http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31234647/obamas_big_sellout/print
Barack Obama ran for president as a man of the people, standing up to Wall Street as the global economy melted down in that fateful fall of 2008. He pushed a tax plan to soak the rich, ripped NAFTA for hurting the middle class and tore into John McCain for supporting a bankruptcy bill that sided with wealthy bankers “at the expense of hardworking Americans.” Obama may not have run to the left of Samuel Gompers or Cesar Chavez, but it’s not like you saw him on the campaign trail flanked by bankers from Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. What inspired supporters who pushed him to his historic win was the sense that a genuine outsider was finally breaking into an exclusive club, that walls were being torn down, that things were, for lack of a better or more specific term, changing.
Then he got elected.
What’s taken place in the year since Obama won the presidency has turned out to be one of the most dramatic political about-faces in our history. Elected in the midst of a crushing economic crisis brought on by a decade of orgiastic deregulation and unchecked greed, Obama had a clear mandate to rein in Wall Street and remake the entire structure of the American economy. What he did instead was ship even his most marginally progressive campaign advisers off to various bureaucratic Siberias, while packing the key economic positions in his White House with the very people who caused the crisis in the first place. This new team of bubble-fattened ex-bankers and laissez-faire intellectuals then proceeded to sell us all out, instituting a massive, trickle-up bailout and systematically gutting regulatory reform from the inside.
How could Obama let this happen? Is he just a rookie in the political big leagues, hoodwinked by Beltway old-timers? Or is the vacillating, ineffectual servant of banking interests we’ve been seeing on TV this fall who Obama really is?
Whatever the president’s real motives are, the extensive series of loophole-rich financial “reforms” that the Democrats are currently pushing may ultimately do more harm than good. In fact, some parts of the new reforms border on insanity, threatening to vastly amplify Wall Street’s political power by institutionalizing the taxpayer’s role as a welfare provider for the financial-services industry. At one point in the debate, Obama’s top economic advisers demanded the power to award future bailouts without even going to Congress for approval — and without providing taxpayers a single dime in equity on the deals.
How did we get here? It started just moments after the election — and almost nobody noticed.
No, Hannity is more concerned with the mythical socialist takeover and I am more concerned with the very real wall street take over. Which really isn’t a take over, it’s just becoming more apparent, who’s in charge.
So, let me guess, you see it has anti_obama slant and you automatically think it is something akin to right wing radio.
Why don’t you look at the data…dataAgent. This is a rolling stone article, not quite Lim-bot reading material.
No, Hannity is more concerned with the mythical socialist takeover and I am more concerned with the very real wall street take over. Which really isn’t a take over, it’s just becoming more apparent, who’s in charge.
So, let me guess, you see it has anti_obama slant and you automatically think it is something akin to right wing radio.
Why don’t you look at the data…dataAgent. This is a rolling stone article, not quite Lim-bot reading material.
No, Hannity is more concerned with the mythical socialist takeover and I am more concerned with the very real wall street take over. Which really isn’t a take over, it’s just becoming more apparent, who’s in charge.
So, let me guess, you see it has anti_obama slant and you automatically think it is something akin to right wing radio.
Why don’t you look at the data…dataAgent. This is a rolling stone article, not quite Lim-bot reading material.
No, Hannity is more concerned with the mythical socialist takeover and I am more concerned with the very real wall street take over. Which really isn’t a take over, it’s just becoming more apparent, who’s in charge.
So, let me guess, you see it has anti_obama slant and you automatically think it is something akin to right wing radio.
Why don’t you look at the data…dataAgent. This is a rolling stone article, not quite Lim-bot reading material.
No, Hannity is more concerned with the mythical socialist takeover and I am more concerned with the very real wall street take over. Which really isn’t a take over, it’s just becoming more apparent, who’s in charge.
So, let me guess, you see it has anti_obama slant and you automatically think it is something akin to right wing radio.
Why don’t you look at the data…dataAgent. This is a rolling stone article, not quite Lim-bot reading material.
