HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Washington Post hits the ...

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:41 PM

 

Washington Post hits the nail on the head, on what made Summers withdraw his nomination to the Fed

Obama had been strongly leaning toward picking Summers, who helped him navigate the depths of the financial crisis and recession at the beginning of his term, and had assurances from Democratic Senate leadership leaders that they would work to get him confirmed, according to people familiar with the matter.

But amid an intensifying uproar of liberal Democrats and left-wing groups opposed to his nomination, Summers decided to withdraw his name on Sunday, telephoning the president to tell him his decision.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/larry-summers-withdraws-name-from-fed-consideration/2013/09/15/7565c888-1e44-11e3-94a2-6c66b668ea55_story.html

120 replies, 11015 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 120 replies Author Time Post
Reply Washington Post hits the nail on the head, on what made Summers withdraw his nomination to the Fed (Original post)
Stupefacto Sep 2013 OP
Skittles Sep 2013 #1
LittleBlue Sep 2013 #2
dkf Sep 2013 #5
truebluegreen Sep 2013 #9
winter is coming Sep 2013 #19
840high Sep 2013 #64
Myrina Sep 2013 #98
emsimon33 Sep 2013 #39
chervilant Sep 2013 #58
George II Sep 2013 #67
L0oniX Sep 2013 #90
Roland99 Sep 2013 #100
Orsino Sep 2013 #112
libdem4life Sep 2013 #3
MannyGoldstein Sep 2013 #6
socialist_n_TN Sep 2013 #18
malaise Sep 2013 #23
OneGrassRoot Sep 2013 #25
malaise Sep 2013 #26
libdem4life Sep 2013 #53
L0oniX Sep 2013 #95
PoliticAverse Sep 2013 #62
gussmith Sep 2013 #96
FredStembottom Sep 2013 #114
bvar22 Sep 2013 #115
annabanana Sep 2013 #37
libdem4life Sep 2013 #47
L0oniX Sep 2013 #93
libdude Sep 2013 #84
L0oniX Sep 2013 #92
Roland99 Sep 2013 #101
Fumesucker Sep 2013 #4
hlthe2b Sep 2013 #8
truebluegreen Sep 2013 #12
Skittles Sep 2013 #16
truebluegreen Sep 2013 #17
L0oniX Sep 2013 #94
leftstreet Sep 2013 #66
George II Sep 2013 #71
Fumesucker Sep 2013 #82
hlthe2b Sep 2013 #7
nadinbrzezinski Sep 2013 #13
ProSense Sep 2013 #10
socialist_n_TN Sep 2013 #20
LineLineLineReply ?
ProSense Sep 2013 #22
Jakes Progress Sep 2013 #57
DURHAM D Sep 2013 #29
ljm2002 Sep 2013 #36
ProSense Sep 2013 #43
ljm2002 Sep 2013 #65
tazkcmo Sep 2013 #117
cui bono Sep 2013 #44
ProSense Sep 2013 #45
cui bono Sep 2013 #48
ProSense Sep 2013 #49
cui bono Sep 2013 #51
Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2013 #46
Logical Sep 2013 #91
LuvNewcastle Sep 2013 #11
snooper2 Sep 2013 #14
Coyotl Sep 2013 #15
malaise Sep 2013 #24
GreatCaesarsGhost Sep 2013 #27
LiberalAndProud Sep 2013 #28
DCBob Sep 2013 #42
Le Taz Hot Sep 2013 #87
Progressive dog Sep 2013 #89
NV Whino Sep 2013 #21
Stupefacto Sep 2013 #30
NV Whino Sep 2013 #31
Baitball Blogger Sep 2013 #32
gopiscrap Sep 2013 #33
PatSeg Sep 2013 #34
KoKo Sep 2013 #41
PatSeg Sep 2013 #78
gopiscrap Sep 2013 #35
harun Sep 2013 #38
emsimon33 Sep 2013 #40
LiberalAndProud Sep 2013 #52
socialist_n_TN Sep 2013 #54
OrwellwasRight Sep 2013 #68
socialist_n_TN Sep 2013 #75
emsimon33 Sep 2013 #55
LiberalAndProud Sep 2013 #63
craigmatic Sep 2013 #50
libdem4life Sep 2013 #56
Blue Idaho Sep 2013 #59
Cali_Democrat Sep 2013 #60
Maedhros Sep 2013 #69
Cali_Democrat Sep 2013 #70
Oilwellian Sep 2013 #72
Maedhros Sep 2013 #102
Cali_Democrat Sep 2013 #110
Maedhros Sep 2013 #113
tazkcmo Sep 2013 #118
Oilwellian Sep 2013 #73
Union Scribe Sep 2013 #74
nashville_brook Sep 2013 #86
Zorra Sep 2013 #88
LineReply .
blkmusclmachine Sep 2013 #61
progressoid Sep 2013 #76
NYC_SKP Sep 2013 #77
Skittles Sep 2013 #80
Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2013 #79
grahamhgreen Sep 2013 #81
flpoljunkie Sep 2013 #83
nashville_brook Sep 2013 #85
Liberal_Stalwart71 Sep 2013 #97
libdem4life Sep 2013 #104
Liberal_Stalwart71 Sep 2013 #105
libdem4life Sep 2013 #106
Liberal_Stalwart71 Sep 2013 #107
libdem4life Sep 2013 #109
Liberal_Stalwart71 Sep 2013 #119
myrna minx Sep 2013 #99
mountain grammy Sep 2013 #103
erpowers Sep 2013 #108
heaven05 Sep 2013 #111
DirkGently Sep 2013 #116
WillyT Sep 2013 #120

Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:43 PM

1. "....helped him navigate the depths of the financial crisis and recession"

LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:43 PM

2. I lol'd too

 

What a load of shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:46 PM

5. Helped Obama navigate what Summers had wrought they mean.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:50 PM

9. ...like a blind rat in a maze.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:02 PM

19. i.e., "helped him steer clear of holding Wall Street responsible for their actions". n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to winter is coming (Reply #19)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 10:09 PM

64. Yes!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to winter is coming (Reply #19)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 10:46 AM

98. ^^ +1 Brazillion ^^

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:57 PM

39. My reaction, also!!!!!

Larry Summers was a large, stinking, steaming pile of sh*t in the administration and he gave very BAD advice to Obama. In choosing the financial and education advisers that he did at the beginning of his first term, Obama lost a lot of my respect and confidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emsimon33 (Reply #39)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:47 PM

58. + a gazillion...

Especially, the banking miscreants and Arne "I play basketball!" Duncan!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #1)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 10:32 PM

67. Ditto "LOL", just how did the OP know that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #1)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 09:41 AM

90. +1 ...and OFFS.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #1)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 11:12 AM

100. "that he, himself, helped cause by pushing to repeal Glass-Steagall"

they left that part off the sentence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #1)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 01:18 PM

112. Like Werner Von Braun helped NASA understand the V-2. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:43 PM

3. Aha, the Liberals/Progressive/Left-Wingers are officially on the political radar !!!

 

"But amid an intensifying uproar of liberal Democrats and left-wing groups opposed to his nomination" Just Wow!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #3)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:47 PM

6. After 20 years, we're back off the floor

 

Still vast work to do. But it's a start.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #6)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:00 PM

18. That's actually a very good point guys......

Maybe this coming on the heels of the Syrian response made a difference. Now is NOT the time to let up though. The RW doubles down. We should too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialist_n_TN (Reply #18)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:06 PM

23. It's been a great week

Now to double down on Obamacare and raising the debt ceiling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #23)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:08 PM

25. Hell, let's go with a full-on push for single payer!





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneGrassRoot (Reply #25)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:09 PM

26. Ha

After Dems kick them out of the House next year

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #26)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:29 PM

53. Good momentum for 2014 hopefully...Obama can only work with what we give him and Congress

 

reflect those who send them (usually). I feel kind of like John Kerry looked...kind of an OMG this might work...oh yeah, I knew that !!!

I can't imagine how personally difficult it is for a true Dove to be in the position he was in and of course still is, I don't care what anyone says. I remember him back when. And for him to get a win for "anti-war" after all of his hard work in government and currently with Lavrov...outstanding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #53)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 09:51 AM

95. "Obama can only work with what we give him" yeah like SS CPI.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #26)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:59 PM

62. Seems unlikely the Democrats will have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate after 2014.

Control of the Senate itself seems in doubt at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneGrassRoot (Reply #25)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 10:26 AM

96. Good Idea

 

but will not happen soon with the fools on the hill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #6)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 01:55 PM

114. Manny, I would clink my coffee cup with whatever you might be drinking if I could!

Cheers to what you just said!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #6)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 01:56 PM

115. We need to keep the pressure on to kill the TPP.

THAT is next on the list.

THEN, Raising the CAP on FICA deductions to "protect" SS from the Austerity Mongers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #3)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:56 PM

37. What the What?. .not "fringe lefties"?

damn! That feels good

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to annabanana (Reply #37)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:22 PM

47. Damn straight...The Proud Left !!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to annabanana (Reply #37)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 09:44 AM

93. Main stream lefties.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #3)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 08:15 AM

84. Sort of stunning,

that a Democratic President would be creating an " uproar amid liberal Democrats and left-
wing groups ", the very groups of people that from my experience have always been the staunchest base of support. This may not cause the President to question his approach to this issue but in a larger sense, it is just one example of a growing dissatifaction with his course of governance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #3)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 09:43 AM

92. So the WP is saying that the centrists, DLC and Dinos didn't do squat?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #3)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 11:13 AM

101. It's sad that the term "liberal" has to be applied to identify a subset of Democrats.

and by the "liberal media" no less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:46 PM

4. An uproar roughly as easy to predict as the direction from whence the sun will rise tomorrow

Which brings up the question of why?

Why put up someone you know a large portion of your coalition will have a conniption fit over?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #4)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:48 PM

8. Obama's support for this cretin is something that continues to give me pause...

sigh....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #8)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:54 PM

12. It is disconcerting that President Obama apparently didn't learn anything

 

from the inadequacy of the response to the crisis, or else that he is incapable of admitting that he made a mistake....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebluegreen (Reply #12)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:58 PM

16. maybe it's that the people who matter to them did just fine

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #16)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:59 PM

17. Yup. Exactly what I'm afraid of.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #8)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 09:45 AM

94. I've been in "pause" since CPI was offered.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #4)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 10:32 PM

66. His 'coalition' has rubber stamped everything so far

Pretty much

Congressional Democrats have been practically SILENT for 5 years

Gee...I wonder what's recently changed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #4)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 10:40 PM

71. Think about it...what did he do with the Russians regarding Syria??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:48 PM

7. Well, they certainly heard from me... I think I signed three petitions and called my own delegation.

Let's hear it for Liberal Democrats!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #7)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:55 PM

13. Due to professional reasons I no longer do that

 

As a reporter I really can't. But you know where I stand

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:51 PM

10. The piece reads like fiction.

“It was just a perfect storm of bad timing,” said one person close to the White House, who requested anonymity in order to speak candidly about private deliberations. “It would have been absolute war, and the president would have had to spend all of his political capital. Larry decided not to drag him through it.”

<...>

In order to buy time and cool tensions, the White House announced that no decision would be made until the fall. But that only gave space for Summers’ s opponents to strengthen their protests to his candidacy, with four of the 12 Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee, which would confirm Summers, signaling opposition.

That would have meant that the president would have probably had to court Republican support for a Summers nomination
, while also trying to strike deals to keep the government open and operating.

<...>

It’s also a setback for Obama, who is fiercely loyal to his aides but has now on several occasions seen his preferred candidates for jobs lose out as a result of political opposition. It’s especially painful given that it’s Obama’s own party that cost Summers the nomination.

In what world would the President rely on "Republican support" for his nomination to succeed?

Democratic opposition was noted, but the rest is purely speculation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #10)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:02 PM

20. Well he seemed to be relying on Republican support for his Syrian intervention........

Why not here too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialist_n_TN (Reply #20)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:03 PM

22. ?

Pay attention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #22)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:47 PM

57. Perhaps that word does not mean what you think it means.

Fiction is made up. it is not making up things to realize that Obama would need several republican votes for summers to receive enough votes to be put into the office that he wanted.

Were you just so set on posting some negative reply to a post that does not agree with Obama's desire to perpetuate the wall street stranglehold on our government that you used the word unadvisedly? Are you unaware of how confirmation works? Where do you see a scenario where summers would be confirmed without a single republican vote? With only a two vote majority (okay four if you count independents), in what world would the president be able to muster all 52 Democrats for a nomination like summers? Wouldn't that mean that he would need republican support? So how is it fiction to suggest that the president would need to have republican support?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #10)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:16 PM

29. Given that four Democratic members of the Banking Committee

had already registered a "NO" vote the only way he could get him to the floor was with Republican help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #10)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:50 PM

36. I'm not sure I understand your question...

...to wit: In what world would the President rely on "Republican support" for his nomination to succeed?

There were already 4 defections against Summers from Democratic members of the Banking Committee. There are 12 Democratic members and 10 Republican members of the committee. Obviously, then, Obama would need several Republican committee members to vote for Summers in order for a his nomination to get past the Committee at all.

That being the case, in what world would the President NOT rely on "Republican support" for the nomination to succeed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ljm2002 (Reply #36)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:04 PM

43. The one

Last edited Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:45 PM - Edit history (1)

"That being the case, in what world would the President NOT rely on 'Republican support' for the nomination to succeed?"

...in which Republicans are blocking his nominees, where it's likely four Republicans wouldn't defect to save his nomination, especially not without some hostage taking. Summers wasn't yet the nominee. To spend that amount of capital to fight for a candidate (the fight would have to begin before the nomination) would have meant that the President really wanted Summers.

Something doesn't add up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #43)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 10:20 PM

65. I see...

...you believe the President did not intend to nominate Summers in the first place.

Well I think you are wrong about that.

But your comment makes sense if you didn't think Obama wanted Summers in the first place. Thanks for the clarification.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #43)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 02:43 PM

117. Wow

"To spend that amount of capital to fight for a candidate (the fight would have to begin before the nomination) would have meant that the President really wanted Summers. "

Yup. Surprised? If yes, why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #10)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:14 PM

44. Oh sure. When he doesn't accomplish something it's because of the GOP obstructionists

but when he wants to get something done he's not supposed to rely on Republican support?

Which is it PS? It can't be both. The GOP are either obstructionists who are able to thwart Obama or they are people he doesn't need support from to get things done. And if he doesn't need their support then how are they obstructing him?

Plus, it's not like he hasn't gone to them in the past. He keeps giving them things they want to get their support. Bush tax cuts ring a bell?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #44)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:18 PM

45. That makes no sense in the context of my point. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #45)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:22 PM

48. It absolutely does make sense. Maybe you're confused since your post was illogical.

"In what world would the President rely on "Republican support" for his nomination to succeed? ""


Your words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #48)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:22 PM

49. No, it was the response that was "illogical." n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #49)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:26 PM

51. I added your quote to my earlier reply while you were responding.

Perhaps that'll help clear it up for you.

You can't say the president wouldn't rely on GOP support and then blame the GOP for obstructing Obama (which would mean he needs their support to get things passed in case you missed that point, I'm not sure which part you're failing to comprehend).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #10)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:20 PM

46. Figures they would chalk this up as an Obama loss, because Liberals can NEVER score a "win".

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #10)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 09:42 AM

91. In other words "Prosense disagrees with it" nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:53 PM

11. Whatever the reason for it, I'm relieved we won't have to go through that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:57 PM

14. I thought it was because he was watching the Chief of Staff series on Discovery

 



LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 07:57 PM

15. At this level and point in time, you withdraw when you get word you won't be getting the job.

 

Obama made that call, bet on it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #15)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:07 PM

24. +1,000

Same here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #15)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:10 PM

27. Agree

Summers would never jump, he would have to be pushed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #15)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:11 PM

28. Yes, this.

We must assume that Summers withdrew at the President's 'request.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #15)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:04 PM

42. yes..most likely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #15)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 08:52 AM

87. You withdraw when back channels

from the President call you and say, "This isn't going to happen." Summers withdraws so the President can save face (as much as it can be saved after this disastrous nomination).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #15)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 09:40 AM

89. That's right, Obama made the call

and Summers will not have the job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:03 PM

21. More precisely, this is why he withdrew.

In order to buy time and cool tensions, the White House announced that no decision would be made until the fall. But that only gave space for Summers’ s opponents to strengthen their protests to his candidacy, with four of the 12 Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee, which would confirm Summers, signaling opposition.

That would have meant that the president would have probably had to court Republican support for a Summers nomination, while also trying to strike deals to keep the government open and operating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NV Whino (Reply #21)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:23 PM

30. The uproar from liberal constituents of these 4 Senators may have prompted them to oppose him

 

IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Reply #30)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:29 PM

31. Possibly

I'm so used to my reps ignoring their constituents that I have doubts that constituents swayed their thinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:43 PM

32. It's trumad's fault!

I can't take the pressure.




Jk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:46 PM

33. Excellent, the left needs to be much more vocal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:47 PM

34. I just watched this video interview with Greg Palast




"In this video Luke Rudkowski interviews investigative journalist Greg Palast about the secret memo he uncovered. The End Game memo uncovered how top US Treasury officials secretly conspired with a small cabal of banker big-shots to benefit themselves. The memo indicates high level politicians like Larry Summers, who is most likely going to be appointed the next chairman of the Federal Reserve by Obama."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatSeg (Reply #34)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:02 PM

41. Recommend...the "End Game" written signed document by Summers had

MUCH to do with this....

And the backlash from those who follow "Alternate Media" ...and Wall Street Folks who are savvy and not part of the Rubin Crowd!

Good on Greg! his Report went VIRAL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #41)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 11:56 PM

78. Great reporting

on his part. That is one happy journalist!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:47 PM

35. Welcome to DU

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:56 PM

38. Win

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 08:59 PM

40. This is great news because now we can focus on TPP and the other "trade" sell-outs of the US

I was thinking earlier that putting pressure on the Senate Banking Committee and then, if necessary, on the Senate would dilute our time that we should be rallying against the up coming "trade" deals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emsimon33 (Reply #40)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:27 PM

52. Good idea, but how?

Everything is on the QT. Whispers and rumors. Can we mount an offense before it hits congress?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalAndProud (Reply #52)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:43 PM

54. We'd better because once this hits Congress.......

Last edited Sun Sep 15, 2013, 11:18 PM - Edit history (1)

it's going to be fast tracked. We're going to have to fight this ON the rumors because we're obviously not going to get any info until they're ready to ramrod it through.

The nastiest rumor is the one that says that this agreement will allow international conglomerates to sue countries and by extension taxpayers, for "lost profits" because of laws that restrict their abilities to make profits. Like environmental laws? Or labor laws that increase the power of the workers against the bosses? There's a lot of laws that countries have on the books to protect citizens from the rapaciousness of the corporations. That's a national sovereignty issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialist_n_TN (Reply #54)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 10:34 PM

68. That's not a rumor.

That's a fact. It already exists in NAFTA, CAFTA, Korea FTA and almost every single other trade agreement the US has. It is called investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS).

You can read what the obligation is in the Korea FTA here:

http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/korus-fta/final-text

(click on Chapter 11, Investment)

And you can read the USTR's public announcement that it will be pursuing ISDS here:

Investment. The investment text will provide substantive legal protections for investors and investments of each TPP country in the other TPP countries, including ongoing negotiations on provisions to ensure non-discrimination, a minimum standard of treatment, rules on expropriation, and prohibitions on specified performance requirements that distort trade and investment. The investment text will include provisions for expeditious, fair, and transparent investor-State dispute settlement subject to appropriate safeguards, with discussions continuing on scope and coverage. The investment text will protect the rights of the TPP countries to regulate in the public interest.  

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2011/november/outlines-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement

Note that there have never been appropriate safeguards, which is why local, state, and federal entities in the US and other countries around the world have been targets of ISDS suits.

You can read more about the system here:

http://www.tni.org/briefing/profiting-injustice

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OrwellwasRight (Reply #68)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 11:20 PM

75. Thanks for this.......

nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalAndProud (Reply #52)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:44 PM

55. We need to alert everyone we know about TPP and its sister Atlantic "trade" partnership

AND..we need to be calling, emailing, and letter-writing our elected federal officials NOW and then keep the pressure on.

Corporations have had major influence on TPP and its European/North American equivalent but the very people who must live under the agreements made have not had a seat at the table.

Until we have the opportunity to review these agreements and to weigh the merits and the potential negatives, voting on TPP and the Atlantic agreement should be tabled. That elected officials, such as senators and congress people, have been sworn to silence, does not give me any comfort about their agreements.

I am tired of THE PEOPLE being sold out to the 1%, Wall Street, Banks and other financial institutions, and corporations, such as Monsanto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emsimon33 (Reply #55)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 10:07 PM

63. Any treaty at this level of secrecy should be rejected out of hand.

There is no reason that a good treaty should be so opaque to the populace of the affected countries. It's a take no prisoners, big business coup. We should be up in arms, yet we seem to be obliged to wait until the trap has already sprung.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:23 PM

50. We've had 30some years of libertarians at that job. Isn't it time to put a liberal in yet?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:45 PM

56. The best message we can send is 2014 ... set the stage for 2016

 

Hopefully the Left will emerge as candidates and get Party backing for the House and the Senate races that are up. Then GOTV. We've had Hope, now it's time for Change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:49 PM

59. If we held a Nuremberg like trial for this man-made economic disaster

He would be in the dock with the rest of the international criminals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:53 PM

60. Yup. It was the 101st Chairborne who made him withdraw his nomination

 

101st Chairborne....Fighting Keyboard Warriors.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #60)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 10:35 PM

69. Are you in middle school? [n/t]

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #69)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 10:38 PM

70. Funny how people here say never listen to the corporate media

 

Of course when the corporate media claims it was pressure from the left that made Summers withdraw his nomination, well then it MUST be true.

Funny how that works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #70)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 11:06 PM

72. Who needs the corporate media

when the hive instinctively knows their hard work produced some sweet honey this time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #70)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 11:15 AM

102. No, I'rm referring to your penchant for posting snarky insults

 

with no accompanying analysis or content. Just drive-by sneers with a ROFL smilie. It doesn't add to the discourse and only promotes the schoolyard-taunting mentality that drags this place down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #102)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 01:04 PM

110. Actually I often post my analysis

 

I Didn't think it was needed in this case because I consider the 101st chairborne to be a laughable bunch, hence the ROFL smiley.

Cheers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #110)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 01:44 PM

113. Online activism is "laughable" to you?

 

And, technically, terms like the "101st Chairborne" have historically referred to those who incessantly support U.S. military action in online forums from the safety of their home or office, since the risks to life and limb for such action rest with the men and women of our armed forces rather than with the jingoistic armchair warrior. It's a bit of a stretch to apply the term to online activists that are signing petitions and contacting their Congresspersons and Senators.

Many of these people, myself included, do much more that type at our keyboards. I canvassed door-to-door in 2008 and 2010 to get out the vote for Obama and Democrats, respectively. I hit the streets to oppose the invasion of Iraq and to launch the Occupy movement. Earlier in my life I've canvassed door-to-door for environmental issues and to support ENDA and a repeal of DOMA.

Don't make assumptions about people you don't know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #113)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 02:57 PM

118. But that's impossible!

How can a person post on DU AND do any other activity?

(BTW that's sarcasm)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #60)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 11:12 PM

73. Is that you in the picture? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #60)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 11:12 PM

74. Just to be clear...

you're angry (no one is fooled by the angry rolling laughing face anymore) that people made their voices heard to their representatives and media and that it worked. You are literally attempting to mock the democratic process in this country. That's what you've been reduced to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #60)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 08:39 AM

86. don't think "left-wing groups" refers to rank and file -- refers to policy shops.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #60)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 09:32 AM

88. Plutocracy lovers everywhere are horrified at the possibility of the PTB being affected

by mere peasants. Pooh-pooh...unheard of! Plutocrats are so much wiser than we than we are, why would they ever listen to mere wage slaves?

OMG...


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 09:57 PM

61. .

 

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 11:48 PM

76. Rec!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Sun Sep 15, 2013, 11:51 PM

77. I'm supposed to believe that Summers cares about liberal Democrats and left-wing groups???

 

.


But amid an intensifying uproar of liberal Democrats and left-wing groups opposed to his nomination, Summers decided to withdraw his name on Sunday,




Had to be something else going on...

/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #77)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 02:25 AM

80. like a chess game?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 12:09 AM

79. Durn lefties overturned the master's chessboard.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 03:15 AM

81. Yee Haw!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 07:58 AM

83. WH knew it was hopeless when Jon Tester told them he would not vote for Summers in banking committee

Tester is no liberal. He was concerned about smaller banks under a Summers Fed chairmanship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 08:37 AM

85. good find. glad he's going to mosey off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 10:33 AM

97. Probably a combination of (1) liberal uproar and (2) Obama asking Summers to withdraw

 

...but liberals didn't do this by themselves. They don't have that much power or sway. Sorry, guys, but don't pat yourselves on the back too hard. I don't think Obama ever intended to nominate Summers. This was all a front. He knew that there was no way Summers would be confirmed in the first place. See, I think we liberals continue to make a mistake when it comes to President Obama...many liberals think they are smarter than President Obama. They are not. They think they know better than President Obama. They don't. They think they know what goes on behind the scenes. They don't. They think they have common knowledge about how politics works. They don't. None of us do.

Bottom line: Stop thinking that you know better than the president. You don't. I don't. None of us do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #97)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 12:00 PM

104. First of all...we won a couple. Pats on back, anyway. Second, just prior to your lecture to Liberals

 

you reveal your superior knowledge and interpersonal insight into his mind.

" I don't think Obama ever intended to nominate Summers. This was all a front. He knew that there was no way Summers would be confirmed in the first place,"

Then oddly take it back with your Bottom Line.

The rest is kerfuffle.

Just in case you don't know the big word ...

ker·fuf·fle

[ kər fúff'l ]

1.commotion: a noisy disturbance or commotion

Synonyms: commotion, disturbance, disorder, agitation, hubbub, tumult, to-do, melee, rumpus, ruckus, foofaraw, donnybrook

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #104)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 12:09 PM

105. "My superior knowledge". You don't read well. I believe I wrote...

 

No one knows. Not I. Not you. None of us.

Learn to read.

And don't be upset. The president is smarter than you. Get over it. Here, I'll give you a hug.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #105)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 12:31 PM

106. Actually, I read pretty well. Again ...

 

Glance up to before the Bottom Line ...

"I don't think Obama ever intended to nominate Summers. This was all a front...." You know this how? Certainly sounds like knowledge superior prefacing the edicts given to the rest of us fledgling Liberals.

Nor do I share your Opinion that this was a front...a political trick.

Upset? Naw...just not up for pompous lectures. Geez, we get enough flak from the RW and Centrists and the Blue Dogs.

Thanks for the hug. Peace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #106)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 12:52 PM

107. Again, you don't read well. "I don't think" is not a definitive statement.

 

It's an opinion. And that opinion stands.

We got the smartest muthafuckin' president in the room. Deal with it!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251324155#post24

Have a nice day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #107)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 01:03 PM

109. President Obama's intelligence is not in question or under discussion. And your language is dreadful

 

and uncalled for and more to the reason you shouldn't be lecturing "Liberals". That's all.

Peace out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #109)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 03:16 PM

119. I shouldn't be lecturing liberals. My language is uncalled for. All these things

 

you're accusing me of you're guilty of yourself.

Tell you what: let's agree to disagree on this.

I think we have one of the greatest presidents who ever lived serving us right now. Though I don't agree with all his decisions, I believe that, by and large, he has been an outstanding president. There are a lot of folk who don't agree with that statement...on ALL sides of the political spectrum. O.K. That's cool.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 10:50 AM

99. K&R - n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 11:50 AM

103. Hooray, a victory for "liberal Democrats and left wing groups" finally!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 01:01 PM

108. What I Do Not Get

Why would President Obama have been "strongly leaning" in the direction of picking Larry Summers? Summers, at least, inadvertently helped bring about the 2008 financial crisis. In addition, he did not have a great track record outside of government. His decisions while at Harvard caused the school to lose billions of dollars. I would think that is a track record that would prevent one from becoming the Federal Reserve chairman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 01:13 PM

111. although my President

 

should have done his own research, I want to know who inside this administration advised BO on picking this clown. It seems some of his trusted advisers may have agenda's outside the aims of the Democratic Party. Just something that crossed my mind...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 02:04 PM

116. Insane he was ever under consideration. Jesus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stupefacto (Original post)

Mon Sep 16, 2013, 07:41 PM

120. K & R !!!

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread