HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Politics & Government » Populist Reform of the Democratic Party (Group) » Once Again President Obam...

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 11:31 AM

 

Once Again President Obama Chooses a Fox to Guard the Henhouse.

Once Again President Obama Chooses a Fox to Guard the Henhouse.

President Obama’s pick to be Treasury Under Secretary for Domestic Finance is Antonio Weiss. His new job would be to oversee the domestic financial system—including the implementation of the Dodd-Frank financial-reform act, and consumer protection. He is currently the global head of investment banking at Lazard Ltd, a firm that has put together several major inversion deals. Why is this significant?
“Since 2003, more than thirty-five American companies have dodged taxes through similar deals, which are known as “corporate inversions.””

A number of progressive Senators, lead by Sen Warren have reservations. "Warren has a number of problems with Weiss. The first is the fact that his career has been focused on international transactions. “Neither his background nor his professional experience makes him qualified to oversee consumer protection and domestic regulatory functions at the Treasury,” she wrote. The second is that he’s tied up in the corporate-inversion trend, which, as she notes, the Obama administration has criticized and tried to stop."
Sen Warren further stated, “It’s time for the Obama administration to loosen the hold that Wall Street banks have over economic policy making.”

Sen Warren’s third concern is “about the fox guarding the henhouse. She ticked off a long list of people with close ties to the financial industry who now serve in high-level economic-policy positions in the Obama administration, including Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and US Trade Representative Michael Froman. Letting former Wall Streeters roost in top government perches “tells people that one—and only one—point of view will dominate economic policymaking. It tells people that whatever goes wrong in this economy, the Wall Street banks will be protected first,” she wrote.”

Read more at The Nation Magazine - http://www.thenation.com/blog/191289/next-big-fight-between-progressives-and-wall-street-dems

88 replies, 12417 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 88 replies Author Time Post
Reply Once Again President Obama Chooses a Fox to Guard the Henhouse. (Original post)
rhett o rick Nov 2014 OP
searchfortruth1 Nov 2014 #1
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #2
Doctor_J Nov 2014 #13
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #14
Doctor_J Nov 2014 #16
RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #17
Mbrow Nov 2014 #43
RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #46
mountain grammy Nov 2014 #63
Fred Sanders Nov 2014 #45
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #58
RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #18
billhicks76 Nov 2014 #49
merrily Nov 2014 #64
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #19
Enrique Nov 2014 #35
nikto Nov 2014 #54
Post removed Nov 2014 #55
sabrina 1 Dec 2014 #86
Enthusiast Nov 2014 #3
Thespian2 Nov 2014 #4
Fred Sanders Nov 2014 #5
JDPriestly Nov 2014 #10
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #12
markpkessinger Nov 2014 #53
Kermitt Gribble Nov 2014 #21
Fred Sanders Nov 2014 #22
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #27
grasswire Nov 2014 #79
rhett o rick Dec 2014 #81
Kermitt Gribble Nov 2014 #32
merrily Nov 2014 #65
RiverLover Nov 2014 #67
merrily Nov 2014 #68
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #70
merrily Nov 2014 #73
magical thyme Nov 2014 #34
Thespian2 Nov 2014 #42
RiverLover Nov 2014 #61
LiberalArkie Nov 2014 #6
jalan48 Nov 2014 #7
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #8
zeemike Nov 2014 #9
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #11
Doctor_J Nov 2014 #15
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #20
Fred Sanders Nov 2014 #23
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #25
Fred Sanders Nov 2014 #26
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #28
Post removed Nov 2014 #39
saintsebastian Nov 2014 #50
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #57
Cal33 Nov 2014 #24
Doctor_J Nov 2014 #41
RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #47
Caretha Nov 2014 #52
ctsnowman Nov 2014 #59
RiverLover Nov 2014 #62
Cal33 Nov 2014 #71
merrily Nov 2014 #74
Cal33 Dec 2014 #82
MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #78
Cal33 Dec 2014 #83
ReRe Nov 2014 #29
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #30
KoKo Nov 2014 #75
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #77
highmindedhavi Nov 2014 #31
840high Nov 2014 #33
Doctor_J Nov 2014 #38
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #56
red dog 1 Nov 2014 #36
Hubert Flottz Nov 2014 #37
Mbrow Nov 2014 #44
blkmusclmachine Nov 2014 #40
Phlem Nov 2014 #48
colsohlibgal Nov 2014 #51
Cal33 Dec 2014 #85
DeSwiss Nov 2014 #60
demwing Nov 2014 #66
rhett o rick Nov 2014 #69
QC Nov 2014 #72
KoKo Nov 2014 #76
grasswire Nov 2014 #80
Odin2005 Dec 2014 #84
wavesofeuphoria Dec 2014 #87
woo me with science Dec 2014 #88

Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 11:52 AM

1. What are some other examples, please?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to searchfortruth1 (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 11:59 AM

2. There were two examples in the OP. How many do you need? nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 01:29 PM

13. And don't forget wheeler

 

none so blind as he who will not see. The BOG is really a cyber version of blind man's bluff, only with back-slapping and "God Bless president, the bestest bestest in history" whenever they bump into each other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #13)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 01:34 PM

14. Arnie Duncan. The list is long. I've asked repeatedly for someone to

 

show me any appointments that are not conservative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #14)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 01:40 PM

16. well, there's Van Jones,

 

but of course he was given the boot at the first opportunity

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #16)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 01:55 PM

17. Yes. To this day, he remains my absolute favorite Obama appointment

Figures.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RufusTFirefly (Reply #17)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 07:56 PM

43. Got the Chance to meet him once,

Great guy, good Ideas...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mbrow (Reply #43)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 08:31 PM

46. Yes! I am familiar with his work with the Ella Baker Center, too.

Although he's been well known in the Bay Area for quite a while, I got a distinct impression that he was a rising star on the national stage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 10:28 AM

63. Yes, there was Van Jones, and look what happened to him..

he was crucified. He was called everything in the book. Given the boot at the first opportunity? Please! I guess we could have let the raging right wingers and the conservative corporate media chew him up more, but for what purpose? Obama can't even get a surgeon general.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #14)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 08:19 PM

45. Warren to head the freshly minted Consumer Protection Bureau, as I recall. Want more, you just asked

for one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #45)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 02:55 AM

58. Aren't you clever? But actually you make my point. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to searchfortruth1 (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:02 PM

18. How about Michael R. Taylor, Deputy Commissioner for Foods at the FDA

Formerly Vice President for Public Policy at Monsanto.

Then there's Secretary of Commerce, Penny Pritzker

...perhaps the most infamous and pernicious Pritzker abuse of power was the Superior Bank scandal, a predatory subprime mortgage securitization racket that led to the failure of Superior Bank in 2001 and prefigured the 2008 crash.

Penny Pritzker played a leading, decision-making role in the lead-up to the failure, which ultimately lost 1,400 depositors an estimated $10 million and cost the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation approximately half a billion dollars.


Then there's FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, a former telecommunications lobbyist and campaign fund-raiser. Wheeler was chief executive of the National Cable Television Association for five years and the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association for 12.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RufusTFirefly (Reply #18)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 10:18 PM

49. All Broken Promises

 

And it would have been easy not to name corporate lobbyists to head regulatory positions. Anyone here think someone has embarrassing wiretaps on Obama for leverage or are threatening him?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RufusTFirefly (Reply #18)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 01:05 PM

64. How about Taub and Hammond at the Postal Commission?

Taub was a chief, if not the chief, author of the 2006 Postal Act, whose objective was to destroy the Post Office. And he re-appointed Hammond, who also wanted the Post Office destroyed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to searchfortruth1 (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:17 PM

19. I hope your "searchfortruth" is successful. I noticed you popped in and left your post

 

only to never return. There are lots of examples.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #19)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 04:25 PM

35. he couldn't handle it when he found it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to searchfortruth1 (Reply #1)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 02:24 AM

54. Geitner, Paulson, Duncan, and Wheeler at FCC

 

There's probably more, but those are the most conspicuous ones.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to searchfortruth1 (Reply #1)


Response to searchfortruth1 (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 2, 2014, 02:16 AM

86. Monsanto CEOs, Gates and Hagel, REPUBLICANS in Defense, Bush Loyalists left in the NSA, Clapper,

Former CEO of a 'Security Contractor, Booz Allen who profited nicely from Clapper's work in the NSA, still is.

The list is so long it needs its own thread. In fact that is a very good idea.

Btw, how many Liberal Dems are in this President's cabinet? There are lots of Republicans and Corporate CEOS, but that is not what we elected when we voted for Democrats is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:01 PM

3. Kicked and recommended!

Thank you, rhett o rick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:20 PM

4. K & R +++

Obama has been and continues to be a hired hand for Wall Street. Any doubts? Check his appointments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thespian2 (Reply #4)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:25 PM

5. LOLx2, so that is why Obama went into community organizing, so he could cozy up to the banks....

how ridiculous can new members at DU get, and as obvious?

Try again, man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #5)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 01:05 PM

10. His work as a community organizer does not prevent him from being dependent on the financial

sector for his success as a politician and maybe even his future career.

Elizabeth Warren pointed out that his rhetoric and presumably his personal leanings are not toward preferences for bankers but that he appoints them to positions of control in our government nonetheless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #5)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 01:20 PM

12. What is obvious? I agree with this new member.Are you really disparaging them because they are new?

 

Let's look at your implication. Since Obama went into community organizing he can't be cozying up to banks. Is that your implication? Doesn't even make any sense. Almost all of Pres Obama's appointments have been from conservative to very conservative and some have been Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #12)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 01:41 AM

53. Thank you!

I agree with him, too. I've been seeing this tactic of disparaging a poster because he/she is new to DU, and I find it very troubling. I mean, agree or disagree with a post, but on its substance, not on the length of DU membership!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #5)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:20 PM

21. You've been here less than a year, Fred Sanders.

What does a poster's join date have to do with anything? If you can refute that the majority of appointments have not been from Wall Street and Corporate America, please do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kermitt Gribble (Reply #21)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:23 PM

22. So, you agree with the new guy, Obama is a "hired hand", a lackey in the employ of and totally

subservient to them?

I have not rushed to judgment that appointing any of these folks leads to such a conclusion....you can if you want....

Free world.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:35 PM

27. Here is my conclusion. Either Pres Obama chooses conservatives because he supports conservatism

 

or someone with a higher power (the NSA/CIA Security State) "helps" him with his decisions. If you have an alternate possibility, I'd like to hear it.

As far as "rush to judgement", how many conservative appointments will it take to convince you? I think the percentage is 99%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #27)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 11:28 PM

79. I really appreciate your thought processes, R o R.

Just a pat on the back for the consistent speaking of truth to power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #79)

Mon Dec 1, 2014, 01:38 AM

81. Thank you and I appreciate your posts also. We must keep up the pressure. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 03:16 PM

32. How else do you explain his appointments?

If this were the exception instead of the rule, I might agree with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kermitt Gribble (Reply #32)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 01:18 PM

65. Isn't the whole point of a group that we don't need to have this kind of discussion?

If we still need to argue that people like Geithner and Duncan weren't liberal nominees, why not just post in GD?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #65)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 01:27 PM

67. Thank you. ~nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #67)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 01:30 PM

68. Every other group is a "safe haven." Why not this one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #65)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 02:06 PM

70. Here is my take. I would like this to be a safe haven for open discussions. I don't mind at all if

 

people want to try sell their Third Way issues here if they stick to honest arguments and cut the ridicule, mocking and absurd posts.
I think that stipulation will weed out the disruptors. They never have decent arguments. They get away with their disruption in GD because they have enough friends to win jury decisions.
Honest debates only strengthen our stands and may win converts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #70)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 08:32 PM

73. There is at least one hidden post on this thread.

Last edited Sun Nov 30, 2014, 09:05 PM - Edit history (1)

A Third Wayer did not get the hide. Haven't enough traditional Democrats or liberals been driven off this board or banned?

I don't hang out in other groups a lot, usually only when a group thread shows up in Latest Threads. But, when I happen to see see hides in other groups, it's not someone who belongs in the group who gets the hide.

A challenge in the very first reply on this thread, just like "the swarm" in GD.

Posters in this group should not have to put up with that kind of thing. No loyalist group has to. Besides, how is going to a group to challenge what is being said there ever an "honest discussion?"

Did you ever "honestly" go to the BOG to challenge praise of Obama being posted there by fans of Obama or to the Hillary Group to challenge praise of Hillary being posted there by fans of Hillary?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #5)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 04:20 PM

34. maybe you can explain for us all of Obama's very disappointing appointments

 

because this isn't the first time I've seen him put a fox in charge of a henhouse. In fact, it seems to be a pattern.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #5)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 07:05 PM

42. You

again, Fred. Give it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:38 PM

6. Let's see, Wall street inside for treasury

Telecom lobbiest for head of FCC, Always a Republican for Defense Sec. , What we need is a southern conservative prosecutor for Justice.

