Obama threatens bankers: I’m the only thing standing between you and the pitchforks
posted at 3:30 pm on April 3, 2009 by Allahpundit
Alinsky + Chicago = mob-tastic! My dad used to know guys like this growing up in lower Manhattan. Free advice from him to me to you: If you’re strapped for cash and one of them offers to help, decline.
President Barack Obama wasn’t in a mood to hear them out. He stopped the conversation and offered a blunt reminder of the public’s reaction to such explanations. “Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen. The public isn’t buying that.”
“My administration,” the president added, “is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.”…
“The only way they could have sent a more Spartan message is if they had served bread along with the water,” says a person who attended the meeting. “The signal from Obama’s body language and demeanor was, ‘I’m the president, and you’re not.’”…
The president spoke of public outrage over the high flying executive lifestyle. “The anger gentlemen, is real,” Obama said. He urged pay reform and said rewards must be proportional and balanced, and tied to the health and success of the company.
Slublog sums it up: “So let me see if I’ve got this right. The Democrats helped cause the crisis through bad policy, fanned the flames of outrage against CEOs and Wall Street and are now saying they’re the only ones who can protect the CEOs from all of those angry people out there.” Indeed, and all they have to do to earn that protection is fire their CEO or whatever else The One demands. Refuse — and if you follow the link, you’ll see that some of them actually want to return their TARP money — and they risk a visit from Timmy the Chin.
Anyone recognize the phrase “the anger is real,” though? The last time Obama used it was in his speech on race to back off all the haters who thought, inexplicably, that a would-be president should have piped up about Reverend Wright sometime in the course of 20 years. Evidently it’s a favorite formulation when he wants to lean on his audience. In which case, if he’s so worried about pitchforks, instead of creepily exploiting the threat of mob violence to centralize the economy, how about our modern-day Lincoln gives a speech asking Americans to cool off before bailout fatigue leads to someone getting killed? After all, the anger really is real.
Update: Comments imported from Headlines.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
Meh. Pride and Greed are harmless so long as one follows a solid ethical code. Envy, on the other hand, dooms us all.
Count to 10 on April 3, 2009 at 4:18 PM
That’s easy to understand. That’s probably close to the number of welfare recipients who have never paid taxes. To them ALL money belongs / comes from the government.
Guardian on April 3, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Yeah, I went back and see that now. I was watching ‘Goodfellas’ the other day and this reminds me of Paulie giving the restaraunt owner protection from the Joe Pesci character. And once the guy takes the bait he gets his business looted and then burned to the ground. Good times I tell ya’. “I’m from the government and I’m here to help” my a$$!
thomasaur on April 3, 2009 at 4:19 PM
+1776
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Racist….oh, wait….
BigWyo on April 3, 2009 at 4:19 PM
I love that movie. It’s an apt analogy.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:20 PM
The Bible and Rush would not say that is greed. That is self-interest. Even in the parable of the talents the servant who buried the talent in the ground was scolded because while the other servants went and invested and got a bigger return, the last servant simply gave the money back.
Self-interest is not a bad thing. Greed is bad. Greed is getting something that you shouldn’t have, i.e. buying a house that you can’t really afford.
MobileVideoEngineer on April 3, 2009 at 4:21 PM
This president is truly giving a new meaning to the term “bully pulpit.”
What a jackass–true to his party name.
cackcon on April 3, 2009 at 4:21 PM
Banker: “Hey, we had a deal. You didn’t say anything about salary caps!”
Obama: “I am altering the deal….pray I don’t alter it further….”
BobMbx on April 3, 2009 at 4:22 PM
Oh, OK.
What’s with those people anyway? Born to hate.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:22 PM
*Hisss-caaa*
Count to 10 on April 3, 2009 at 4:24 PM
Good differentiation. Although hawksruleva points about the greed within government is on target.
Let me repeat George Washington:
It’s significant he said this in his Farewell Address.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:24 PM
I’ve asked you this before and must have missed your answer. Why are you here?
