broken promises and Bush Lite governance will doom him. He'll be a one-term president.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Which Way? Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Money Talks - P.S.: Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: He'll Pay Dearly Posted by: Lincoln fan
» The Lure of Power and Fame Posted by: DrBrian
Sheesh
Posted by: Rolomax on Apr 10, 2009 12:59 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm so disappointed to read stuff like this.. But I'm not yet willing to agree with all of the crap I'm reading, hearing, and seeing about Obama.

The way I see it, he is trying to something that is nearly impossible, and that is the rescue of American Ideals in the face of a new world economy.

The only thing I can think of at this point is a music video I recently found..

Money is the root of all evil. Who isn't a sucker for it?

fwiw

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» thanks Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: thanks Posted by: PointMan
» RE: thanks Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: james108
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: james108
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: james108
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: james108
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: Rolomax
» contrivances Posted by: techcafe
» RE: contrivances Posted by: jenko
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: james108
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: Pointer
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: richard0a37
» RE: Back to the 3rd Grade, Rolo! Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: The List, Rolo. Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: The List, Rolo. Posted by: Rolomax
» ok Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: The List, Rolo. Posted by: Rolomax
» RE: The List, Rolo. Posted by: Rolomax
» Talk about your suckers... Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: Sheesh Posted by: mooresart
1998 debate wasn't about CDS, genius
Posted by: NickJ on Apr 10, 2009 1:17 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The CFTC was the battleground where ages ago Rubin, Summers, and then-Rubin aide Gensler teamed up to whack CFTC chief Brooksley Born, who had serious concerns about the burgeoning derivatives market, in particular the credit-default swap market."

The CDS market barely even existed in 1998. Brooksley Born never once mentioned "credit default swaps" during that entire debate -- look at her CFTC proposal, her Congressional testimony, etc.

Saying that Born had "serious concerns" about credit default swaps "in particular" is a flat-out lie. But then again, this is Matt Taibbi, so flat-out lies are par for the course.

Please, Matt, do us all a favor and paddle back to the shallow end.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 1998 debate wasn't about CDS, genius Posted by: alexandra_hamilton
But Matt what does this have to do with 9/11
Posted by: Eat Politicians on Apr 10, 2009 1:31 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't you get it, the twin towers actually caused the banking crisis because they were in fact lobbyists. Jet planes made out of cheesecake were hired by the government to explode and squirrels were on the payroll too. DON'T YOU GET IT MATT! 9/11! 9/11! 9FUCKING11!

Wait, I'm getting another message through my tinfoil hat from truther central command. Apparently Obama is behind it all, he planned the whole thing and the government was going to elect him the whole time because he is the mastermind of 9/11! And Colonel Sanders! Don't forget that the exploding planes were actually full of Colonel Sanders secret recipe sauce.

Willie Nelson set the explosive charges on the pentagon! Don't you get it Matt? Quit denying the reality of 9/11, quit denying that you secretly loaded colonel sanders sauce onto the planes at the request of Obama and the Pentagon and the Illuminati and the Fibonacci sequence and some unknown guy that lives in the swiss alps and is only known by the codename Saucernipples.

It all makes sense Matt. It all makes sense in my head because the voices tell me it does...THE VOICES MATT! THE VOICES CAN'T BE WRONG!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» ROTFLMAO! Well said. Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: OTFLMAO! Well said. Posted by: jenko
» Nice straw man argument, genius. Posted by: GuitarBill
» It is you that brings nothing of value here Posted by: Man_vs_Kleptocracy
» Well, did you do your homework? Posted by: GuitarBill
» logikal? Or bullsh*tter? Posted by: GuitarBill
» Riddle me this, conspiranoid? Posted by: GuitarBill
» Mad Riddler out of order… Posted by: Man_vs_Kleptocracy
» RE: OTFLMAO! Well said. Posted by: CZMD
“Over time whoever controls the money system controls the nation.”
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Apr 10, 2009 1:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Stephen Zarlenga (Director American Monetary Institute)

It really is that simple and that complex.

Obama is not a leader. He is a follower handled by the likes of Rockefeller-Kissinger and Robert Rubin cronies Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and the rest. These are same kind of corporate malefactors behind BushCo and the destruction of the Glass Steagall Act with the snake oil creation of the derivatives casino "Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000" .

The same parasite Organized Corporate Crime rule runs the private monopoly bank scam "Federal Reserve" Corp (not federal, no reserves) owned by the very Wall Street felons that created the meltdown at immense profit. And the same Fascist power that owns the Washington-MSM zoo is now being bailed out on the public nickel thru its favorite temp servant Barack Obama.

A documented 9/11 coveup was the first act. War on a noun as in phony 9/11 "war on terror" that is well over 1,000 lies old after Center for Public Integrity figures was act 2 (Matt Taibbi and his MSM cheer leaders have less than no credibility on either, by the way). Wall Street Bailouts as a naked takeover of what was left of the illusion the nation's democracy makes for Act 3.

It's bloody bad Fascist theater. It's also a killing joke played on deaf, dumb and blind America over the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» another home run Posted by: TrollTreason
» RE: another home run Posted by: gazooks
» RE: What enslaved cowards should do Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Thank you Stephen Posted by: ron heringhauser
» Well said. Posted by: GuitarBill
» Waterboard Silverstein Posted by: weathered
» RE: Waterboard Rudy Giuliani. Posted by: GuitarBill
» Waterboard weathered... Posted by: yellow
The show so far
Posted by: Perry Logan on Apr 10, 2009 2:40 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A glance at the record suggests that Barack Obama has not a progressive bone in his body.

When I pointed out to Obama supporters that he was farther right than any of our other primary candidates, they just called me a racist. That's one reason I voted for Cynthia McKinney.

When he was a Senator, Obama supported the Cheney energy bill and the tort reform bill--possibly the suckiest piece of legislation ever passed.

Obama helped water down legislation requiring public disclosure of radiation leaks and voted for nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain twice. He voted for FISA and immunity for the telecoms. It is not clear whether he opposes NAFTA. He supported the tort reform bill. He watered down legislation requiring public disclosure of radiation leaks and voted for nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain twice.

Obama is to the right of the Supreme Court on abortion and the death penalty. He sides with Scalia and Thomas on gun control. He has issued alarmingly right-wing statements on Israel and other matters of foreign policy. He embraced and wants to expand Bush's faith-based initiatives. He wants more executions, more guns, fewer abortions.

As noted in the OP, Obama has some of the worst neocons as advisors. He seems uninterested in prosecuting the Republican traitors who got us into this mess. He even kept on one of Bush II's cabinet members.

Lately, his adminstration has been falling in line with Bush II on so many potent issues, all but the dullest progressives are seeing the light. The only surprise is that they thought Obama was any kind of progressive in the first place.

So much for the theory that progressives are smart.


Video: Mr. Logan visits the newly-renamed Planet Xe

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Who says progressives are smart? Posted by: rnagisetty
» RE: The show so far Posted by: robertmc
» RE: The show so far Posted by: Basenjis
» OBAMA is a SLAVE Posted by: lorado
» RE: OBAMA is a SLAVE Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: OBAMA is NOT a SLAVE Posted by: photon's feather
» RE: The show so far Posted by: techcafe
» Hey, Perry Logan, Posted by: TruthBeTold
The Loan Tapes Are the Smoking Gun
Posted by: jbpazz on Apr 10, 2009 4:02 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Geithner & co. assured us the value of toxic assets was unknown. From this lie he advanced the sale of toxic assets to private concerns the public covering any potential losses.
As the LOAN TAPES are a computer record of the asset values, everyone in the Administration should be charged with fraud and crimes against humanity.
They have given aid and comfort to our enemies in time of war.
Dare we call this treason?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

who doesnt know?
Posted by: tonesage on Apr 10, 2009 4:17 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
all of you who think a SINGLE person elected out of the two-party system here (and most places globally) are going to HELP you ANY are sheep! SHEEP! They are going to sell us ALL. DEMS AND REPS! they are part of a larger, elite group of pseudo-royalty that views themselves SUPERIOR to you and I by divine-genetic-hierarchical-and in obamma's case indoctrinated rite. the masses of the world are terrified of the fact that there is only one way to remove this plague and none of you want to hear it.

WAKE THE HELL UP!!!

"The structure is set! We'll never change it with a ballot-pull."
Zach DeLaroacha

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Greedy and Highly Compromised" describes the DC-MSM racket
Posted by: PointMan on Apr 10, 2009 4:48 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The same holds for Matt Taibbi Rolling Stone MSM gofer shill for the DC 9/11 liar-fest. Wall Street vermin behind scam “war on terror” couldn't have done their work without Greedy and Highly Compromised MSM dirtbags.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you are Obama, only the President of Harvard Will Do, not some honest dummy from Ohio State!
Posted by: johnwinthrop on Apr 10, 2009 5:30 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are Harvard, and the Ivy League, the only sources for top appointments by Presidents? Wait till Obama's first Supreme Court pick is made.

Let's See.

I predict bravely the winner will be from Harvard, Yale or Columbia Law Schools(Stanford, rightly or wrongly, is perceived as "Republican" by the Kennedys and Bidens, even though, Reagan and Bushes picked Harvard conservatives.).

NYU Law School. Moving up in prestige for past 20 yrs for sure- a near Ivy. But it ain't Harvard fool, so back off! Trying to make the first black (eventho he isn't black) President look stoopid? We're on to you, Mr. Racist!

How about Vanderbilt, Duke, or Univ. of Florida? UCLA or U of Texas Law Schools? Are you kidding? Not good enough. Not even U of Michigan Law, a school most applicants would die to get into.

The Change You Can Believe In.


More senior Obama officials from the top three Ivies and almost all of the judicial appointements. Just like Reagan. (You mean that dumb actor appointed Harvard and Yale Law graduates? Um. Yup. He did. Just like the Smooth One)

Obama is just one of those common folk. You know that. He left Occidental, a fine private college, so he could have the prestige of Columbia. Never too early to start building your resume. As a "community organzer".

Didn't Mother Jones go to Radcliffe?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DEMOPUBLICANS!
Posted by: wbblack on Apr 10, 2009 5:33 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is there any doubt that we will never win under the current political and economic system? We need real change -- fundamental, systematic and soon. The world economy is a nightmare. It needs to be broken down and remagined.

WBBLACK

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: DEMOPUBLICANS! Posted by: soulrebeljc
Another homerun for Matt Taibbi
Posted by: robertmc on Apr 10, 2009 5:51 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I know this will never happen but this whole mess cries out for RICO prosecutions.
I suppose it's possible that when things get REALLY bad and through some miracle the public starts paying attention to people like William Black and others like him that are willing to tell the truth, we might get some token prosecution but I'm not holding my breath.

I know I'll never vote for Obama again
(even under my 'lesser of two evils stance).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

". . . follow the money . . . "
Posted by: stevehamlin on Apr 10, 2009 6:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I was in business school, they taught us that "Interlocking Directorates" were how the status quo was preserved and tom-foolery accomplished. (In an ethics class; insert your own "oxymoronic" joke here. . .)

Maybe it's time to pick up on the work of MARK LOMBARDI and start unraveling things . . . ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Lombardi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OBAMA'S POOR CHOICE
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Apr 10, 2009 7:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Summers has a dubious track record that goes back years. He was a poor choice and isn't the type to go quietly into the night. I wish Obama would ask for his resignaiton. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Someone's POOR CHOICE Posted by: gellero1
» No real world experience hurts Posted by: johnwinthrop
nouthing to see here
Posted by: SeattlePackedSnowandCollidedCars on Apr 10, 2009 7:08 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its Obama, the guy can walk on the Chicago River, he can sure walk over the Potomac just as easy.

This is the "change" that you guys wanted

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

LOL
Posted by: gellero1 on Apr 10, 2009 7:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm shocked..............shocked !!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: LOL Posted by: aonghus36
chas
Posted by: charles_courtney_bd6 on Apr 10, 2009 8:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To the tune of "Reuben, Reuben."

Rubin, Rubin, I've been thinking,
Helped bring us to this sad estate.
Tim and Larry are his minions,
And I fear they'll just repeat.

Barack, Barack, don't be blinking.
Keep your eye right on the ball.
There's no shame in making changes;
Joe and Paul could be on call.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The constitutional order is dead.
Posted by: leafsong1 on Apr 10, 2009 8:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Viva la revolucion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Rubbish Posted by: leafsong1
It's time to wake up people
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Apr 10, 2009 8:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since when has such change ever come to DC? Try everytime we change Presidents. They all 'rebrand' eachother's shit policies and keeps 'biznuss' rooling.

Obama never sais he was aPeacemaker nor has he said he was for the poor,the usual prop for the Dems. His speak has always been about the middleclass and businesses we can't do without,even if it means giving up all of YOUR money.

Forget the 'extending payments to future generations' crap. They've been doing that shit since Reagan/Bush. The Presidency that brought Treason front and center and made us swallow it like it was candy.

'Treason" you might ask? Yes TREASON! Our country made it illegal to deal with people and nations that had any business dealings with Iran,Iraq and central America. Under Dick Cheney, Haliburton made hundreds of millions selling weapons to Iraq and Iran,including WMD's and banned gas weapons like mustard gas.

Reagan/Bush ran death squads in Central America aiding Rebel forces who paid their way with cocaine and receicved guns and military help we got the coke to run in through Mexico.

The Gov'ts answer then was 'raid' social security and make the future generations payback their secret war efforts, the savings and loan bailout and the trillion dollar debt we had then. With 'off-budget' expenses at ten trillion dollars we had real money trouble,and this was 1988.

If we're bitching that the budget is one or two trillion in the whole,if we knew just how bad 'off- budget' was we'probably have a mass crapping of the pants. Because that's all taxpayer money too.

The point is this system has and always will cover it's own ass to keep the money flowing. Obama not giving a shit about the folks that are the poor and working poor is nothing new. If he really gave a shit about us he woud have made an FHA program where you could flat out, no strings, refinance program for homeowners to get 1% loan rates. But that's too much like being HUNAM.

If he really wanted to 'jumpstart the economy' he woukld have ordered the Treasury to issue every citizen with a social security number a check for $50,000. Wanna see spending go up in the 'consumer' department,give the poor fifty G's and you'll see some spending.
But once again THAT WOULD BE HUMAN.

No, we're going to see more 'handouts' to the banks,Wall St. and the Defense/industrial sectors,there will be a new threat or enemy and we will probably have been their 'friend' at one time and the quality of life for all us Americans, who do the jobs that make possible the 'soft living' the wealthy enjoy, will descend into the abyss of the poverty of progress.

Maybe when we sink that low,and it might be in the next week,we'll finally stand up and do our civic duty and reject this government,it's policies and it's laws that restrict our Freedoms,Liberties and Rights as children of a greater Creation. ABOLISHTION MEANS FREEDOM FROM ECONOMIC TYRANNY.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's time to wake up people Posted by: soulrebeljc
Obama's team is mostly a slap in the face to his own base
Posted by: Defenestrator on Apr 10, 2009 8:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From Alexander Cockburn:

"There is precious little among the President-elect’s choices to reward the progressives who worked their hearts out to put him in office"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama will pull a Ronald Reagan just like Clinton did. Here's the plan.
Posted by: Benn_Miller on Apr 10, 2009 9:15 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama continues to pander to the GOP and burn what's left of the base. The GOP puts up a super looney rightwinger as the nominee. Suddenly, Obama looks "moderate" and the media ensures his victory as do the hardcore Democratic Party voters. In 1984, when Mondale made that stupid mistake of being honest, he was painted as "extreme" and suddenly Reagan looked "moderate". I would also add that the Obama administration is continuing to condition the electorate into believing that his selling out and more war spending is to be looked at as "moderate". Obama will most likely win a second term because the GOP has a long term agenda of weakening the progressive/liberal wing of the Democratic Party while also seeing to it that none exists in their own party. By 2016, as it is highly unlikely Joe Biden will run, the Democratic Party will most likely have a very difficult time picking a qualified Democrat. They'll probably end up pulling a "Mccain" weakling and the GOP will be able to freely claim that they improved their reaching out to young voters when they win in 2016 because Obama's 8 years would have been soooo conservative enough to make even Bush look "liberal". Folks, we really do need 3rd parties.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A four year marriage, but who will be the next in line?
Posted by: monkeywrench on Apr 10, 2009 9:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"And when we hire investment bankers to run banking policy, and put investment bankers in charge of handing out bailout money to investment banks, we ought to know what that is. But for some reason we don't seem to see it the same way, not as clearly."
. . . .

We don't see it as clearly because the media has gone out of its way to make sure we don't see this clearly, pushing the "finance is too complicated for mere mortals" line incessantly every time the subject comes up.

And, on the appointment of Brennen: It makes me wonder what the intelligence community might have on Obama, or even what they could do to him. After all, big money is still going to Iraq and Afghanistan, and complete troop withdrawel from Iraq is still an illusion.

In his incredible backpeddling on much of what we elected him for, Obama is either a typical politician or someone who is being extorted. Maybe, one of his private "conferences" after he took office was with the real "Powers That Be," where he was taken into a quiet room and given the "Howard Beale-Network" lecture on "The Way the Military-Industrial-Finance Complex Really Works."

In my mind as well the official Obama honeymoon is kaput; but, if the "Change We Can Believe In" courtship ends in divorce four years from now, who will we marry next time? Romney? (Gulp!)...PALIN?! (And don't kid yourselves about the demise of the Republican Party; for a party supposedly "out in the wilderness," they certainly still wield a lot of power and influence, both as the "NO!" party in congress and as an incessant, loud voice on the public airwaves. Given the chance, they will strike with surprising speed once again.)

Fasten your seatbelts, folks; it is STILL going to be a bumpy night.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama is on board for all of this
Posted by: chlamor on Apr 10, 2009 9:37 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
somehow people have the impression that Obama was once or is now some sort of "people's candidate."

Where in the hell did people get this idea?

Well they got it from the slick marketing campaign and most bought into it without looking at the ingredients.

Obama is on board for corporate rip-offs, Empire building and aggressive US military intervention wherever there are valuable resources necessary to keep the Empire hobbling along.

The sooner folks shed their illusions the sooner they will take agency and act directly to stop the robber barons from their wholesale slaughters and all out plunder.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
» RE: Do not click on that link Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Chill, People
Posted by: wagnerrocks@gmail.com on Apr 10, 2009 10:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After reading all the above comments, I come to the conclusion that we must allow Obama a real chance to play this game of political chess from his own perspective, and hope we elected a chess master. In this time of tribulation, it is difficult to trust anyone at all, so we have to leave the fate of the government and the people in the hands of someone who may (or may not ) be corrupt, but less so than the man and his minions who came before.The corruption and collusion that takes place in Washington is criminal and has been especially since Regan, but we have come to this moment by our better judgements and the future is unfolding in spite of whatever reservations we may have. Blessings be upon the people of the United States of America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Chill, People Posted by: photon's feather
Roller coaster
Posted by: willymack on Apr 10, 2009 10:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our economy has just about bottomed out because nearly everybody's broke or hanging on by their fingernails. Just a few hundred thousand more job losses and people tossed out of their houses and into the street will complete the decline. The "economy" will begin a miraculous "recovery" at this point, putting money back into people's pockets, and the people off the streets and back into houses, sometimes the same ones they were tossed out of, but, of course the mortgage indebiture will begin anew. The sharks will reappear from their hidey holes and rob the people blind again, secure in the knowlege that those they bought off will give them a clear path to obscene wealth. This will inevitably lead to another "collapse", thus completing the cycle. Enjoy the ride.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Goldman Sachs just bought Posted by: weathered
Good story
Posted by: Bliss Doubt on Apr 10, 2009 2:17 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but if anybody else wrote it, Taibbi would call it a tin hat conspiracy theory and tell them to get a life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wells Fargo turned a $3 billion profit for the first quarter of 2009. The TARP seems to be working.
Posted by: yellow on Apr 10, 2009 2:28 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was shocked to see of all people the reverend Al Sharpton on the Ed Shultz Show defending the bank bailout plan designed by Timothy Geithner as a success and a "necessary measure" to get the credit system back to normal. Sharpton, no financial expert but whose left credentials are impeccable, claimed that without TARP money for banks, no recovery is possible. He seemed to value it more than the stimulus package designed to help create jobs and economic growth.

I don't like bailing out billionaire bankers either. But if the financial system goes down, there will be no recovery. I am shamelessly in favor of spending trillions to bail out the main street economy and don't fear inflation or a collapse of the dollar. Such is more likely in the event the economy is not bailed out. Economic collapse in the US will lead to a collapse of our East Asian trade partners export markets in the US. Under such conditions, China and Japan will stop buying US Treasuries, demand for Dollars will contract globally, the US financial system will contract and go down and a long and deep depression with massive suffering and economic destruction will ensue for decades. Action is needed now!! There is no choice.

Those who advocate inaction on either the banks or the real economy are asking for depression, deflation and disaster. A deeply depressed US economy might even pull the rest of the world economy down with it considering the integration of most of the world through trade and investment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keep drinking the "hope and change" kool-aid drones
Posted by: EagleX on Apr 10, 2009 3:05 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
EOM

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

These bastards should be line up against a wall.
Posted by: thekidde on Apr 10, 2009 4:27 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We Know What That Is
Posted by: Gregsdiary on Apr 10, 2009 4:50 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"When Enron buys a seat at the table to conduct energy policy under the Bush administration, everyone knows what that is..."

When the insurance and pharmaceutical industries own the friggin' table to conduct healthcare policy under the Obama administration, everyone knows what that is. Corruption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

His First and Greatest Mistake
Posted by: ct113 on Apr 10, 2009 8:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The executive branch of this country is not solely governed by one man. The President of the United States, like any other world leader, depends on his advisors to make sound decisions that affect not only this country but the rest of the world as well. That being said, his first and greatest mistake of his presidency is to nominate people like Geithner, Summers, Emanuel and Clinton to key positions within his cabinet. I interpreted these nominations as the first true test of his "progressive" character; putting aside the Obama mania.

Judging by his rhetorical and analytical ability, one can only assume that he is not ignorant to the motives or special interests that these people in his cabinet represent. Unfortunately, every day it seems more likely that these people are committed to hollowing out the government dollar by dollar destroying this country's ability to recover from the current economic crisis. If Obama continues down this road, history will probably label him as the Herbert Hoover of his time, a man who had the ability to alleviate the worst of the Great Depression and did nothing instead. Forget about labeling him as the new FDR no matter how hard his PR people desperately try to.

As a young unemployed and uninsured American, my sincere hope is that whatever is left of this country after the jackals have finished what they started can be transformed and rebuilt by its people and for its people.

“These are movements that do not seek to start from scratch but rather from scrap, from the rubble that is all around… rooted in the communities where they live, these men and women see themselves as repair people, taking what’s there and fixing it, reinforcing it, making it better and more equal.”

~Naomi Klein

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Life at the top...
Posted by: richard0a37 on Apr 11, 2009 12:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
According to the official list, 144 individuals from 23 countries/nations attended the Bildenberg meeting. Interestingly, George W Bush wasn’t in attendance, so perhaps our perception of him as a complete moron wasn’t just an act on his part.

My guess is that labelling each participant according to country is a cunning deception i.e. the fact that Condoleezza Rice is seen next to the mnemonic USA might lead us to think that she is in some way representative of USA.

Did Ms Rice become a member of Bilderberg because she was once head of the USA’s National Security Agency, or did she become head of NSA because she is a member of Bilderberg?

Attendees also included HM the Queen of the Netherlands, HM the Queen of Spain, HRH the Prince of Orange and HRH Prince Philippe of Belgium, but alas, not HRH Prince Charles of Wales, one day to become HM King Charles of England and the Common Wealth.

The COMMON WEALTH? There’s nothing common about the distribution of wealth.

What are the qualifications for being a member of Bilderberg? The association of any particular participant with a country is I think a smokescreen to confuse the rest of us. In other words, Bilderberg members bear no allegiance to any country or nationality. They just want us to think they are.

Once upon a time, countries, nations, states, republics etc did not exist, but eligibility for membership of Bilderberg or its equivalent would have existed. The political division of the earth into these things we call countries etc is an illusion in other words.

It is of course an extremely powerful and all embracing illusion, and there is probably not one single human who doesn’t in some way associate himself with a national identity. For billions of people, there is belief in a God, belief in a country, belief in a ‘flag’, all of which are carefully managed illusions.

It seems to me that the only people who really know what’s going on must be the Bilderbergs. We have the Project for the New American century, its goal to achieve some kind of world government as far as I can tell. Possibly, use of the word ‘American’ is a misnomer, other than that the overall policy will be shaped by US imperialism, invasion and occupation.

The human race is without doubt carefully managed and orchestrated, and it is quite likely that it is the Bilderberg group who control all this. At the top of their list is probably where they are planning the next war to take place, how big it is going to be, how much publicity it should be accorded.

In other words, it is probably a mistake to think that 911 for example was in some way carried out with the collusion of the US administration, as against representatives of the other ‘nations’ not knowing anything about it.

After all, who’s to say that Bin Laden did not at one time sit with the Bilderbergers. Since the invasion of Afghanistan was planned in the late 90s, the goal was to get the armies out there, thus the name ‘Osama Bin Laden – Sane Bad Oilman’ was used as the driving force to get all those hundreds of thousands of troops motivated. Choosing the date 11th Sep gives us 911 the emergency number in the USA.

For the past 8 years or so, people have been obsessed with the intricacies of how the twin towers may or may not have been demolished, an event that damaged the tiniest of tiny pieces of real estate. The real action though has been going on unabated all these years and has covered an enormous area of terrain, it is almost incalculable.

It's a shame Alternet did not instigate the discussion about Bilderberg, a subject much more interesting than the trivial musings about one particular individual

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Liam on the Left
Posted by: Liam on Apr 11, 2009 7:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just remember why FDR appointed Joe Kennedy to head the SEC....everyone told him Kennedy was a crook and FDR said, "Takes one to know one." And Kennedy went on to clean up Wall Street and become probably one of the best SEC Chairs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Matt Taibbi - huge Obama FAN on Left Jab Radio?
Posted by: notabilia on Apr 12, 2009 4:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay, so why when I was listening to "Left Jab Radio" yesterday did Matt Taibbi confess that he voted for Obama, step right in line with the Clintonite hosts who professed pure slavish love for Obama, and why were Matt Taibbi's columns for Rolling Stone so ga-ga over the con artist's Obama's political performances?
It's the dilemma of the purported truth-teller. Rolling Stone's Jann Wenner slathered Obama in hagiography, Taibbi falls in line, and continues to work for his corporate sponsor. Now, I doubt Taibbi reads the comments in this absurdly pinging ALternet comments section, but out in this wilderness, I set the Taibbi mea-culpa watch. When will he admit he was duped by the diversity figurehead neocon Obama machine? When, Matt, when?
To be fair, Taibbi made a few mewling sounds on Left Jab that indicated he basically understands what an idiot he was to go for the Obama hype. I'd still like a real confession, though.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Run, run for the hills, everyone,
Posted by: TruthBeTold on Apr 13, 2009 10:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is coming to get you.

Run, run.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We all know about Summers, what about Rice.....
Posted by: richard0a37 on Apr 13, 2009 11:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of the things that bother me where politics is concerned is how little attention people pay to things that are actually quite important. Now that we have a democratic president, we get, daily almost, some kind of character assassination of the leading players. On this occasion, it’s Larry Summers.

But throughout the whole of the Bush years, hardly a mention was ever made of the presence of Condoleezza Rice who, as far as I am aware, was not an elected official. Nobody voted for her, yet she was constantly in the limelight – and still is.

Like Obama, she is not white, yet rarely if ever has any commentator raised an eyebrow or in any way suggested that this is perhaps just a shade unusual.

Think about it, a black woman heading the National Security Agency, possibly the most powerful institution on earth, but a black woman running the show? Sure, why not?

Where has the political logic disappeared to all of a sudden? So much has been written about a black man becoming president, slightly less about a woman not achieving the office, but when an unelected black woman is made head of the NSA, not a dickybird, zip.

I’ve just taken a look at Wikipedia’s summation of Ms Rice, and someone has even put a picture of her in the bath on the Internet. Under normal circumstances, such a picture should be quite erotic – especially if you fancy black women, but she is grimacing which puts paid to any sensuous or sexual intonations.

To my way of thinking, the existence of Ms Rice in the political spectrum makes a farce of the whole of US politics. It turns conventional thinking on its head, suppresses critical comment where there should be plenty, and is just another example of the powers-that-be getting away with just about anything when it suits them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OBAMA HIRED 5 TAX CHEATS!
Posted by: reelman on Apr 15, 2009 11:26 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some serial cheats!!
Rules are ALWAYS different for democrats...guess so many dems are tax cheats its tough to fill a job with an honest person...facts are facts...Obama hires tax cheats...over and over.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So Next Time Will the Boys Listen?
Posted by: EKSwitaj on Apr 16, 2009 1:17 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So . . . the next time feminists say they'd rather not have a sexist pig in the cabinet, will you listen? Or will you again spring to his defense without bothering to check if there are other issues with him?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE OPERATIVE WORD BEING "BEFORE"
Posted by: LTBROWN on Apr 19, 2009 1:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Among the payoffs Larry Summers received: $45K from Merrill Lynch days before he joined Obama's team"

before he was on Obama's team! Well, d@mn, do you know how many folks are going to fall under this. They were rogue BEFORE they got with Obama and got some dignity and moral values. lmao Oh, I loves that media spin. But then again, I understand. You all have to eat too. Just make sure it's never crow.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement