Obama's Big Sellout

[symple19]

Article by Matt Taibbi - Interesting read

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31234647/obamas_big_sellout/print

[Winehole23]

Taibbi's articles in this vein have been great. Board libs should blame Bush a little less for the massive financial default that tipped us into recession, and pay more attention to what Bob Rubin and Larry Summers did during the Clinton Administration, and are doing right now.

[admiralsnackbar]

Damn... that was a persuasive slam dunk of a read.

[boutons_deux]

BigPharma, BigMedicine, BigInsurance cartels got health care reform that enriches them and continued their gorging of America.

BigFinance will get the financial reform it wants (buys).

"the influence of Wall Street is simply a fundamental and ineradicable element of our electoral system"

and their vote$ count much more than citizens' votes.

[boutons_deux]

And US/UK BigOil get the Iraq oil contracts from the war-for-oil they got the Repugs to lie to The American People for and to waste US military for.

Shell Wins Rights To Iraq's Giant Manjoon Oil Fields

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/11/shell-wins-rights-to-iraq_n_388355.html?view=printUS and UK oilco's (naturally) were excluded in early 2000s from Saddam's Iraq dealing with French, Russian, Chinese oilcos.

Oilmen in the Repug WH exploited 9/11 and stopped that shit real quick, as had been their goal for years before 2000.
btw, the teabaggers are financed by Koch, an oil and gas billionaire.
But righties are only enraged by side-shows like czars and deficits, birth certs, govt take over, willfully forgetting the deficit ball got rolling by Repug tax cuts and bogus, fraud-polluted wars.
The real take over is by the corps of federal govt and US taxpayer's treasure. That doesn't bother the righties, they keep farting smoke screens to cover the real criminals.

[Twisted_Dawg]

These rich goons that really run the government are really no different. They just change hats when a new party takes over.

[admiralsnackbar]

That doesn't bother the righties, they keep farting smoke screens to cover the real criminals.

Doesn't bother the lefties much either, which makes me wonder why your party affiliation is so determined, boutons.

I thought the genius of the article was how ludicrous it made partisan membership ultimately seem. The wedge issues parties platform on may be different, but the result of their governance has seemed more or less the same in my lifetime: distract the polity with social issues while attending to the needs of the oligarchs.

[George Gervin's Afro]

these rich goons that really run the government are really no different. They just change hats when a new party takes over.


+1

[Winehole23]

Doesn't bother the lefties much either, which makes me wonder why your party affiliation is so determined, boutons.

I thought the genius of the article was how ludicrous it made partisan membership ultimately seem. The wedge issues parties platform on may be different, but the result of their governance has seemed more or less the same in my lifetime: distract the polity with social issues while attending to the needs of the oligarchs.Well put.

[Winehole23]

Meanwhile, b_d seeks to distract from complicity of his own camp in selling out to corporations by holding up a non-sequitur -- the war in Iraq.

[EmptyMan]

There is only one solution.

Spurstalk.com must put forth a Manchurian candidate.

[TeyshaBlue]

Meanwhile, b_d seeks to distract from complicity of his own camp in selling out to corporations by holding up a non-sequitur -- the war in Iraq.

You have to couch it in terms he can understand.

Citibank = Haliburton.


:lol:downspin:

[symple19]

meanwhile, b_d seeks to distract from complicity of his own camp in selling out to corporations by holding up a non-sequitur -- the war in iraq.

+1

[jacobdrj]

Doesn't bother the lefties much either, which makes me wonder why your party affiliation is so determined, boutons.

I thought the genius of the article was how ludicrous it made partisan membership ultimately seem. The wedge issues parties platform on may be different, but the result of their governance has seemed more or less the same in my lifetime: distract the polity with social issues while attending to the needs of the oligarchs.

Basically, yeah.

[MiamiHeat]

There is only one solution.

Spurstalk.com must put forth a Manchurian candidate.

I volunteer. My name is Prentiss Shaw.

[jack sommerset]

Yikes. Rolling Stone let this on there site. Not good for Obama. But I also think Obama is a one timer and knows it.,

[MiamiHeat]

The guy had ZERO significant leadership experience coming into the campaign.

He never served in the military, never held a leadership position in the private sector, nothing in the business world, he had done NOTHING but talk.

This just goes to show all of you how stupid idealists can be. "WE R VOTING TO CHANGE TEH WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BLACK MANZ FOR PREZ!!!"

HOPE N CHANGE!!!

and didn't stop to think of it rationally. McCain was the better selection. He was not another Bush. I am a registered Democrat and I voted for McCain

[admiralsnackbar]

The guy had ZERO significant leadership experience coming into the campaign.

He never served in the military, never held a leadership position in the private sector, nothing in the business world, he had done NOTHING but talk.

This just goes to show all of you how stupid idealists can be. "WE R VOTING TO CHANGE TEH WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BLACK MANZ FOR PREZ!!!"

HOPE N CHANGE!!!

and didn't stop to think of it rationally. McCain was the better selection. He was not another Bush. I am a registered Democrat and I voted for McCain

There's no way that ticket could have had any pull with Palin on board, regardless of who the Dems had run.

[Winehole23]

Yikes. Rolling Stone let this on there site. This is Taibbi's third big piece in RS on how our financial oligarchs gamed the bailout, that I can recall right now. The other two were longer, and even more scathing IMO.

Wino23 thinks Taibbi's reluctance to draw his own conclusions at the end there, is wuss. I think he let Obama off easy. The only way Obama isn't complicit in the overt hijack of political process the bailout of the whole damn banking/financial sector signified, is if he has no idea it was even occurring, and who can believe that? How could Obama not see and understand it happening, brazenly, before him, day after day, like we all did, ? (so to speak)

Was WH23 only one who noticed that? It couldn't be.

Obama hired the men (and women: Wino23 is a fan of Elizabeth Warren and to a lesser extent also of Sheila Bair) who administer the bailout. Unless they are keeping Obama completely in the dark; or the POTUS himself has gone completely blind; or he has gone completely crazy or evil as well; or if he is, again, in on the deed...whatevs.

Taibbi, per contra, urges tacitly if also stylistically IMO that the ultimate returns on Obama as yet are incomplete, and gives Obama the benefit of a doubt and a chance to prove himself, as Mr. Obama must, or fail. Obama's term is not done. The actual damage and benefits have yet to be tallied. Obama is just one quarter through.

[MiamiHeat]

There's no way that ticket could have had any pull with Palin on board, regardless of who the Dems had run.

Sadly, you are 100% right. On the money

Palin turned out to be a buffoon. How the hell did she ever get to such high a position in Alaska?

"I can see russia from alaska" ......

[symple19]

This is Taibbi's third big piece in RS on how our financial oligarchs gamed the bailout, that I can recall right now. The other two were longer, and even more scathing IMO.

Wino23 thinks Taibbi's reluctance to draw his own conclusions at the end there, is wuss. I think he let Obama off easy. The only way Obama isn't complicit in the overt hijack of political process the bailout of the whole damn banking/financial sector signified, is if he has no idea it was even occurring, and who can believe that? How could Obama not see and understand it happening, brazenly, before him, day after day, like we all did, ? (so to speak)

Was WH23 only one who noticed that? It couldn't be.

Obama hired the men who adminster the bailout. Unless they are keeping Obama completely in the dark; or the POTUS himself has gone completely blind; or he has gone comlpetely crazy or evil as well; or if he is, again, in on the deed...whatevs.

Taibbi, per contra, urges tacitly if also stylistically IMO that the ultimate returns on Obama as yet are incomplete, and gives Obama the benefit of a doubt and a chance to prove himself, as Mr. Obama must, or fail. Obama's term is not done. The actual damage and benefits have yet to be tallied. Obama is just one quarter through.

Good points, love the third person :lol

What people have to understand about Taibbi is that he's a staunch progressive, albeit one who doesn't sip from the donkey kool-aid. I believe he holds out hope for Obama because he hates the other side so much more. It's also true that much of the legislation he talks about hasn't passed through yet, so there is still time for some of these much needed regulations to hold. Smart money, however, is on more loophole ridden legislation to pass through.

I also found it interesting how Obama shoved out his main economic advisors as the transition team took over. Just more fodder for the conspiracy theorists fire.

Here is the article by Taibbi on Goldman Sachs, also scathing: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/28816321/inside_the_great_american_bubble_machine

WH23, I'm not familiar with the third article you referenced, if you could post a link I would greatly appreciate it.

[Winehole23]

The Big Takeover. (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/26793903/the_big_takeover/)

[baseline bum]

Doesn't bother the lefties much either, which makes me wonder why your party affiliation is so determined, boutons.

I thought the genius of the article was how ludicrous it made partisan membership ultimately seem. The wedge issues parties platform on may be different, but the result of their governance has seemed more or less the same in my lifetime: distract the polity with social issues while attending to the needs of the oligarchs.

One of the most succinct yet accurate summaries I have ever read here. God, I hate the fucking Democrats, and Obama's showing himself to be no different. I'm done voting for either of the two parties.

[symple19]

The Big Takeover. (http://spurstalk.com/forums/www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/.../the_big_takeover)

thanks man


One of the most succinct yet accurate summaries I have ever read here. God, I hate the fucking Democrats, and Obama's showing himself to be no different. I'm done voting for either of the two parties.

indeed, i hate em both too. I think this sentiment is really starting to grow. It's even growing here in the Bay area, one of the most liberal places in the country. If I were a democrat, I'd be very worried. If I were a repub, well, I'm glad I'm not. lol

[symple19]

WH, your link was broken for me - here it is : http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/26793903/the_big_takeover/

[Winehole23]

Nice catch. Thanks, symple.

[mogrovejo]

The fact that so many people believed Obama was different will never cease to amaze me.

Like I said in another thread, there's only one way to diminish the influence of rent-seekers (and Wall Street is only a small part of it): diminish the amount of power the government has. The best way to start that, I'm convinced, is to elect representatives fiercely opposed to the appropriation process (earmarks), no matter their party affiliation. But if you're hoping that a person will change the situation within the current frame of a hyper-sized, interventionist, government, you'll be disappointed all the time.

[coyotes_geek]

The fact that so many people believed Obama was different will never cease to amaze me.

Like I said in another thread, there's only one way to diminish the influence of rent-seekers (and Wall Street is only a small part of it): diminish the amount of power the government has. The best way to start that, I'm convinced, is to elect representatives fiercely opposed to the appropriation process (earmarks), no matter their party affiliation. But if you're hoping that a person will change the situation within the current frame of a hyper-sized, interventionist, government, you'll be disappointed all the time.

Term limits at every level of elected government. As long as the "public service" gravy train (and the perks that one enjoys while on board) runs for eternity the passengers will do everything in their power to make sure they don't get booted off.

[Winehole23]

Like I said in another thread, there's only one way to diminish the influence of rent-seekers (and Wall Street is only a small part of it): diminish the amount of power the government has. I voted for RP last year, so that should give you some idea where my sympathies lay. I was an Obama skeptic. My experience so far tends to confirm my nagging suspicion that Obama is establishmentarian to the bone and is leading us in the direction of social democracy. But instead of making health care free, like Europe, the price is being raised for almost everyone. Great.


The best way to start that, I'm convinced, is to elect representatives fiercely opposed to the appropriation process (earmarks), no matter their party affiliation. Why would such a person ever run for office?

For that matter, why do you think the people keep electing rent-seekers?


Maybe the people prefer ambitious rent-seekers -- the Obamas and Sarah Palins of the world, if you like - to your sort of candidate, mogrovejo.



But if you're hoping that a person will change the situation within the current frame of a hyper-sized, interventionist, government, you'll be disappointed all the time.A lot of people did. They will again.

