Where's the "CHANGE" Obama?

[froggy]

Our Failed Economic Recovery: Time for a 'Change'? | BNET

 

[Jarhead]

In a jar on his desk in the West Wing.

 

[washamericom]

fake rockstar

 

[Jarhead]

American Idol gone bad

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

1st affirmative action President.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

And then there's this startling endorsement of Obama:

"I spent some time with the highest tenured faculty member at Chicago Law a few months back, and he did not have many nice things to say about "Barry." Obama applied for a position as an adjunct and wasn't even considered. A few weeks later the law school got a phone call from the Board of Trustees telling them to find him an office, put him on the payroll, and give him a class to teach. The Board told him he didn't have to be a member of the faculty, but they needed to give him a temporary position. He was never a professor and was hardly an adjunct.

The other professors hated him because he was lazy, unqualified, never attended any of the faculty meetings, and it was clear that the position was nothing more than a political stepping stool. According to my professor friend, he had the lowest intellectual capacity in the building. He also doubted whether he was legitimately an editor on the Harvard Law Review, because if he was, he would be the first and only editor of an Ivy League law review to never be published while in school (publication is or was a requirement). "

 

[Claudette]

Any way to prove any of that story??

Sure is interesting reading.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Tooooooooooooooooooooo easy!!!!!!!​

"Goldman Sachs Group Inc plans to spin off its proprietary trading business as early as this month to comply with the so-called Volcker rule, CNBC reported on Wednesday.

It would be the first move by the New York-based investment bank to adapt its business to comply with the U.S. financial reform package signed into law last month, and would follow similar moves from other banks.

"As we've said all along, we are considering our options," said Goldman spokesman Michael DuVally. "When we have something to announce, we'll announce it. Of course anything we do will comply with the law."

Goldman shares ended 2.1 percent higher at $156.41 on the New York Stock Exchange.

"It gets them out of the way of the Volcker rule without causing any deterioration in their earnings. Therefore it's a significant positive," said Dick Bove, analyst at Rochdale Securities.

Goldman will receive a substantial number of benefits from the reform law, potentially offsetting the prop trading restrictions, Bove said.

Others took a more cautious view.

"What does Goldman become without proprietary trading?" said Walter Todd, co-chief investment officer of Greenwood Capital. "We're going back to the old days. It starts to look like what inve$tment bank$ used to look like."

NOW, banks will have to compete with EACH-OTHER, again....rather-than SCAMMIN' WITH UNREGULATED-PRODUCTS (to show a profit!!!).



O-BA-MA!! O-BA-MA!! O-BA-MA!! O-BA-MA!! O-BA-MA!! O-BA-MA!!​

 

[washamericom]

And then there's this startling endorsement of Obama:

"I spent some time with the highest tenured faculty member at Chicago Law a few months back, and he did not have many nice things to say about "Barry." Obama applied for a position as an adjunct and wasn't even considered. A few weeks later the law school got a phone call from the Board of Trustees telling them to find him an office, put him on the payroll, and give him a class to teach. The Board told him he didn't have to be a member of the faculty, but they needed to give him a temporary position. He was never a professor and was hardly an adjunct.

The other professors hated him because he was lazy, unqualified, never attended any of the faculty meetings, and it was clear that the position was nothing more than a political stepping stool. According to my professor friend, he had the lowest intellectual capacity in the building. He also doubted whether he was legitimately an editor on the Harvard Law Review, because if he was, he would be the first and only editor of an Ivy League law review to never be published while in school (publication is or was a requirement). "

this is a powder keg if true, has ap picked this up?. i wonder if some of his colleagues didn't like the company he kept.... ayers, rev wright etc.
university of chicago is one of the places for the best and brightest.
and, how can you sit in frontof a guy for twenty years, and not know his character?, so you see it's been damage control from the beginning, and remains today.

 

[blastoff]

Any way to prove any of that story??

Sure is interesting reading.

Ditto. The U of C is a hotbed of lefties and, while it's interesting, curious why we haven't heard about it sooner.

 

[Jeremy]

Tooooooooooooooooooooo easy!!!!!!!​

"Goldman Sachs Group Inc plans to spin off its proprietary trading business as early as this month to comply with the so-called Volcker rule, CNBC reported on Wednesday.

It would be the first move by the New York-based investment bank to adapt its business to comply with the U.S. financial reform package signed into law last month, and would follow similar moves from other banks.

"As we've said all along, we are considering our options," said Goldman spokesman Michael DuVally. "When we have something to announce, we'll announce it. Of course anything we do will comply with the law."

Goldman shares ended 2.1 percent higher at $156.41 on the New York Stock Exchange.

"It gets them out of the way of the Volcker rule without causing any deterioration in their earnings. Therefore it's a significant positive," said Dick Bove, analyst at Rochdale Securities.

Goldman will receive a substantial number of benefits from the reform law, potentially offsetting the prop trading restrictions, Bove said.

Others took a more cautious view.

"What does Goldman become without proprietary trading?" said Walter Todd, co-chief investment officer of Greenwood Capital. "We're going back to the old days. It starts to look like what inve$tment bank$ used to look like."

NOW, banks will have to compete with EACH-OTHER, again....rather-than SCAMMIN' WITH UNREGULATED-PRODUCTS (to show a profit!!!).



O-BA-MA!! O-BA-MA!! O-BA-MA!! O-BA-MA!! O-BA-MA!! O-BA-MA!!​

I've lost count how many times I've offered help for you but I'll try just one last time.

Please visit...
Tourette Syndrome Association TSA Home Page

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"Once the so-called "Volcker rule" is put in place, it will be tough to get around. The measure will prevent banks from trading their own capital for profit. It will also prevent them from owning significant stakes in hedge fund and private-equity assets.

The rule is tough and unexpected -- even if its namesake doesn't agree. The few "loophole lawyers" who sounded tough about skirting regulations when I spoke with them in the winter and spring had no concrete ideas about how to get around the Dodd-Frank bill when I spoke with them more recently.

Perhaps that is posturing. Perhaps they haven't figured it out yet. Perhaps they have, but don't want to reveal the strategies.

In any event, it's hard to imagine what Goldman and its peers could possibly do to skirt the new rules. First, because there are no more off-balance sheet vehicles in which to store secret goods. Second, because the Dodd-Frank bill cracks down not just on trading, but lending, general consumer finance AND derivatives."

Go ahead, banks......MAKE OBAMA'S DAY!!!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And then there's this startling endorsement of Obama:

"I spent some time with the highest tenured faculty member at Chicago Law a few months back, and he did not have many nice things to say about "Barry." Obama applied for a position as an adjunct and wasn't even considered. A few weeks later the law school got a phone call from the Board of Trustees telling them to find him an office, put him on the payroll, and give him a class to teach. The Board told him he didn't have to be a member of the faculty, but they needed to give him a temporary position. He was never a professor and was hardly an adjunct.

The other professors hated him because he was lazy, unqualified, never attended any of the faculty meetings, and it was clear that the position was nothing more than a political stepping stool. According to my professor friend, he had the lowest intellectual capacity in the building. He also doubted whether he was legitimately an editor on the Harvard Law Review, because if he was, he would be the first and only editor of an Ivy League law review to never be published while in school (publication is or was a requirement). "

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EcC0QAd0Ug]YouTube - ‪Obama and Khalid Mansour‬‎[/ame]

Prince Alaweed's adviser Khalid Mansour gets Obama into Harvard

 

[washamericom]

And then there's this startling endorsement of Obama:

"I spent some time with the highest tenured faculty member at Chicago Law a few months back, and he did not have many nice things to say about "Barry." Obama applied for a position as an adjunct and wasn't even considered. A few weeks later the law school got a phone call from the Board of Trustees telling them to find him an office, put him on the payroll, and give him a class to teach. The Board told him he didn't have to be a member of the faculty, but they needed to give him a temporary position. He was never a professor and was hardly an adjunct.

The other professors hated him because he was lazy, unqualified, never attended any of the faculty meetings, and it was clear that the position was nothing more than a political stepping stool. According to my professor friend, he had the lowest intellectual capacity in the building. He also doubted whether he was legitimately an editor on the Harvard Law Review, because if he was, he would be the first and only editor of an Ivy League law review to never be published while in school (publication is or was a requirement). "

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EcC0QAd0Ug]YouTube - ‪Obama and Khalid Mansour‬‎[/ame]

Prince Alaweed's adviser Khalid Mansour gets Obama into Harvard

as painful as it was to watch this "slowmotionman", here is another piece of the sordid jigsaw....

i jigsaw him first

 

[Claudette]

Any way to prove any of that story??

Sure is interesting reading.

Ditto. The U of C is a hotbed of lefties and, while it's interesting, curious why we haven't heard about it sooner.

No ones heard about it because the LSM didn't investigate this guy for shit when he was running for Prez.

Hell, it could be a pack of bs for all I know.

Wonder what would happen if the LSM actually did its job and found out the whole story was true??? Wonder if the NYT would have 8 inch letters on the front page for 69 days??? LOL

Talk about interesting!!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Amazing!!!!

The Wall Street Journal (of all publications) ADMITS that Phil Gramm's legislation totally-fucked-UP the U.S. banking/Wall Street complex......​

"Financial overhaul is the law of the land, but while it is true that the Dodd-Frank Act is a sweeping bill for the financial industry, it is hardly the most sweeping bill for Wall Street since the Great Depression as many argue.

That distinction goes to a law passed in the Internet age, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. The financial modernization implicit in that bill effectively destroyed 1930s reforms with a simple argument: Things are too complicated today.

The assessment was accurate, but the response wrong-headed. The financial "reform" of the 1990s made matters worse by complicating the financial industry more, primarily by allowing investment banks to merge with consumer banks. It is this toxic mix that led to our modern day Great Recession—a name that, should the recovery falter, may become a placeholder for what historians may someday call our second Great Depression."

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcJ4sjgtIR0]YouTube - ‪American Casino‬‎[/ame]

.....So, NOW the WSJ is suggesting....what?....that Dems SHOULD have made every effort to RESCIND/OVERRIDE Gramm's legislation????? ​

"Put simply, Dodd-Frank spruces up the house. Gramm-Leach-Bliley undermined the engineering.

"Not withstanding those fears and distortions," Mr. Geithner said. "the reforms that followed the Great Depression laid the foundation for decades of prosperity and led to one of the most-impressive records of investment."

There are two tells in that statement. First, notice that Mr. Geithner used the word foundation to describe the financial reforms of the 1930s. That is an engineering term and one that suggests that the response—Glass-Steagall, the Securities Act of 1933 and Securities Exchange Act of 1934—imposed structural change on the financial industry.

Secondly, Mr. Geithner acknowledges that those changes indeed worked, spurring investment and "decades of prosperity." One could hardly argue for a better endorsement.

So, why didn't Mr. Geithner and proponents of reform return to that blueprint?"

Yeah.....right.....Republicans were gonna ADMIT Gramm fucked-up, and allow a full-override of his legislation, maybe.....by 2015.

Great distracto-article, WSJ.​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"The issues the Act covers in its 2,300 pages were informed by many of the failures of our financial architecture in the crisis. Those failures were catastrophic, and they had the potential to be far more devastating to the economies of the world than they actually were. The awareness of how close we came to paralyzing the financial system created an opportunity to do something truly significant to make the system safer and more in tune with the needs of our economy. Sadly, because all things in Washington are political, we fumbled the ball.

The Act is already being denounced by some for not going far enough to curb the risky behavior of financial institutions, and denounced by others for going too far and hampering innovation and efficiency in financial markets. The Act does make some important improvements in the oversight of the financial system and addresses some of the causes of the crisis, but whether it will be effective depends on the 243 rules yet to be written, the 67-plus studies yet to be undertaken, and the subsequent implementation and enforcement. It took a long time to get into the pickle that brought our economy to its knees, so we shouldn't be too impatient about the lengthy process. What makes a fellow dubious, however, are the cynical political calculations that are evident throughout this legislation."

Pretty tame for Forbes.

That's gotta break "conservatives'" hearts.​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

December 17, 2010​

"The U.S. economy is gathering steam as the year draws to a close, according to a private industry group's index of economic indicators published on Friday.

The Conference Board's measure of leading economic indicators jumped 1.1 percent in November, the biggest rise since March and the fifth straight monthly gain.

The increase in the LEI matched forecasts in a Reuters poll. The index's level is now at a record high of 112.4, the research group said.

It was the latest evidence of steady, if fragile, improvement in the country's growth prospects after a summer lull. Retail sales in particular have been surprisingly strong, raising hopes for consumer spending."

​

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Our Failed Economic Recovery: Time for a 'Change'? | BNET

That "change" is what's in your pocket where folded bills used to be.

Promise kept.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"General Motors Co (GM.N) shares rose as much as 2.5 percent in midday trading on Tuesday after banks resumed coverage of the automaker with high marks for its North American sales and position in emerging markets.

Barclays said GM is "relatively attractive" for three reasons -- strong positions in emerging markets China and Brazil; strong earnings in North America due to price discipline; and even a conservative estimate of its financial position suggest $42 per share price target.

JPMorgan sees the "potential for significant additional appreciations beyond year-end 2011."

GM's presence in fast-growing international markets, lowered debt levels as well as a slew of new products over the few years will be advantage for the automaker, JPMorgan said.

The U.S. government bailed out GM for $50 billion after the automaker's 2009 bankruptcy. The Obama administration has said it is on track to recoup the full investment in GM and that it is making progress toward shedding government's stake by mid-to-late 2012."

​

​