May 1, 2010 & & & headlines around email. & & Start a Petition » change_setup("300", "Featured", "all", "#DCB000", 6); Lets fake that, someday in 2002, thousands of cars proposed exploding. In the fake world, oil refineries combined a new containing alkali to gasoline that was ostensible to have it bake some-more solemnly but in actuality caused horrific explosions.And lets contend that in reply to these explosions, then-President George W. Bush in a huff lashed out at the pollutifying oil companies and demanded that the supervision intensifize the scrutinimany of Big Oil.This populist harangue would come notwithstanding the actuality that Bush had received&millions of dollars&from the oil and gas industries and that Bush himself began his post-alcoholism career as a&Texas oil man. While the probable that a little bad suckers would take Bushs newfound antipathy for the oil industry seriously, I think the immeasurable infancy of reactions would range from shouting to guffawing to ROFLing to OMGWTFLMAOing.Sadly, America faces a identical incident now with President Barack Obamas attribute with Wall Street. Put simply, when Obama smiles and tells us in his hopiest, changiest voice that he really, unequivocally wants to rein in Wall Street and have promissory note safer for Main Street, we should not hold him.Why? Well, lets begin with the majority viewable reason Obama does not merit the trust: debate contributions. Look at the&insane amount&of money that employees of the vital monetary institutions split over to Obama during his 2008 presidential campaign. Citigroup employees donated over $700,000; JP Morgan employees donated $695,000; and Morgan Stanley employees donated over $500,000. Employees of Goldman Sachs, the evil spirit squid itself, donated a whopping $995,000 to the Obama debate in 2008, creation the squids employees the second-largest writer to Obamas campaign.As if that werent enough, cruise the people hes surrounded himself with. Former President Clinton recently&acknowledged&that he perceived the wrong recommendation about controlling derivatives from former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers in the late 90s. That would be the same&Larry Summers&who not long ago pooh-poohed the thought of violation up the oligarchic megabanks given you do so would allegedly harm the competitiveness of the United States. For those of you not profitable attention, Summers now serves as... the executive of the White Houses National Economic Council! Before receiving the job, Summers raked in $5.2 million operative part-time for the D.E. Shaw sidestep fund.Meanwhile, stream Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is a&protg&of Bob Rubin, whom Clinton says additionally gave him bad recommendation on derivatives regulation. Geithner, you might recall, was the monetary might who came up with a&
No comments:
Post a Comment