Obama angered by Wall Street's 'fat cats'

[demoleft]

Source: afp

AFP - US President Barack Obama has hit out at Wall Street "fat cats," expressing anger that banks bailed out by the government again plan huge bonuses as millions battle poverty and unemployment.

"I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street," Obama said on Friday in excerpts of an interview with CBS television to be aired on Sunday.

With unemployment still hovering at around 10 percent, amid a recession triggered in part by the excesses of financial institutions, Obama voiced frustration that "some people on Wall Street still don't get it."

Lavish pay and bonuses on Wall Street have been blamed for encouraging the excessive risk taking that with the sub-prime mortgage housing crisis fueled the global maelstrom and brought the US financial sector to the brink of collapse a year ago.


Read more: http://www.france24.com/en/node/4946651

---

"I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street."
i like this.

[nosmokes]

1. yeah. he's seething while figuring

out what to do w/ all the money he'll have in his war chest for 2012.

[saigon68]

2. Apparently he ran to "Make" a lot more gold star mothers

Then he keeps Gates as Warrior in Chief and Gen NutJob McCrazy to fight a War Of Christianity

and throw away countless lives of amerika's youth, to continue the Chimpanzee's War to maximize CORPORATE PROFITS.

[pecwae]

3. Will he put some action behind those words?

Just expressing anger will do nothing.

[Dr.Phool]

4. "I am not a crook"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Yeah, right.

[AlbertDD]

5. Fwd:

yes exactly.....

[CountAllVotes]

48. Welcome to the DU AlbertDD

:hi: and Welcome! :D :D :D

:dem: :kick:

[Tansy_Gold]

7. GMTA, Doc

And for those young whippersnappers among us who don't remember Tricky Dick, there's always "I did not have sex with that woman."





Tansy Gold, off to another art show. . . . . if the car starts. . . . .

[fasttense]

6. Then why did he hire all those fat cat bankers on Wall Street for his economic team? n/t

[Myrina]

11. +1,000,000

Why indeed?

[MannyGoldstein]

14. +6.02x10^23

And not fire them.

(Words mean zip.)

[RufusTFirefly]

29. Alas, he probably got some tips from his Veep

Biden was often good at making impassioned speeches and then doing nothing -- or worse, the reverse.

[Roland99]

16. +Infinity!

[ozymandius]

20. Ha! Indeed.

He would improve his and his party's fortunes by firing the whole lot of Banksters drawing breath in his administration.

[unabelladonna]

42. this.

[AnneD]

45. ITA....My bull shit detector won't stop ringing.......

Good to see the SWT crowd here this morning.

[AlphaCentauri]

61. I can't even believe he said that n/t

[WriteDown]

34. Those aren't fatcats. They're just big-boned. nt

[Deja Q]

53. with small boners

:yoiks:

[rollingrock]

72. Because those are his true colors

Obama is good at pretending to be a populist only because he knows that's how you attract voters and win elections.

[SpiralHawk]

8. "But we luvs us some fatcats. Smirk." - Republicons

"BeCuz FatCats is us (and of course all the dumb kool-aid drinking proles who actually suck up the bullshit Fox News, and Rush, and Hannity, and Beck and O'Reilly dish out). Smirk."

- Republicons

[meow2u3]

56. As long as the fat cats have four legs

I have no problem with them. It's the two-legged fat cats I despise.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[xiamiam]

26. the afghanistan war speech was the first time for me...nt

[lxlxlxl]

30. thats disgusting

your really out of line...

[RedCloud]

10. Wall Street: Home to some of the world's biggest permanently spoiled brats.

It's always just about them, isn't it?

[EndElectoral]

12. Stop with the faux talk already and do something about it. Fire Geitner for one.

[BREMPRO]

13. anyone who doesn't believe he is sincere on this and trying to get stricter govt. regulation passed

through congress on financial institutions is either not paying attention, is hopelessly cynical, nitpicking, and/or never genuinely supported him.

[MannyGoldstein]

15. So We Can Look Forward To Obama's Clawing Back Banker Bonuses

paid for with our tax money, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/09/britain-unveils-whopping_n_383103.html">like Britain and France are doing?

And restoring Glass-Steagall?

Excellent!

[mbperrin]

17. And the unholy trinity of Geithner, Summers, and Bernanke, each of

whom he has chosen and is retaining, and each of whom is doing all they can to help fat cat bankers steal all they can, he has no say in their continuing to serve?

He just renominated Bernanke, and the other two were his choices from the beginning.

And what regulation is being pushed in Congress to control credit card abuses, help mainstream Americans keep their homes, outlaw the casino gambling of CDS and other derivative games that are chewing up 6.5% of our GDP, or to prosecute criminal conduct on the part of the banksters?

I'd like a bill number or two and the name of the US Attorney who's prosecuting, please.

[yurbud]

60. add Rubin, tie their heads together, and throw them off the roof of the White House

[Roland99]

18. Let me guess. He's so much smarter on this one that we're not looking ahead like he is?

And that his hiring people all centered around Wall St (specifically, Citigroup) was a shrewd and calculated move to put Wall St. in its place by the very people that put us in this mess?


Wow, yeah, Obama's a fucking genius then!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

19. Cynical nitpicker here.

:hi:

[nosmokes]

22. And that's why he put Bernanke up again? Bernanke?! There is *NO* way to

justify that in any fucking universe.

[BREMPRO]

23. you are all are proving my point.

[mbperrin]

24. So you don't have any bill numbers or US Attorneys working on anything.

That proves your point, how?


Your sentence needs to read "You are all proving my point, because..." with the explanatory words following.

And yes, I am a teacher of the English language.

[BREMPRO]

31. here's a statement from Firedog Lake- probably the most far left blog out there praising,

(with some expected reservations and cynicism),the financial reform bill passed in congress.

"The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, one of the most sweeping regulatory changes to the financial industry since the Great Depression, passed the House of Representatives today by a final vote of 223-202. On final passage, 27 Democrats voted no along with every Republican voting.

The bill is riddled with loopholes, but does include some laudatory elements, including a proviso to audit the Federal Reserve, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, leverage limits for banks, shareholder limits for derivative clearinghouses, provisions that would eliminate “too big to fail,” and more. Given this Congress and the power of the banks, it’s somewhat remarkable that the bill is as good as it is, even though that’s not saying very much."


The members of your so called "unholy trinity" and Obama have all supported the kind of regulations included in the bill.

just a few examples:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/23/AR2009102301342.html
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/jan-june09/regulationchanges_03.html
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/summers-time-has-come-...
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2009/06/15...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...
http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/tg413.htm
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/30/business/fi-gei...
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june09/regu...
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE59F3I220091016

[mbperrin]

32. Okay, 4 of your links work, so thanks for that. However,

these are perfect examples of speechifying, saying things an audience wants to hear while actually doing nothing. The only legislation mentioned also mentions that banks got their way and avoided regulations on derivatives, while the actual solution is simply to outlaw them, not exempt them from future regulation.

Stay enthused, but please, start keeping two scorecards on politicos you follow: what they say, and what actually happens later. The results will too often be quite shocking. Have I given up on systemic change? Just about, but I'm 60, and I've been active in politics for 43 years, and the mountain of betrayals and disappointments has gotten truly impressive over time.

But I do read about real mountaintops being removed, and only for money, so is it possible that someone could take on this mountain for the right reasons? Perhaps. That's why I'm still around at all, but I'm weary.

Keep your energy up, and watch the bastards.

[BREMPRO]

38. Sorry about the links. I keep forgetting that DU condenses links and you can't cut an paste from

previous posts. The other links should work here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7201182&mesg_id=7207729

As with all legislation there is compromise- unfortunately our majority includes the "New" democrats and blue-dogs. Although they are better than Republicans generally, they tend to defer to corporate interests. I've pushed for an effort to target these conservative Dems in the next election cycle. That would be a very good use of the energy and resources of DU.

I agree with the general principle of watch what they do and not just what they say. I watched the cynicism for months when DUer were harping on the fact that Obama and the Dems were doing nothing about financial regulation. My response was it takes time, that they are focused on health care and restoring financial stability first (you have to put out the fire first before you discuss fire prevention regulation.) Now that we actually have a bill, many here who said nothing would be done are criticizing the effort as too weak or just window dressing. That's the cynicism and nitpicking i'm referring to.

We'll have to wait and see with the final bill and if it works but it appears to have some teeth. There are some regulations on derivatives with more transparency, a definite improvement. Outlawing them would have been good, but given the power of the banks and the weak majority coalition, not really feasible.- if the regulations don't work they could be revisited.

Among those mountains of disappointment that i share with you, we've had a few victories. I try to keep that in perspective and not be so cynical as to lose hope. The alternative is to give up and let the powerful corporate interests and the lying bastard corporate shill Republicans win. That is not an option in my book and worth the effort to challenge the cynicism that exists here.

I've been involved in politics for 30 years, not as long as you. I'm still cautiously optomistic we can turn thing around- the dream of Johnson's great society and Bobby Kennedy vision for the country that was usurped by tragic events and the subsequent Republican and Corporate coup. It's going to take time, patience, effort and courage to make changes to move forward with a more responsive and progressive government, and a more just and equitable society.

you might find this interesting:
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=12&year=2009&base_name=oh_matt_taibbi

It's a critique of the Taibbi's cynical "Obama is an economic sellout" op-ed.

[bvar22]

35. Watch this video from the campaign and get back to me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZG8Zq8V54k

Cheap Talk.
Chump Change.

[AnneD]

47. Thanks Bevar.....

I was just about to post that nugget. He sure sounds different today.

If he wants to walk the walk he will......

1) start taking Volker's advice while he is alive to give it.

2) Fire the following moles....Summers, Geitner, Bernanke, Roubini

3) submit Elizabeth Warren as your Sec of Treasury

4) Start prosecution for criminal action against some of these WS asswipe (to numerous to name here)

5) Hell...start ANY criminal prosecutions of any higher ups!!!!!!!!!!

6) re instate the Glass-Stegall Act

7) Break up large banks while supporting smaller banks. Evolution is real and these failures are not random but for a reason.


Did I forget any thing SWT gang. This is just the laundry list for economics. I have more on our bill of rights issues.

[Renew Deal]

21. Rescind TARP and they'll get it pretty quickly.

Or better, break some of them up (BOA, Citibank, Chase).

[western mass]

25. More cheap talk..

I know. We *want* to believe, right?

[madrchsod]

27. earth to obama----you were supposed to do this first

stop listening to the den of thieves you appointed.

[Metta]

28. Talk is cheap. Unless he changes his economic staff, he's a liar.

See Matt Taibi's article in the greatest threads, from yesterday.

[Le Taz Hot]

33. I'm sure he'll be sending them a

sternly-worded letter. :eyes:

[nc4bo]

36. umm, well ok, if you say so. nt

[bvar22]

37. Obama "says" he's angry in front of the TV Cameras....

...meanwhile, back at the White House he's popping champaign corks with the failed Wall Street Bankers and celebrating their VICTORY.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

The champaign for the Health Insurance Cartel's VICTORY is already on ice.

"By their works, you will know them."

[salguine]

39. As usual, his words don't jibe with his actions...

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

40. Okay, you've covered your ass, Mr. President.

Now you can go back to your wars.

[unabelladonna]

41. he has a chance of becoming a great president

for the people, if he does something....anything to stop the rampant greed of these bloodsucking wall streeters.

[LibDemAlways]

46. Well he's hired a bunch of them and given them important posts in his

administration. It's sort of like having an agency dedicated to stopping murder and then putting Charles Manson in charge. Doesn't compute.

[salguine]

50. No, I think that window has closed. The momentum in the wrong direction is

too strong now. If he had started working aggressively for the People right out of the gate, then yeah, probably. Instead of stopping the bloodsuckers, as you call them, he's asked us little folk for our blood. 'Cause they've gotta feed.

[Joe Chi Minh]

43. Obama's anger won't butter the parsnips. He seems to be engaged in permanent damage

limitation, though seemingly not remedial action, at present.

It seems likely to me that his remark yesterday that there is such a thing as evil, was in response to Joe Bageant's latest article - quite a coincidence, if not. It would surely have rattled him if there was any truth in it. And Joe is nobody's fool.

Now, rather belatedly, it seems, he has the horrors that the rest of the world has had, ever since he appointed those foxes to guard the chicken-coop.

Like so many, I've always been reluctant to doubt his sincerity, but the only alternative it seems to me at least, is that he feels too weak to taken on those who are said to have been his real friends all along. The frying pan or the fire.

[scentopine]

44. A can of whoop-ass on Afghanistan, impotent here at home.

What cowardly behavior. If that's not why he ran then maybe he should step aside, with peace prize in hand he can rest his terms success on the war he accelerated.

[QC]

49. Pull the other one.

It's got bells on it.

[and-justice-for-all]

51. Then raise their fucking taxes!

[Dream Girl]

52. If you were the first AA president and had a progressive agenda,

would you come out with all guns blazing on day one? Do you think Obama might have a four year plan? An eight year plan? It wouldn't make sense for him to start out with a far left agenda right away...rather, I would expect him to begin at the center and move further left particularly if he gets a second term. Look how he is being charged with being a "socialist" or a "communist" with a relatively moderate agenda right now. I'm not making excuses, but use common sense and put yourself in his place. With all the forces assembled against him, what would you do???

[Fumesucker]

54. Welcome to DU..

:hi:

It really doesn't matter at all what Obama does, the Republicans are going to scream, it's what they do.

So let them have a real reason to scream is the way I see it.

[Dream Girl]

55. True that, but I do believe that Obama is a long term thinker, very patient

and diliberate, I think the opposition would do more than scream...they would eviserate him and possibly destroy him in every way, it would be ten times worse than what they're doing now. I believe the opposition mostly thinks he is playing the game and they are really going pretty easy on him. The chess analogy is probably more apt than his critics on DU know (don't laugh). I believe he is laying the groundwork and will move further left as time goes on. He wouldn't have gotten this far in his life if he didn't always have a plan. I do think he has it mapped out from the wall street insiders on his team, to Afghanistan, etc. He is pretty non-threatening to the PTB. BTW - thanks for the welcome, I've actually been on DU since 2004, but somehow screwed up my name change after the amnesty and finally decided to create a new name. I mostly lurk and only got up to about 1,000 posts in all those years.

[rockymountaindem]

59. Well, if I were in President Obama's position, I would have come out swinging

at the very beginning during the phase when the economic crisis was most acute and the public outcry against the erring financial institutions was strongest. This was also the time when the Republican/conservative opposition was most in disarray following their whopping defeat at the polls. That would have been the time to really ram through (if that is possible in our system of government) serious systemic changes.

He has, in the words of Neville Chamberlain, missed the bus in that regard. The Republicans are stronger than they were a year ago, the opposition to reform has had time to organize and the public increasingly sees President Obama as responsible for the continuing mess we're in. When more or less everybody blamed the still-fresh memory of the Bush administration for all our woes, it would have been comparatively easy for a new Democratic administration to take on the mantle of reform and really hit the Wall Street greedheads hard. It's unfortunate that we've waited so long to affect financial reform legislation, because it's going to be far weaker now than it could have been if the new administration had acted on this much more strongly from the outset.

[natrat]

63. and you think all this was not by design? ha, designated party of failure

[WorseBeforeBetter]

70. I would have come out with guns blazing, and reined in those fuckers...

on Wall Street. Perhaps the agenda isn't so "far left" since Dems, clued-in moderates, and even teabaggers seem to grasp what is going on (greed and a carefully orchestrated collapse). Obama blew it, and his comments in the OP make him sound incredibly naive, just as his critics charged.

And let them call Obama whatever names they wish -- it shouldn't stop him from doing the right thing. FDR, the "traitor to his class," welcomed the confrontation.

Enough with the "ifs" -- there's been too much damage done to this country. Heads need to roll.

[Zorra]

57. Are we charging interest on TARP money?

If we're not, then now would be a good time to start.

Interest at the same rates as the average interest on credit cards, late fee penalties at the same percentage as those on the average credit card.

[No Elephants]

65. Low interest., but we imposed almost no conditions on them. So,they can lend out that money

to whomever they please at whatever interest rate they please and get still richer on our dime.

It was a good deal for them, not so good for the US.

Private investors got much better deals for themselves than the US got for the American taxpayer.

[natrat]

58. i am not a crook indeed

as the whores prepare financial regulation that will make permanent bailouts for the top 20 banks--pitty the scum who buy into all their bullshit

[Mithreal]

62. Not what Rahm said.

[saigon68]

64. That disgusting little man

[No Elephants]

66. Not protecting Wall Street? So, how come Geithner told Dodd not to limit executive compensation and

STILL is Secretary of the Treasury (even though he had to change his voter registration from Republican to Indpendent to get the position)?

And how come Bernanke, a Bush appointee, stood by as we sped toward worldwide economic collapse and RECENTLY got reappointed?

And how come our Democratic Congress is still talking about EASING restrictions on derivatives?. (You know, those crappy securities that almost caused world wide economic collapse a little over a year ago.)

BTW, speaking of Dodd, INO, his seat's being in danger has made him a MUCh better legislator this past year or so, despite his wife's conflicts of interest.

Get the message from Dodd's recent actions? Defeat the Republican bastards and PRIMARY the Democratic bastards and this country MAY have a chance! Stay home or re-elect bad Democratic legislators and we have no hope

[corpseratemedia]

68. + 1000

ACTIONS, not words

too obvious a conflict of interest to the general public when a pol says fatcats but appointed the biggest fatcat crooks to "regulate" the fatcat haven and gave them trillions of other people's present and future generation's wages

[Cass]

67. Yeah, well, this all sounds good but talk is cheap. nt

[NJmaverick]

69. He has every reason to be angry

[Enrique]

71. are they beating him at golf?

he doesn't look angry here, maybe they were letting him win back then. :shrug:

[Zoeisright]

73. So then DO something about it.

For Pete's sake.

[sendero]

74. Yeah..

... after feeding them 10 cans of fancy feast a day he's mad at them for being fat.

Sure.