What compels you to write this silly stuff?
Do you actually enjoy being called an idiot in so many creative ways?
Rod on April 3, 2009 at 4:24 PM
There are few words liberals understand less than “accountable.” They think it means “subject to political control.”
No system is more accountable than a free market enterprise in a competitive economy. Its management reports to its shareholders, and they all must work to attract and retain a customer base. Inept managers can be disciplined or removed almost immediately, especially if the shareholders were careful to keep them from building excessively generous “golden parachutes.” Badly run companies lose money, and are eventually destroyed by their competitors.
No system is less accountable that a state-run enterprise in a command economy. It has no effective competition – it can simply legislate competition out of existence, as Obama will eventually do if he tries to keep the auto companies under fascist control. The “management” is absolutely impossible to discipline, and extremely difficult to get rid of – it takes two to four years at minimum, and their termination will only be tangentially related to their performance as “chief executive officers” of a particular state-run company. There is very little concern with servicing a customer base, and the state can sustain inefficient or absurd business models with artificial infusions of bailout cash indefinitely. This practice didn’t begin under Obama – visit your local post office and ask them how they stay in business without making any real effort to “compete” against FedEx or UPS, even though they lose money every year, and raise prices relentlessly on an increasingly inferior product.
Liberals toss around the word “accountability” because they have a primitive and childish view of the consequences that should apply to business leaders – the only penalty for failure they can imagine is being tossed in jail. The idea that a business is held “accountable” by going out of business perplexes them. The idea that risk should be an important component of determining reward would require an understanding of freedom that childish leftists do not possess. To them, the “return” on an “investment” should be small and guaranteed, with the stock market serving as a huge welfare program. I wonder how the idiot trolls who come in here trumpeting Dow Jones numbers (on good days only, of course) think the Dow will ever get back to 10,000 without some people taking big risks, some people losing big money, and some people becoming very, very rich.
Doctor Zero on April 3, 2009 at 4:24 PM
I was referring to the arrogance of The Precendent…or do you consider him to be following a “solid ethical code”?
ladyingray on April 3, 2009 at 4:25 PM
This “leak” has Rahm’s fingerprints all over it.
1. Would the bankers leak it to Politico?
2. Sends a message: Don’t f@ck with the President
3. Not unlike sending the dead fish to an opponent.
4. Pres polling much higher than the Bankers.
5. Note all the stories about the Boy-King being “tough” these days.
aquaviva on April 3, 2009 at 4:25 PM
ah yes..greed is a sin.
So then all the folks who bought houses they could not afford were greedy, all those who lived way above their means and charged everything were greedy. All the corrupt Democrats who are not paying their taxes are greedy too.
Now we have the greedy Obama’s leading the pack. I mean didnt they get a deal on their house, didnt Michelle get a higher paying job?
becki51758 on April 3, 2009 at 4:26 PM
Exactly. He of all people? Concerned about slavery? His parentage, his raising, his self-selected mentors, his education, his profession, his twisted religion, his associates, ALL demonstrate that he is very much concerned about IMPOSING Communist slavery on this entire people!
He has no investment in historical slavery other than to exploit it to the ends of his personally led dystopia.
Maquis on April 3, 2009 at 4:26 PM
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:26 PM
INC: I thought that he, if nothing else, would understand disparaging put downs and stereotyping–but I guess there’s no carry over from a lifetime of listening to it.
jeanie on April 3, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Bankers know, remember well how the government strong-armed them over the years to make these really stupid loans. Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) goes rogue: bankers better make the loans or else, no mergers allowed, Acorn demonstrating on your doorstep, and government trouble and intrusion. Who wants Barney Frank and Maxine Waters on your case? Short term solution, better to just capitulate and make the darn loans.
This leak came from the bankers, not the White House. Part of Obamalinsky’s agenda is to demonize bankers and Wall Street to incite class envy and chaos. Then “benevolent” government plays the “hero,” and comes to the rescue. Obama position: Only the government can fix this… Truth: maybe not.
Obama is, has always been, and continues to be an avid, much beloved Alinky disciple (Alinsky’s bio son said as much during the campaign) who’s learned his lessons upside down and sideways. He is also a Chicago machine thug.
marybel on April 3, 2009 at 4:27 PM
My point exactly.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Angry, bitter….feeds off the insults. Run of the Mill Troll.
Oh, and Fat….Angry, bitter…huge…..
BigWyo on April 3, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Hawaii is multi-racial. I don’t think his personal issues come from his skin color so much as they do from abandonment by his parents and being raised by a Marxist mama.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:30 PM
A-CON has already showed up. Didn’t they give tours of AGI employee homes…
You think bankers are unaware of the relationship between Obama, the left and the Acorn brown shirts….of course they are.
Who do you think leaked this story to Politico in the first place? The administration…most likely rahm emanuel has his finger prints all over this….the same guy who sent a dead fish to make a point to someone. They’re making an example out of others who are or will be targets/opponents.
moxie_neanderthal on April 3, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Not at all.
Though, pride is different than arrogance, isn’t it?
P.BO seems to have arrogance in great supply, but I have yet to see evidence of pride. Nothing is below him.
Count to 10 on April 3, 2009 at 4:31 PM
Awesome!
Mommypundit on April 3, 2009 at 4:32 PM
Maybe he should heed the Lincoln of the past???
“You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people’s initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.”
Abraham Lincoln
Rovin on April 3, 2009 at 4:32 PM
No. I answered you once above and now marybel has added her 2 cents.
See marybel on April 3, 2009 at 4:27 PM
The bankers say it’s their patriotic duty to return the money and they want to restore faith in the markets.
No way the WH would have leaked something like that.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:32 PM
I didn’t realize that mark to market only came in to effect then but I remember early on in this meltdown Newt commenting that accounting changes could make the banks liquid immediately without cash infusions from taxpayers. I still strongly believe someone pulled the thread with that $550 billion bank run and the entire effect was to elect Obama. Uncovering this whole drama is the key to getting rid of this megalomaniac.
msmveritas on April 3, 2009 at 4:32 PM
Or….he’s internalized the victim mentality to the degree that now that he thinks the power is his, he’s going to take his turn at the wheel? He does keep emphasizing that he won, he’s in charge–he just hasn’t added the word ‘now’–but I wonder if he thinks it?
jeanie on April 3, 2009 at 4:32 PM
We had one of those nut bags show up on our doorstep yesterday for the “Census”. Suffice it to say we did not participate, the ACORN took some notes on her clipboard and slunk away.
Key West Reader on April 3, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Does it not bother you that people are laughing at you?
mr.blacksheep on April 3, 2009 at 4:33 PM
That guy wasn’t a Democrat, was he?
hawksruleva on April 3, 2009 at 4:33 PM
i have pitchforks here at my house & i can use them. but only when pitching bales of ACORNs!!!!
kelley in virginia on April 3, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Interesting biographical details about Saul Alinsky:
Alinsky was born to Russian-Jewish parents in Chicago in 1909. He studied criminology as a graduate student at the University of Chicago, during which time he became friendly with Al Capone and his mobsters. Ryan Lizza, senior editor of The New Republic, offers a glimpse into Alinsky’s personality: “Charming and self-absorbed, Alinsky would entertain friends with stories—some true, many embellished—from his mob days for decades afterward. He was profane, outspoken, and narcissistic, always the center of attention despite his tweedy, academic look, and thick, horn-rimmed glasses.”
Apparently being a thuggish, self-absorbed narcissist is key to being successful at implementing the Alinsky Method.
Buy Danish on April 3, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Yep. Exactly. Brilliant point.
You are one smart, moxified neanderthal – Jerry.
aquaviva on April 3, 2009 at 4:34 PM
–James Madison
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:35 PM
Actually, everybody is laughing at the cons clinging desperately to a failed ideology and a joke of a party.
It is hilarious.
