There is a false narrative about Pres. Obama and Wall Street that needs to be corrected right now.

[ClarkUSA]

Here's the real deal about President Obama's relationship with Wall Street:

the turnout... reflected the president’s broader struggles in attracting big-name support from those on Wall Street, whom he referred to as “fat cat bankers” in 2009. One person who attended described the atmosphere as subdued and said the event seemed to attract more Buffett followers than Obama supporters... Mr. Buffett has found himself in a lonely role as the president’s ambassador among the moneyed set. He is endorsing not just Mr. Obama but also a policy like the so-called Buffett rule, which would increase taxes on the rich, as well as the view that America is exiting, not re-entering, a recession... the campaign has received a tepid response from other deep-pocketed donors on Wall Street, some of whom have shunned the president’s push for regulation and his talk about lavish bonuses. The nation’s biggest banks, which cut many large checks for Mr. Obama’s 2008 run, are mainly on the sidelines for now.

“In the last election, people were tripping over themselves to get on the Obama bandwagon,” said Michael J. Driscoll, a former senior trader at the Wall Street firm Bear Stearns who now teaches at Adelphi University. “Things have changed; Wall Street is not happy being under attack by the administration.”

Republican candidates hope to lure away Wall Street’s money. Last week, the Republican contender Mitt Romney, a former private equity executive, met privately with JPMorgan Chase’s chief, Jamie Dimon, once a big-name supporter of Mr. Obama. Mr. Dimon has not yet endorsed any candidate. Anthony Scaramucci, a hedge fund manager who previously donated to Mr. Obama, has shifted allegiance to Mr. Romney.

Mr. Buffett said he was not surprised that Wall Street’s sentiment had shifted so much against the president. “People need to face up to the country’s problems. Once what you start pointing and explaining what your part is in it, you start losing a few people,” he said, laughing.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/others-go-but-buffett-stays-on-side-of-president/?hp

People are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

[Whisp]

1. K&R

[Scurrilous]

2. K & R

:thumbsup:

[elleng]

3. Thanks as usual, Clark.

Unreccers have been here, unfortunately. Not the first time we, you and I, have accepted views others don't want to hear, eh?
:hi:

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[MADem]

9. Yeah, and they'll find out how much difference there is if we get a

union-busting GOP asshole in the WH.

No difference? No difference, my ass!


The mind boggles, doesn't it?

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[MADem]

12. Link to the story. Perhaps the moderator didn't understand your context?

You might want to ask--maybe you can get an answer. I don't think they can restore it once they dump it, though. I could be wrong..!

[slay]

6. Cause Wall Street has dumped Obama for Romney - and... it's election time

big talk against wall street = votes. but i saw that in 2008 from Obama - lots of talk of hope and change and getting rid of insiders (HA). i mean i'm glad he's saying it - but words are a long way from actions - especially with Obama.

[TheWraith]

31. Bullshit. What "election time" was it in 2009 when this started? nt

[slay]

37. Pffft. That just shows he's had plenty of time - and did little to no action

n't

[Honeycombe8]

7. I heard on TV (so it must be true!...just kidding) But really, I heard that Romney

has rec'd more donations from WS investors and banks than Obama has. Looks like Wall Street has picked their guy. The one who said, "Corporations are people, too."

[certainot]

8. for all those who say obama's working for wall street- so does limbaugh!

[girl gone mad]

10. Good luck trying to change the narrative.

It will be difficult since Obama stuffed his administration full of Goldman Sachs cronies. Also, rather than listening to his critics on the left who warned that his policies heavily favored Wall Street banks at the expense of the working class, he sent his COS out to call them names and tear them down.

[ClarkUSA]

13. Ending the negative cycle of trivial and meaningless complaints about Pres. O would be a good start.

Focusing on the facts of what President Obama has historically accomplished on behalf of protecting American consumers would be the next step:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/wallstreetreform

[Mr Deltoid]

14. Is it trivial and meaningless

...to disagree with his extending the Bush tax cuts for two additional years?

Curious....

[ClarkUSA]

15. I feel that it is, especially if that opinion dismisses the year's extension of UI benefits...

... and the first tax relief for the working poor (the payroll tax cut) we've seen in a long time, which President Obama felt was a higher priority (because he has been a true friend of the poor and the unemployed since he got out of college) to extract out of an hostile and recalcitrant Republican Congress. So yes, I do find any and all of the indignant calls to abandon the long-term unemployed poor and the middle-class just to raise taxes on the wealthy to be trivial and meaningless.

[Mr Deltoid]

17. Really?

Lets see. UI benefits for 1.5 million for a few months. For extending the great recession for two additional years, for 300 million Americans...

:) Yeah what a deal! :) sounds like blackmail to me.

[bornskeptic]

19. Failing to make the tax cut deal would have raised taxes by $1600

for the average middle class couple, and by about 400% for the average minimum wage worker. If you think doing that at a time when unemployment was near 10% and millions of Americans were struggling to hang on to their homes would have been a way to improve the economy, your economic theory is as screwed up as that of the Republicans.

[Mr Deltoid]

21. The tax cuts caused this whole mess

I dont buy into Reaganomics.

[NBachers]

16. Hey, let's back off on the Obama hate, OK?

[Prism]

18. They chewed him up

And now they're about to spit him out.

Who could have seen this coming . . . except, you know, everyone.

Why a Democrat couldn't figure out the true holders of wealth in this country would dispose of him the instant he was no longer useful is beyond me.

Let's hope Obama has learned his lessons in time.

[These Eyes]

20. K & R

Thanks for posting this!

[Tarheel_Dem]

22. Thank You. (nt)

[Tarheel_Dem]

23. It's the Naderites and Paultards who continue to push this narrative, aided of course, by

the NorquistDogLake & WorldSocialists rags who think we voted for Hugo Chavez. :hi:

[Bake]

24. But he's still taking their money, right?

I mean, he got their money, didn't he? Didn't he at least take their money?

Bake

[stevenleser]

25. If you get a paycheck, so do you. n/t

[Bake]

26. But I'm not exactly in a position to give them anything more than my 40 hours a week.

Obama's in a LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT position, don't you think?

So you're defending the corporations now. Don't suppose we'll be seeing you at OWS.

Bake

[stevenleser]

27. I'm an OWS supporter, and actually, all of us who accept paychecks are doing a lot to help those who

we would rather not help.

[Bake]

28. How do you suggest we buy groceries?

Gotta have a paycheck. Class warfare? They already have us by the balls.

So if you sympathize with OWS, why defend the corps/banksters?

Bake

[stevenleser]

33. I'm not defending them. You aren't understanding the point I am making at all.

You're willing to compromise the fact that you are helping the corps/banksters with your underpaid labor because you need a paycheck. OK, I get it and am doing the exact same thing. But you are excoriating Obama for doing the exact same thing.

[Bake]

35. Hardly!

Obama doesn't need a "paycheck." There's a difference -- a BIG DIFFERENCE -- between earning a paycheck and selling out your constituency. Don't even TRY to argue to the contrary.

Bake

[Bake]

30. And by the way, my pitiful paycheck hardly compares to Obama's.

His paycheck from Wall Street, that is. At least I earn mine honestly.

Bake

[stevenleser]

34. So if he was making less money, what the President is doing would be fine by you?

OK.

[Bake]

36. His paycheck is paid by his constituents. The taxpayers.

It's the campaign contributions from Wall Street that bother me. Seriously, you see no difference there?

Bake

[chill_wind]

32. Yes, and he still is.

He's only second to Romney right now.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=780431&mesg_id=780910

[great white snark]

29. Thank you ClarkUSA. K&R.

You are too kind to call it a "false narrative".

[loyalsister]

38. Thanks!

:thumbsup:

[yurbud]

39. if they are not supporting him, what's stopping him from prosecuting them and seizing their assets

for the mortgage backed derivatives scam?