You better hope that people keep hoping for the sake of your precious Ms. Palin, mogrovejo.

[whottt]

I almost feel sorry for you guys. Geez, an Ivy league lawyer that was backed by every global monomoply and uberrich billionaire on the planet turns out to be owned. What were the fucking odds of that? Shit, let's give the government the pharmacy and medical industry too, because they clearly deserve that trust.

Wake me up when you figure out that money's not coming back into this country....and that housing bailout was bailing out the chinse making a bad inevestment in our housing industry. Must be nice to have the tax payers save you from a shitty investment...where do I sign up?


At least Obama's foreign policy has made sense. Although the root of that is likely financial too.



I guess this means ya'll will all be voting for Sarah Palin in 2012(who at least right now has no money behind her) instead of helping the monopolies do her political career in?


She's the one that took it to the oil companies without lube.


I'm not saying it's going to stay that way, but it is that way for right now.

And if makes you guys feel any better, I doubt McCain would have been much different than Obama on this. Vietnam wasn't the only time he was broken.

[mogrovejo]

I voted for RP last year, so that should give you some idea where my sympathies lay. I was an Obama skeptic. My experience so far tends to confirm my nagging suspicion that Obama is establishmentarian to the bone and is leading us in the direction of social democracy. But instead of making health care free, like Europe, the price is being raised for almost everyone. Great.

Health care isn't free in Europe. Don't fall for that kind of scam.

RP is a hypocrite and of the worst kind. Along with pompous speeches about closing the Fed (that he knows that has no chance to happen), he is okay with using federal money to subsidize the shrimp industry or local theatres. American conservatism has to get rid of corrupt, pork-addicts, career politicians like Ron Paul.



Why would such a person ever run for office?

For that matter, why do you think the people keep electing rent-seekers?

Rent-seekers don't get elected - at most they help politicians to get elected.

There are some people in that type that ran and hold political office: Jeff Flake, Tom Coburn, John Thune.


Maybe the people prefer ambitious rent-seekers -- the Obamas and Sarah Palins of the world, if you like - to your sort of candidate, mogrovejo.

A lot of people did. They will again.

You better hope that people keep hoping for the sake of your precious Ms. Palin, mogrovejo.

Sarah Palin has a great record in terms of fighting rent-seeking - and she gets it. There's a reason why she's so popular among those in the field of public choice.

[Winehole23]

There's a reason why she's so popular among those in the field of public choice.What, please?

[Winehole23]

RP is a hypocrite and of the worst kind. Along with pompous speeches about closing the Fed (that he knows that has no chance to happen), he is okay with using federal money to subsidize the shrimp industry or local theatres. American conservatism has to get rid of corrupt, pork-addicts, career politicians like Ron Paul.Says mogrovejo.

This post is just a preemptive reminder.

[Winehole23]

Maybe if Wino quotes mogro, mogro won't be tempted to quote himself again.

[admiralsnackbar]

Term limits at every level of elected government. As long as the "public service" gravy train (and the perks that one enjoys while on board) runs for eternity the passengers will do everything in their power to make sure they don't get booted off.

I'm on the fence about this. My suspicion is that term limits create a situation in which a politician feels he has to grant all the favors he can regardless of their utility to the electorate so he can make the greatest profit for himself in his allotted time. On the other hand, the advantage of long-term senators/reps is that their constituents have time to learn whether or not they're pieces of shit, and if they turn out to be such, can still be voted out. 9 times out of 10, a public servant is a crook, but when you do find a good one, the last thing you want to do is kick his ass to the curb, y'know? :lol

[mogrovejo]

What, please?

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


Says mogrovejo.

This post is just a preemptive reminder.

What?

[symple19]

RP seems to have more common sense than almost anyone else in Washington. I disagree with much he says (mostly on FP), but on monetary policy he's worthy of support.

So, just because it's near impossible to close the fed, he should just give up?

I admire someone who will continue the noble fight against what is possibly the most entrenched, corrupt agency associated with the government.

Audit the Fed!

[mogrovejo]

Not even the Department of Silly Walks will be extinguished, let alone the Fed, as long as the Party of Appropriators and the Cult of Earmarks, from which Ron Paul is a proud member, rule in Washington. He's perfectly aware of that, his supporters not so much.

Some of his ideas are good, his ideology is, to use Kirk's words, an inverted religion.

[TeyshaBlue]

Those are some superb links, Winehouse. Should be mandatory reading for every senator.:toast

[coyotes_geek]

I'm on the fence about this. My suspicion is that term limits create a situation in which a politician feels he has to grant all the favors he can regardless of their utility to the electorate so he can make the greatest profit for himself in his allotted time. On the other hand, the advantage of long-term senators/reps is that their constituents have time to learn whether or not they're pieces of shit, and if they turn out to be such, can still be voted out. 9 times out of 10, a public servant is a crook, but when you do find a good one, the last thing you want to do is kick his ass to the curb, y'know? :lol

To me, it's an easy decision as to whether or not that collateral damage is acceptable.

[MiamiHeat]

Would be great if Ron Paul could get past the primaries....

[admiralsnackbar]

To me, it's an easy decision as to whether or not that collateral damage is acceptable.

Can you say why, CG?

EDIT:

Sorry, that was a poorly worded question. I should have asked why you think term limits would protect us from the collateral damage in a way a lack of them do not.

[Winehole23]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_choice_theoryThanks, for the link, Sir.


What?You missed another jocular aside. Is your lack of a sense of humor showing again? :hat

Maybe I was lacking the funny.





Admittedly, humor is hard to translate between cultures. The cultures themselves don't really translate too well, to start with.

[Winehole23]

FWIW, I agree with Ron Paul about 50%.

[Winehole23]

For Wino, that is a historically high ratio.

[Winehole23]

Cult of Earmarks, from which Ron Paul is a proud memberThat maybe partakes of hyperbole. It is true that RP banked hard in the current cycle, and brought home some serious bacon.

There's a reason the man from Surfside, Tx, keeps representing Victoria and Brazoria counties. There is also a reason IMO, that his internet furore contributed heavily to his campaign ...about this time two years ago, wasn't it? RP lapped other candidates in one month tallies. RP was selling something different.

[whottt]

Ron Paul will be 77 years old in 2012.

[Winehole23]

Ron Paul will be 77 years old in 2012.I think RP has already hinted he won't run again.

[symple19]

I think RP has already hinted he won't run again.

Hopefully he has a protege who will carry on some of his worthier issues.

[Winehole23]

Hopefully he has a protege who will carry on some of his worthier issues.I only agreed with RP about halfway. I don't know what I'd think about a protege'.

[Winehole23]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_choice_theory
Any man who would let his political theory determine his political choice, is an alien to the spirit and practice of American politics, the inclusion of lumpen affect notwithstanding. When the science of political irrationality overtakes the bookies, I'll start listening.

Why bother with all this fringy stuff, mogrovejo? It's fine that you want monarchy for yourself, but wishing it on the rest of us is really too much. :hat

[mogrovejo]

Any man who would let his political theory determine his political choice, is an alien to the spirit and practice of American politics, the inclusion of lumpen affect notwithstanding. When the science of political irrationality overtakes the bookies, I'll start listening.

Why bother with all this fringy stuff, mogrovejo? It's fine that you want monarchy for yourself, but wishing it on the rest of us is really too much. :hat

Famous quotes from public choice theorists in the 18th century:


If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.

And be assured I've never wished, and don't intend to do it in the future, the institution of a monarchy anywhere in the world.

[Winehole23]

If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.The US republic was made for men, not angels.And by men, for men and women.

No right stands unless the state enforce it, and the people continue to uphold it. The Constitution of the USA is not a trifle, and it is not a quaintness -- not just yet, anyway.

[Winehole23]

And be assured I've never wished, and don't intend to do it in the future, the institution of a monarchy anywhere in the world.So noted. I appreciate the clarification.