Ha!
getalife on April 3, 2009 at 4:35 PM
Baghdad Bob?
Count to 10 on April 3, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Good catch in the quote!
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:36 PM
It shouldn’t matter if you are a conservative, republican, democrat or idiot, the sheer fact that this president has become unhinged and is now using mafioso tactics to talk to other Americans this way is wrong on so many levels.
His absence of tact, considering his ability to be so glib, is an indication that he is mentally crumbling. The job is too much for him and his ego. His mental state should be of concern to all Americans and I can only hope the WH psychiatrist is working with him on a regular basis.
sherry on April 3, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Striking similarity. I suspect it’s a small-penis thing.
mr.blacksheep on April 3, 2009 at 4:38 PM
Ok then, if you say so.
mr.blacksheep on April 3, 2009 at 4:38 PM
why the fck did AIG financial managers get bonuses then? who’s holding those people accountable? this tired BS about the holy free markets was denounced even by alan greenspan.
jesus christ, so much BS. the entire country can vote for the government, but only an exclusive, rich group of shareholders can decide who should lead “too big to fail” companies. and this group is more concerned with profits than the overall economy.
umm, o just sacked wagoner, but don’t let the facts get in your way.
sesquipedalian on April 3, 2009 at 4:39 PM
I would agree with that differentiation. But I’m not sure, by that definition, the bankers were greedy. Did the bankers break any laws? If so, where are the cases? Or did they try to maximize profits through every legal means? Just like the AIG people getting bonuses- is it greed to ask for the payment as agreed upon?
hawksruleva on April 3, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Really? I wouldn’t chalk this up to a mental breakdown as much as I would that he’s a prick and he’s always been a prick.
The man has no character, so what do you expect? He’s a coarse, unfeeling human being. He’s a Chicago politician, not crazy.
I’d be happier if he were crazy.
John_Locke on April 3, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Surely you jest. The man is very prideful.
ladyingray on April 3, 2009 at 4:40 PM
What makes you think Conservatives have a party?
Guardian on April 3, 2009 at 4:41 PM
It’s sad to see an American squander their freedom like getalife. Their gifts from their Creator were not enough to instill independence of thought.
chunderroad on April 3, 2009 at 4:41 PM
Your boat is slowly sinking and you’re trying to convince us that you just got a new pool.
thomasaur on April 3, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Well, AIG wouldn’t have given bonuses if they had failed, according to market justice. But initially the problem itself is caused by government policies.
We haven’t actually had a free market in at least 80 or 90 years. All these ineffeciencies are caused by market distortions. Boom/bust is caused by distortions from the Fed, but all of that is extremely complicated to try and argue in a comment thread. Not to mention that you clearly don’t listen.
John_Locke on April 3, 2009 at 4:43 PM
I know you’re being facetious about hoping the WH psych working with him, but seriously, one thing I read last summer was that narcissistic personality disorders are the hardest to help–obviously because they think they have no problem and resist facing reality.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:43 PM
I guess he should consider himself lucky. Not so long ago and in a different country, they would have just taken him out back and shot him.
Maybe ‘O’ can bring that back.
BigWyo on April 3, 2009 at 4:43 PM
You will vote gop to destroy the economy and country again.
getalife on April 3, 2009 at 4:43 PM
You really are a cow, aren’t you??
BigWyo on April 3, 2009 at 4:46 PM
So why are bankers who were fiscally responsible and didn’t need TARP money, in fact want to give back their TARP money “greedy”? One would consider this a fine example of prudentia.
Wethal on April 3, 2009 at 4:46 PM
Yeah, you know cause all of us went out and campaigned hard for McCain… There are a ton of conservatives I know who voted third party because they hate McCain and the way the GOP has gone.
Unfortunately, those votes destroyed the economy anyway since we have The One in power.
John_Locke on April 3, 2009 at 4:46 PM
Of course he’s an evil maniac, I was being flip. My intended point that accepting this kind of talk should be an alarm for all Americans. Frankly, I could care less if he ends up in a straight jacket in a rubber room.
sherry on April 3, 2009 at 4:47 PM
The CRA was not passed or expanded under the GOP. Glass-Steagall was not repealed under a GOP administration.
Wethal on April 3, 2009 at 4:48 PM
Anyone who is praising the rise of socialism needs to study the immediate after-effects of it’s arrival:
Academicians, scientists, attorneys, political opponents, military leaders, sick, Jews, blacks, Gypsies, freaks, queers, insane, criminals, handicapped, etc…..
…..all are removed from the society because they do not contribute to the society but do impart huge costs to keep around, therby creating a threat to the social government.
BobMbx on April 3, 2009 at 4:48 PM
I’ve got a thesis and I’m sticking with it – regardless of the evidence!
J/K. Thanks for pointing out the responses….I didn’t see those.
aquaviva on April 3, 2009 at 4:50 PM
Everwonder if Ed or AP is really behind getalife? I mean, trying to educate the poor guy really helps pageviews here.
I wonder what will make him see the light. I mean, France finally elected Sarkozy, there’s hope for everyone.
get – is “laughing at the cons” your counterargument to greed (or more properly, self-interest) being a natural thing, useful when it is recognized and properly harnessed?
Or are you reduced to “I’m rubber and you’re glue” philosphy at this point?
hawksruleva on April 3, 2009 at 4:50 PM
aquaviva,
Good, I was getting worried about you.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:51 PM
It makes sense that those types would be in denial longer than others who need mental help, but his fragile ego is on display for all to see and examine and discuss. Didn’t he say something at G-20 like “look, I defied the pundits. I did have success in London”. I can’t remember exactly but it was an inappropriate egotistical comment, showing his very fragile ego and thin skin.
sherry on April 3, 2009 at 4:51 PM
I do believe this to be the case…maybe not getalife, but I’ll guarentee there’s at least a couple of the resident trogs on the HA staff.
BigWyo on April 3, 2009 at 4:53 PM
Don’t forget about the slack-jawed disinterest with which the survivors approach their work. Hannan pointed out that Great Britain (not just England…) increased doctor salaries, trying to prevent the mass exodus to America (where doctors can earn enough to pay for their degree). Instead of the raises retaining more people, the doctors chose to work fewer hours, making the shortage of physicians WORSE not better. Why? Two reasons.
1) More money just means more money for the government. So why bother to earn more?
2) Socialism decouples that dynamic force – greed.
Give me a greedy doctor any day. He’ll recommend more work than I need, but he’ll do a good job, for fear that I’ll give him a poor recommendation.
hawksruleva on April 3, 2009 at 4:55 PM
Yeah, those remarks all tally. Reading about narcissists was both oddly fascinating and terrifying. They have fragile egos and their interior self is essentially a hall of mirrors. Anything that doesn’t reflect well on them has to be eliminated or marginalized. They have to have constant assurance that they’re the best.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 4:56 PM
Thanks! I have more to say on the subject here.
Buy Danish on April 3, 2009 at 4:58 PM
It’s the United States Government Mafia. At the head of the pack is Godfather Obama. Chicago must be so proud of him.
Gulf Coast on April 3, 2009 at 4:58 PM
One of the keys with a Narcissistic Personality is the fragile ego. I heard Rush earlier saying ridicule would unhinge him and he’s right. More effective though is to disrupt the reflecting pool.
msmveritas on April 3, 2009 at 4:59 PM
You don’t know how right you are, only it was Janet Reno, not Barney Frank and Maxine Waters. I was in the meeting in 1998 when it happened. Reno had all the banking and mortgage groups in and threatened everyone with massive government lawsuits if we did not make more loans to poor people. We got the message.
All of these crazy dervitiaves and credit-default swaps only became necessary because the government forced the banks into making more and more risky loans. They had to figure out a way to sell off the risks. If all of those subprime loans had stayed on the books of the banks, they would have all gone under, and a lot sooner. The result would have been even uglier than what we have seen the last two years.
rockmom on April 3, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Someone from Wyoming (I presume) should know better than to insult bovines like that.
LegendHasIt on April 3, 2009 at 5:01 PM
Getaleaf came to the party.
As usual, he was quite tardy.
He spouted some crap,
About Barry the Sap.
The HotAirHeads laughed good and hardy.
Limerick on April 3, 2009 at 5:03 PM
As John_Locke pointed out, AIG is hardly a “free market corporation,” especially after being taken over by the government and saved from insolvency by gigantic infusions of taxpayer money. You probably didn’t realize that those AIG bonuses you’re railing about were approved by the politicians who run AIG now. I can understand why this would come as surprising information to you. It’s not as if the politicians involved were held… what’s that word again? Ah, yes. “Accountable.” No, they filled the airwaves with screams of outrage and organized squads of thugs to intimidate the AIG employees into giving their bonuses back. It worked, too. You were probably in a coma and missed that part of the story. I hope you’re feeling better. A corporation in a truly free market would not have paid those bonuses you’re so upset about, because it would have been benkrupt and not paying any bonuses to anybody.
The entire country can vote for the government? Really? When do I get to vote against Barney Frank, then? I live in Florida – do I have to drive up to Massachusetts, or can I do it from here by email? When do we get a straight up-or-down vote to fire Obama over his stewardship of AIG and that bonus debacle you’re so upset about? You’ll be voting to remove him from office, right? After all, you’re purple with rage over those bonuses and want the person responsible for them to be fired. There won’t be any other factors involved in this decision, will there? It’s pure accountability for Obama based solely on his performance as chief executive officer of AIG, just like a private executive would be held accountable. We should have this vote immediately, don’t you think? It would be foolish to wait for years to make management decisions affecting billion-dollar corporations.
By the way, who decides a company is “too big to fail” in the first place? I’ll give you a hint: it’s not “exclusive, rich groups of shareholders.” If one guy can unilaterially sack another guy without needing anyone else’s approval, which guy is “running” and responsible for that company? Here’s another free hint: it’s not the guy who got sacked.
Doctor Zero on April 3, 2009 at 5:06 PM
We need some cracks in the media mirrors.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 5:08 PM
Is that your blog? I will check it out.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Yep.
Buy Danish on April 3, 2009 at 5:11 PM
I just saw the Irony Alert.
I hope you’re blogging from an undisclosed location!
;)
INC on April 3, 2009 at 5:16 PM
There its fixed!
belad on April 3, 2009 at 5:16 PM
Unlike Barack, I’m not selling snake oil (or Automobiles for that matter), but I would be wary of making my location public. I’d prefer to keep my knee caps intact.
Buy Danish on April 3, 2009 at 5:17 PM
Won’t have to, once Barry gets done with us there won’t be anything left.
Wyznowski on April 3, 2009 at 5:18 PM
I remember my dad telling me that the middle class stands between society and dictators. I was a kid and didn’t understand exactly what he meant at the time. It makes sense now.
When you have the possibility of upward mobility you don’t have class chaos. When you have enough people who even if not extremely wealthy, have a rational grasp of work and production and reward, then you don’t have class chaos.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 5:19 PM
Protection racket. Chicago. Hmm…
unclesmrgol on April 3, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Yo O, The Pitch Forks Are For YOU!
katablog.com on April 3, 2009 at 5:21 PM
rockmom on April 3, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Thank you for your kind words. Right idea, different people, same result.
You rock!
marybel on April 3, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Don’t Ask Me Any Questions. Or I’ll go full metal ACORN on yo azz.
Fist bump!
Key West Reader on April 3, 2009 at 5:22 PM
If he fails like cons want, you have a point.
getalife on April 3, 2009 at 5:23 PM
You voted for Obama and he’s setting records on unemployment and deficits.
Chuck Schick on April 3, 2009 at 5:28 PM
Make this viral. It’s brilliant. The only way to reach the “youths” is in their own language. Show them how they’re being played:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18cmUeG55PE&feature=player_embedded
Sugar Land on April 3, 2009 at 5:28 PM
I just noticed at Politico that this story is their #1 Most Read and #3 Most Emailed.
Surprisingly enough, it doesn’t make the Editor’s Top Choice top five list. /sarc.
INC on April 3, 2009 at 5:33 PM
FIFY
Del Dolemonte on April 3, 2009 at 5:36 PM
Hmmm…. Census has not started yet.
And hey…. Getaclue…
I don’t remember Obama running as a Socialist during the election. I don’t seem to remember his campaign promise to Nationalize banks, or AIG, or the auto industry…
I do remember him promising change…. just not this kind of change…
So, did the American public vote to throw out the Free Enterprise System?
Romeo13 on April 3, 2009 at 5:36 PM
The so called “Clinton economy” began in March of 1991. Republicans by then had been in the White House for 11 years.
You really need Forehead to give you some better material. It’t no wonder he’s reduced to appearing on CNN.
Del Dolemonte on April 3, 2009 at 5:38 PM
Sidenote: As someone who has a Kenyan parent (also) and an American parent who is the descendant of American slaves, I repudiate the notion that inherent in the identity of an American who happens to be black means that the same person has an “investment in slavery.”
Also, slavery was/is rampant in eastern Africa, so if it actually meant something, Obama could have an “investment” in slavery. As a matter of fact, he bowed to the slavers only yesterday.
baldilocks on April 3, 2009 at 5:40 PM
ITA. He hates white women. I bet Carla Bruni felt it.
baldilocks on April 3, 2009 at 5:42 PM
Very good post from Keith Hennessey on the significant word missing from the G20 summit communique. You’ll never guess, it’s the word free.
msmveritas on April 3, 2009 at 5:42 PM
“Mark to Market” for the mortgage-backed securities was based on FAS 157, which was put in effect for entities with fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007.
The concerns with it were noted in late 2007. In no small part, we ended up with the Paulson fiasco and an emergency request for $700 billion because of this rule.
The “Reserve Fund” money market (the oldest in existence) had substantial holdings in Lehman Bros, so the announced bankruptcy in combination with this abomination of a rule forced the fund to write down the valuation of all of those assets to ZERO in a single day.
By policy, money market funds seek to maintain parity valuation, where assets back the valuation in such a manner as to keep a $1.00 valuation. This huge write-down caused the fund to “break the buck”, where the fund was valued at $0.97 on the dollar based on asset vaulation. This was only the second time in history that a fund “broke the buck”, and given the perceived security of this fund, it started what Heckuva-Job-Timmie has call an “irrational flight” from money market funds. The huge outsurge of cash caused them to manually shut down trading, and to seek an approach that wasn’t “ad hoc”.
Thus, we have the TARP abomination and all that has arisen from it.
For want of a nail, a kingdom was lost.
If the “mark to market” rule had been rationally implemented, the buck would not have broken in the “Reserve Fund”, there would have been no trading shutdown, no emergency meetings where Congresscritters were scared out of their gourds by Treasury folks with talk of the Armageddon that would have happened if the hadn’t shut it down, and no leverage to have a crisis that “you don’t want to go to waste”.
The toxic assets would still have been there, but they could have been dealt with outside of the ultra-panicked response structure we had.
The current FASB relaxation of 157 is a step in the right direction, but not nearly enough. The markets being up the last two days is tied very strongly to this rule change, NOT to The Won meeting with the G20. It was good enough news that it was able to overcome even today’s unemployment numbers.
VekTor on April 3, 2009 at 5:43 PM
Actually that is not exactly correct. Workers from the Census are already canvassing neighborhoods across the country in order to compile accurate lists of addresses of people. They aren’t “census takers”, but they work for the Census Bureau and this is in conjunction with the 2010 Census, so yes, the census has begun.
They’ve been doing it in Texas since March, and Census people will start next week in New York State.
Del Dolemonte on April 3, 2009 at 5:45 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »