Why did Obama "hire" Geitner?

[kid a]

I just read the William Black / Bill Moyers interview. I didn't get the direct indictment of Obama that some here are reading into it.

It seems he has temporarily lost faith in Obama's handling of the economy. He honestly believes it's the fear of catastrophic economic consequences for Obama's inaction on investigating and transparency.

Will the people screaming from the rooftops about this interview and their angst with Obama answer a few questions here?

1. Do you believe Obama is complicit in any fraudulent banking schemes?

2. Do you believe Geitner is now, or ever has been, involved in any banking fraud?

3. Do you interpret Obama's continued support of Geitner as part of a cover-up?

4. Why did Obama hire "Geitner"?

Here are my answers:

1. No
2. No
3. No
4. I think Geitner was hired as a transitional "expert" on the current crisis.
I believe Obama will let him "move on" by the end of the summer.
I believe (and hope) Obama will promote a more prosecuting and aggressive TS and present us with an honest representation of the banking industry when he "knows what he is talking about."

[truedelphi]

1. Geithner proved himself to be one total F___up when the IMF sent him

Off to the Far East in 1998-99 and he was sent there to help out their recovery.

He had two economic models to choose from: that should not have overwhelmed him. However, he chose the model that worsened the economic situation and many people think he had a leading role in what has happened to Japan's economy.

[KharmaTrain]

2. Cause People Need A Scapegoat

Somehow I guess this financial mess was supposed to straighten out in 60 or 90 days and Keysian theories would dominate the global economy. Doesn't seem to be working that way. The depth of this mess is still unknown...and anyone who says they do know is full of shit. This is totally uncharted waters that even the smartest economist has no clue how it will play out. But that's not good enough...people want change and fast.

People are angry...some have lost jobs, others have seen their retirement savings vanish and others see a political opportunity. Geitner is at the crossroads of all looking for a face to paint the blame on. Be it that he was some kind of complicit witness or participant prior to January 20th or that he hasn't danced the right dance since. No matter, he's getting a lot of heat. While people appear to have patience with President Obama, the same can't be said of those at ground zero in what will be known as one of the biggest scandals in American history...if not the largest.

Transitional is a very key word here. Geitner knows the system and the thought is to fix the problem from within. I'm not sure this is the best way, but there are few alternatives. The matter is which how much tolerance for pain the American people have. Do you let the system fully implode putting millions out of work and homes? Or do you try to save the redeemable parts of the system and build from anew? I sure don't have the answer.

[MrPerson]

3. No one else wanted the job.

[sandnsea]

4. Geithner unraveled Bear Stearns

I find it amusing that people are in hysterics because this guy said the banks are insolvent.

Well duh. What the hell do they think has been going on since last September. When DU told them the banks were insolvent, they said, nuhuh, it's just a big scam to rip off money from the taxpayers.

:crazy:

[Two Americas]

5. or....

The simplest and most logical explanation, that requires no conspiracy theories, that does not require us to take sides in the love him or hate him feuding around here, that requires neither hope nor outrage, neither loyalty nor surprise, is that Obama fully intends to continue the economic policies of the last 30 years. So be it.

That seems obvious to me, and I don't know why there needs be so much drama around the issue. Why don't his supporters just admit that this is what they want, and his detractors accept the truth and stop being disappointed and expecting anything else? As it is, the two sides cannot even talk to each other.

Obama is going to continue the same economic policies of the last 30 years, more artfully and successfully managed perhaps. Those defending him, if truth were told, would probably be perfectly happy with that and are hoping for a return to the Clinton era. Those who are opposed to those economics are not going to be happy, no matter what with those policies. End of story.



...

[chimpymustgo]

7. I think you hit the nail on the head. The question becomes: can this country survive continuing

the rapacious policies of the last 30 years? What's left to steal from us?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Exactly. This isn't a revolution, or anything like it. The Capitalists are still in charge.

New boss meet the real bosses.

[chimpymustgo]

10. Great line: "New boss meet the real bosses."

[SammyWinstonJack]

9. .

:thumbsup:

[WI_DEM]

6. President's make mistakes, even JFK did. His treasury secretary was a republican and he also

appointed to high level positions people like Dean Rusk, Robert McNamara & McGeorge Bundy, the so-called "Best and Brightest" (from the name of the William Manchester book) who all advised Presidents Kennedy and Johnson to escalate the U.S. committment in Vietnam. Carter appointed a good friend, Bert Lance, budget director, and he had to resign under an ethics cloud (due to banking irregularities) within months of taking office. Clinton had a few doozies too. Not too many folks wanted to be Treasury Sec and I'm still willing to see if Geitner is a fall guy, a bad choice, or will be vindicated in the end.