Name the rest of the liberal dept heads we have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:44 PM

7. Hope and Change for Wall Street?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:48 PM

8. It looks to me like Pres Obama is in good with Wall Street or a higher power is calling the shots.nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 12:54 PM

9. I am sure it is 11 dimensional chess.

Who knows more about causing chaos in the chicken house that a fox, so give him the job of protecting it...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zeemike (Reply #9)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 01:11 PM

11. But it's like Lucy and Charlie Brown. Lucy (BO) promising Charlie Brown (99%) that

 

the Fox won't eat the chicken THIS TIME. George Bush would say, "Don't be fooling me again." (I left out the stutters)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 01:35 PM

15. what the fan club refuses to acknowledge is that this is bad politics as well as bad governance

 

These moves alienate everyone in the base. And here's a clue for the party: in 2016 there won't be a charismatic african american to get blacks to the polls. Hillary will have to try to win with Obama's conservative/corporatist platform, and without that natural constituency.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #15)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:19 PM

20. Do you have a possible explanation for Pres Obama's obsession with appointing conservatives? nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #20)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:25 PM

23. It is possible to support Warren and twice elected Democratic party President Obama, it is not that

difficult or inconsistent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #23)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:30 PM

25. Obama was twice elected because he pretended to be progressive. Why not support a real progressive

 

instead?

The problem I have with your statement is that you are discussing personalities and not ideologies. While you might like both Sen Warren and Pres Obama because they seem nice and have nice smiles, you can't like both progressive and conservative policies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #25)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:32 PM

26. I see Obama as transitional, he is the pioneer as Gorbachev was....history will be the judge of that

The French Revolution took decades to play out, not like in the movies.

And all I see on his overall agenda are clear progressive policies....all of them. He needs and deserves our support, not our disappointed derision.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #26)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:41 PM

28. "And all I see on his overall agenda are clear progressive policies" You must be reading

 

different news than me. Do you consider drone killings as progressive? How about his support for fracking? TPP? No accountability for Wall Street crime? How about his supprt of the Patriot Act and indefinite detention. His protection of war criminals isn't progressive nor is his stonewalling the report on torture. Clearly his "overall agenda" isn't progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #28)


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #25)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 10:46 PM

50. Just a Minute

I totally agree, first of all, with nearly all of the remarks you've made in this thread. Looking at your avatar and signature, though, and considering your use of a phrase like "real progressive", I wonder how far your support for Sen. Warren goes. If we're going to be criticizing other progressives for not being as liberal as they perhaps should be, we can't overlook Sen. Warren.

For starters, she supports GOP efforts to "to repeal or reduce the estate tax". She's also been evasive when asked about raising inheritance tax rates. Furthermore, there's a great deal that remains unknown about her foreign policy positions other than that she's steadfast and typical in terms of her support of Israel. She's even implicitly approved of Israeli shelling of Palestinian schools. Would any of these things make you second-guess your support for the senator?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saintsebastian (Reply #50)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 02:41 AM

57. So far, other than Sen Sanders, she is the best candidate we have. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #15)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:27 PM

24. I hope by that time Warren will be so popular among most Democrats, that there

 

will be a tsunami of a movement to get her to run. There's a good chance
that her name recognition will be as good as, if not better than, Clinton's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cal33 (Reply #24)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 06:05 PM

41. My greatest fear is that she's just another illusion. Like Obama 2008.

 

If we actually elect her she might turn out to be another corporate water-carrier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #41)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 08:57 PM

47. She might be. But she seems like less of a cipher than the President

She's also shown the ability to utter inconvenient truths and to face adversity without shrinking.
On the other hand, over time Washington has turned the process of corrupting decent politicians into a fine art.
Will Warren be able to resist decades of refined techniques for bringing public servants to heel? I really don't know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #41)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 10:57 PM

52. my exact same fear

 

Doctor_J

I'm not going to endorse anyone until I see who actually throws their hat in the ring....


and them I'm going to scrutinize them like there is not tomorrow before I cast my next vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #41)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 05:58 AM

59. X2

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #41)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 07:39 AM

62. Watch this video from back when she was still a professor

& maybe you'll feel more assured she IS the real deal~

&list=PLX2fpiFdElFXZohAs7jOOdVKrWvzE7nCa&index=7

But I completely understand your concern. Once burned, twice shy. Obama burned half of the country, people who really who wanted what he was selling. That "You Didn't Build That" line, he took from Liz Warren...sigh.

Here's another vid of the Young Turks discussing centrist corporate Obama vs EW. Its really interesting & and they mention that "We all know now that Barack Obama is not a liberal, he's not progressive."~

"Published on Feb 6, 2014

"On Thursday morning, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) called on President Barack Obama to nominate more judges to the federal bench who have backgrounds serving the public interest instead of corporate America. Of Obama's judicial nominations so far, just ten—fewer than four percent—have worked as lawyers at public interest organizations, according to a report released Thursday by the Alliance for Justice, a network of civil rights organizations. Only 10 nominees have had experience representing workers in labor disputes. Eighty-five percent have been either corporate attorneys or prosecutors. At an event Thursday sponsored by several civil rights organizations, including the Brennan Center for Justice and the Alliance for Justice, Warren called for more balance in the system. "Power is becoming more and more concentrated on one side," she said...".* Ben Mankiewicz (co-host of What The Flick?! and TYT Sports) and comedian Jimmy Dore break it down on The Young Turks.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #41)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 02:57 PM

71. I have watched Elizabeth Warren long enough to feel quite sure that she is the real McCoy. I

 

didn't know much about Obama until after he became president. I simply can't believe that
she is a middle-of the-roader at heart,, pretending to be a Progressive -- just to become
president. That simply is not Elizabeth Warren.

I can guess at her reasons for not wanting to run. But she might possibly change her mind
if the political situation becomes such that she felt it was her duty to respond to the wish of
the American people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cal33 (Reply #71)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 09:13 PM

74. Others had been watching Obama from afar since his speech at the 2004 Democratic National

Convention. Including me. Originally, I chose him chiefly because I thought he had the best chance of winning of anyone in that field. But, as primary wore on, I got to be more and more of a fan--and I was following the primary relatively closely, donating and volunteering, too. I vowed never to make that mistake again.

I am not saying that Warren is like Obama. But, that was a fear of mine when people first started literally gushing over her, when she was still working in his administration. Once burned, twice shy, as the saying goes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #74)

Mon Dec 1, 2014, 12:44 PM

82. I've read that when she was working at the Treasury Dep't, she had no fear about telling

 

Geithner and her other superiors what was on her mind, when she disagreed with them --
which was rather often. They came to look upon her as a nuisance.

Lately I've also read that when Obama thought of appointing another Wall Street banker
as Under Secretary of the Treasury, when asked her opinion, Warren said, "Enough is enough."

Obama's government does have many Republicans. Too many, in my opinion. Is he doing it
to appease the Republicans? If so, look at the way they are treating him. Yet he seems to be
going back for more punishment.

Warren is a Progressive -- and one with courage, integrity, and the willingness to make
America a better place for everyone, not just the rich few. Her history of opposing Wall Street
crooked bankers is well known, and it has been steady over the years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #41)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 10:54 PM

78. A decade ago, she wrote a book about the 99% getting

 

@$!#ed.

And started the CFPB.

Warren's been consistent for a long time.

What had Obama done, other than talk about transcending ideologies and other such stuff?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #78)

Mon Dec 1, 2014, 12:49 PM

83. He hired a lot of Republicans to run his government. Aren't there enough better Democrats around

 

to help run our government?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:43 PM

29. Jeebus...

All I can do is hold my head with my right hand and my gut with the left.

Just when you think he might be getting it, he turns around and goes in the opposite direction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ReRe (Reply #29)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 02:47 PM

30. He talks a good talk. It's the walk that's troubling. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #30)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 10:33 PM

75. Now well into the 6th year...it does seem that's a big concern...

We Watched and Waited...and BOOM. It gets harder and harder to make excuses as much as we might want to and as much as we want to believe that he's playing that cautious, lawyerly 23rd Dimension (or whatever it is) Chess Game in the "Interests of the American People."

I've wanted to believe....and hoped to believe when I voted Twice for Him on Recs of our Last of the Left ...to give One More Chance.

It wears thin these days...There's not much more betrayal of "Principles" that one can ignore as much as one tries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #75)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 10:36 PM

77. The middle class are frogs in the water on the stove. The temperature is rising

 

and some frogs are willing to stick it out with MIC-Hillary until they reach a boil. I say it's time to make a move, to try to jump out of the pot. The movement has started, we must help it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 03:02 PM

31. politics as usual

Obama took their money during his campain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to highmindedhavi (Reply #31)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 03:19 PM

33. Yep.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 840high (Reply #33)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 05:58 PM

38. Yeah, the fan club calls us racists and blames us for all thats gone wrong for 6 years

 

In fact all we believe is that the president is just part of the corrupt system instead of the godly populist saint that they see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #38)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 02:36 AM

56. They want so badly to have a leader they can blindly follow. Not make up their own minds

 

about fracking or the TPP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 04:25 PM

36. Last week, Sen. Warren wrote a HuffPo blog about Obama picking Weiss

"Enough is Enough:The President's Latest Wall Street Nominee"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025842840/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 05:21 PM

37. Senator Warren is one of the few in Washington...

who is not afraid of the banksters and their pet puppets in high places.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hubert Flottz (Reply #37)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 08:02 PM

44. Her and Bernie Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 06:04 PM

40. Washington is a crime FAMILY. A racket. All the insiders Obama chooses pretty much tips their hand

 

"Change"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 09:30 PM

48. The fucking Third Way.

They and the Republicans are why we can't have nice things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sat Nov 29, 2014, 10:54 PM

51. When Oh When?

Will the democrats go back to being democrats, not third way tools of Wall Street. I'll be eager to see the Obama apologists rationalize this.

We'll get another big dose of Wall Street Third Way with Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to colsohlibgal (Reply #51)

Mon Dec 1, 2014, 03:51 PM

85. Do you think they will harrass Hillary they way they did her husband Bill, and

 

the way they are harassing Barack now, should she become president? I've
raised this question before, and somebody thought that it was all an act.

It could be, but I feel pretty sure that the Tea Baggers really mean it. They
are a group apart from the other Republicans, I think. There are also those
who hate him for no other reason than his race.

I think she would be harassed, too, no matter how much she should help the
rich to get richer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 06:51 AM

60. K&R

 

What's a Moderate 80s Republican to do?

- When you think about it, the Democratic Party has more moderate Republicans than the Republican Party does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 01:23 PM

66. Pin of the Week!

 

Congrats on the great post, I'll keep it pinned till next weekend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demwing (Reply #66)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 01:56 PM

69. Thanks demwing. Let's get this movement going. nm

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 03:45 PM

72. The president appoints right wing asshole and Wall Street shills

so they will be where he can keep a close eye on them.

They work for *him* now, not Goldman Sachs or Citigroup, by damn!

Anybody else remember that particularly desperate rationalization from late 2008-early 2009?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to QC (Reply #72)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 10:35 PM

76. There's THAT to consider. Judging him by his Appointments.....

If one looks at his Appointments from the beginning....it's hard not to wonder what he was about...and as it went on it became clearer. Though....we still wanted to believe.

There are still those who BELIEVE.... But, at some point, some of us really can't "cough it down" anymore on "FAITH."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Sun Nov 30, 2014, 11:36 PM

80. For a real "thrill", investigate the Bush Lazard connections.

This is a HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE appointment. Much worse than it even appears.

I believe this is the turning over of the U.S. to the BFEE. Pure and simple.

Here's a start if you want to go digging into Bush Lazard. Follow the trails to Texas and Scotland and all around the mulberry bush.

http://theinfounderground.com/smf/index.php?topic=13140.0

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Dec 1, 2014, 02:46 PM

84. Nice to see this pinned!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Thu Dec 4, 2014, 01:37 PM

87. Out Cheneying-Cheney: Obama’s Likely Defense Pick Once Backed Pre-emptive Attack on North Korea

Out Cheneying-Cheney: Obama’s Likely Defense Pick Once Backed Pre-emptive Attack on North Korea

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/12/4/out_cheneying_cheney_obamas_likely_defense

President Obama is reportedly preparing to nominate former Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter to replace ousted Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. A trained physicist, Carter has a long history at the Pentagon, where he once served as the chief arms buyer. In 2006, he made headlines when he backed a pre-emptive strike against North Korea if the country continued with plans to conduct a test launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile. He co-wrote a piece headlined "If Necessary, Strike and Destroy." We speak to Alice Slater, New York director of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation and a member of the Abolition 2000 coordinating committee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Original post)

Mon Dec 8, 2014, 06:04 PM

88. kick

and rec

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread