A bit of a rant, but it represents the way a lot of those on the left are feeling about the president and his party.
BTW, I take credit for predicting just this before Obama won the nomination in 2008. I thought he would likely do pretty much what HRC would have done if she had won. His appointment of her to State confirmed that, not mention retaining Gates at Defense and putting Geithner at Treasury, and even appointing Pritzker to Commerce later. In fact, my words at the time were "Chicago pol," and "snake in the grass."
The Con-man Cornered: Obama and the Democratic Debacle of 2014
James Petras | Bartle Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University in Binghamton, New York and adjunct professor at Saint Mary's University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
See also, Robert Reich, The Choice of the Century.
2 comments:
Yes, it's kind of a crazy rant. The issue isn't Obama personally. He represents the mainstream of his party.
The issue isn't Obama personally. He represents the mainstream of his party.
Politico, Why Wall Street Loves Hillary
While the finance industry does genuinely hate Warren, the big bankers love Clinton, and by and large they badly want her to be president. Many of the rich and powerful in the financial industry—among them, Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman, Tom Nides, a powerful vice chairman at Morgan Stanley, and the heads of JPMorganChase and Bank of America—consider Clinton a pragmatic problem-solver not prone to populist rhetoric. To them, she’s someone who gets the idea that we all benefit if Wall Street and American business thrive. What about her forays into fiery rhetoric? They dismiss it quickly as political maneuvers. None of them think she really means her populism.
Post a Comment