Humor Article of the Day

by Dave Schuler on November 12, 2012

I don’t think he intended to be funny but Simon Johnson’s op-ed at Bloomberg on his picks for the next Secretary of the Treasury is a real knee-slapper. Here are his suggestions: John Reed, Jon Huntsman, Bill Bradley, Sheila Bair, and Gary Gensler.

Don’t get me wrong. I would welcome any of those as the next secretary. But I strongly suspect that our priorities for what the Treasury Secretary should be doing are very different from those of the White House. At least if Tim Geithner is any gauge.

Here’s my suggestion: Rahm Emanuel. At least it would get him out of Chicago.

{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }

TastyBits November 12, 2012 at 9:43 am

Sheila Bair is my new best hero, but she is not strong enough.

It does not matter anyway. President Obama continued the policies of President Bush. They are protecting Wall Street and crushing “the folks”. The bonuses that the President Obama rails against are enabled by his appointments. Timothy Geithner is dirtbag.

jan November 12, 2012 at 12:15 pm

Tastybits,

It’s interesting to me how Obama can be the type of president who reaps the mega rewards/donations from Wall Street, with impunity, during a presidential run, hiring many of those guys, like Geithner to be a part of his administration. But, at the same time easily morph into a supporter of the Occupy movement, pulling in the support of a constituency railing against Wall street types (conveniently turning said support into a rich vs poor scenario, helping to weave his Gordon Gekko characterization of Romney, and the oh so successful class warfare part of his reelection strategy) .

It’s the same way he evolved into a gay rights supporter, towards the end of his campaign, as well as getting on the stick with a mere symbolic gesture to immigration promises (temporary nod to the DREAM act), unkept for most of his first presidential term.

There are so many other undulations in his leadership, that all seem to fall short, though, of the ‘flip flopping’ label that was thrown at and stuck to Mitt Romney. He indeed seems to be a man who can ‘have his cake and eat it too,’ getting elected with a smaller popular vote than his first election, and still call it a ‘mandate’ by the people.

Mind boggling…..

TastyBits November 12, 2012 at 1:20 pm

@jan

Everybody should know my positions on the mortgage/financial mess, but even as jaded as I am, I never realized how much the regulators were working for the regulated. The regulators were not just cheerleaders. They were actively working to protect Wall Street and to hurt Main Street/individuals.

This should be a wake-up call for the Democrats, but both parties are neck deep in the disingenuous political games. The Democrats have stereotyped the Republicans as the only who do it, but what the partisans do not understand is that there is no difference between the two parties actual positions. Anybody who thinks there is a difference is a partisan or a fool.

The biggest difference is that the Democrats know how to play the Republicans. Republicans are Br’er Fox, and Democrats are Br’er Rabbit pleading to not be thrown into the brier patch. The Democrats are Lucy with the football, and the Republicans are Charlie Brown.

I would highly recommend Sheila Bair’s book. She is a reasonable person regarding regulations for the financial industry, and Republicans would improve their lot if they took her seriously.

TastyBits November 12, 2012 at 1:45 pm

@jan

More directly, you are being played by the Republicans. You attack Obama and defend Romney. Your only worth to the Republican party is a voter, a donater, a book buyer, a radio listener, etc. To Mitch McConnell you are worth less than his hunting dog unless you know how to tree a squirrel.

Republicans are “evolving” on many of the party planks. Before the election, it was called “compromising one’s principals”, and it was the sign of a RINO. What the difference a day made.

Dave Schuler November 12, 2012 at 2:05 pm

“Those are my principles. If you don’t like them, I have others.”

jan November 12, 2012 at 5:51 pm

“More directly, you are being played by the Republicans. You attack Obama and defend Romney. “

Tastybits,

I didn’t feel the need to attack Romney, as others were doing a good job at it. Furthermore, IMO, I felt that much of the time Romney was being treated as the incumbent, with his comments, governorship/private sector record being probed with more withering criticism and questioning, than his opponent’s. After all, wasn’t it Obama who has been retained as the POTUS for the last 4 years, and whose job merited demanding and solid critiquing?

Basically, my support for Romney consisted of a combination of considerations: his business experience and ties to that community; his enthusiasm to tackle and find solutions for fiscal problems; and what appeared to be an ethical, and bipartisan background in working with business people and politicians from opposing parties. IMO, we need those kinds of skills to overcome the obstacles facing this country. I was at least willing to give him a chance, as much as I was unwilling to relive the same old, same old, with the same old political policies promoted by the Obama Administration. Of course, there is no choice now.

Regarding congressional leaders, either R or D — I have little regard for anyone there. Both McConnell and Reid’s actions/words, in the Senate, seem more bent on partisan gamesmanship than actually creating agreements with the people’s well being in mind. The same goes for Boehner and Polosi in the House.

jan November 12, 2012 at 6:21 pm

“Republicans are “evolving” on many of the party planks. Before the election, it was called “compromising one’s principals”, and it was the sign of a RINO. What the difference a day made.”

Honest reflection is conducive for future course corrections. However, if done in too much of a spastic fashion it usually results in a sparseness of foundational thinking, oftentimes leading to the land of unintended consequences.

This is the stage where my partisan instincts become tired out and diluted.

TastyBits November 12, 2012 at 8:06 pm

@jan

It is a rigged game. Heads they win, tails you lose. In Vegas, the house always wins, and in Washington, the rich and powerful always win.

The OTB crowd believes more regulation will keep Wall Street & Big Business from trampling Main Street & Small Business. They were played by the Democrats in 2008, and I expect 2012 will be the same.

If the Democrats were really concerned about raising taxes on the rich, they could have done it when they controlled the House, Senate, and Presidency, but somehow, they forgot. Luckily, this slip gave them a campaign issue.

Drew November 13, 2012 at 2:32 pm

Seems to me the talk of Romney being no different from Obama is convenient and self congratulatory bar room talk, and commensurately shallow.

The tax environment will be different under Obama. The regulatory environment will be different. The spending environment will be different.

Other than that, I guess its all the same. snicker

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: