Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
...and being a fake Indian qualifies Liz to pass judgement people who actually succeeded in the private sector
Come up with any proof of that yet Frank?
Didn't think so.
Parents: White
Grandparents: White
Great Grandparents: White
Relatives proffered by Lizzy Cheekbones validating her Cherokee ancestry: None
Science = Settled.
We have Consensus Lizzy lied about her Cherokee ancestery
Nope. You have ipse dixit.
Pogo, it's obvious you're delusional when it comes to your GF Lizzy Cheekbones.
She can tell you ANYTHING and you'd believe it.
It's obvious only one of us cares about the factual.
Guess which one of us doesn't declare absolutes that he can't prove.
Come up with any proof of that yet Frank?
Didn't think so.
Parents: White
Grandparents: White
Great Grandparents: White
Relatives proffered by Lizzy Cheekbones validating her Cherokee ancestry: None
Science = Settled.
We have Consensus Lizzy lied about her Cherokee ancestery
Nope. You have ipse dixit.
Pogo, it's obvious you're delusional when it comes to your GF Lizzy Cheekbones.
She can tell you ANYTHING and you'd believe it.
It's obvious only one of us cares about the factual.
Guess which one of us doesn't declare absolutes that he can't prove.
Can you give us the name of Lizzy Cheekbones Cherokee ancestor? Just one name
I can give you the names of all my ancestors going back to about 1450 and more if I had the inclination to go Florence and do some basic research
Remind me what Jack Lew did on Wall St that made him qualified for Secretary.You really shouldn't make shit up, especially when Warren's own words are out there. Do you never learn?No, Warren opposes him because he "represents Wall St" which means he actually has experience in the business he is supposed to be regulating. To Dems this is a no-no.Since the OP didn't provide a link: The Elizabeth Warren Veto - WSJ
Warren is opposing Weiss because he was an adviser to Burger King when they acquired a Canadian doughnut company in a tax inversion scheme.
Weiss's background is in international mergers and acquisitions and Warren feels this does not inform him on the domestic protection issues undertaken by the Under Secretary of the Treasury for Domestic Finance.
Just because someone "worked on Wall Street" does not automatically qualify them for a specific job. There are a universe of specialties on Wall Street, and Weiss's specialty is not a fit for the Domestic Finance protection job.
That raises the first issue. Weiss has spent most of his career working on international transactions -- from 2001 to 2009 he lived and worked in Paris -- and now he's being asked to run domestic finance at Treasury. Neither his background nor his professional experience makes him qualified to oversee consumer protection and domestic regulatory functions at the Treasury.
The second issue is corporate inversions. Basically, a bunch of companies have decided that all the regular tax loopholes they get to exploit aren't enough, so they have begun taking advantage of an even bigger loophole that allows them to maintain their operations in America but claim foreign citizenship and cut their U.S. taxes even more. No one is fooled by the bland words "corporate inversion." These companies renounce their American citizenship and turn their backs on this country simply to boost their profits.
One of the biggest and most public corporate inversions last summer was the deal cut by Burger King to slash its tax bill by purchasing the Canadian company Tim Hortons and then "inverting" the American company to Canadian ownership. And Weiss was right there, working on Burger King's tax deal. Weiss' work wasn't unusual for Lazard.
Exactly. As. I. Said.
Maybe this is because it has become more obvious that Wall Street and the private Banking industry which includes the FED have been the causes of our economic turmoils. Capitalism is not turning out to be the holy grail that Ayn Rand envisioned. Without regulation, capitalism has turned out to be a disaster, and with regulation not very dependable for the general population....
It wasn’t long ago that Wall Street experience was considered an advantage for Democrats at Treasury—evidence that the party of labor had some connection to the wealth producers of America. JFK tapped Douglas Dillon (Dillon, Read & Co.), while Bill Clinton chose Robert Rubin ( Goldman Sachs ) and the relatively moderate Texas Senator Lloyd Bentsen. But the Warren Democrats seem increasingly to want to separate themselves from the private economy.
more at WSJ
Idiot.Maybe this is because it has become more obvious that Wall Street and the private Banking industry which includes the FED have been the causes of our economic turmoils. Capitalism is not turning out to be the holy grail that Ayn Rand envisioned. Without regulation, capitalism has turned out to be a disaster, and with regulation not very dependable for the general population....
It wasn’t long ago that Wall Street experience was considered an advantage for Democrats at Treasury—evidence that the party of labor had some connection to the wealth producers of America. JFK tapped Douglas Dillon (Dillon, Read & Co.), while Bill Clinton chose Robert Rubin ( Goldman Sachs ) and the relatively moderate Texas Senator Lloyd Bentsen. But the Warren Democrats seem increasingly to want to separate themselves from the private economy.
more at WSJ
So the consequences of 1929 and 2008 were great! I see.Idiot.Maybe this is because it has become more obvious that Wall Street and the private Banking industry which includes the FED have been the causes of our economic turmoils. Capitalism is not turning out to be the holy grail that Ayn Rand envisioned. Without regulation, capitalism has turned out to be a disaster, and with regulation not very dependable for the general population....
It wasn’t long ago that Wall Street experience was considered an advantage for Democrats at Treasury—evidence that the party of labor had some connection to the wealth producers of America. JFK tapped Douglas Dillon (Dillon, Read & Co.), while Bill Clinton chose Robert Rubin ( Goldman Sachs ) and the relatively moderate Texas Senator Lloyd Bentsen. But the Warren Democrats seem increasingly to want to separate themselves from the private economy.
more at WSJ
Capitalism made this country what it is. Regulation is destroying it.
Non sequitur noted.So the consequences of 1929 and 2008 were great! I see.Idiot.Maybe this is because it has become more obvious that Wall Street and the private Banking industry which includes the FED have been the causes of our economic turmoils. Capitalism is not turning out to be the holy grail that Ayn Rand envisioned. Without regulation, capitalism has turned out to be a disaster, and with regulation not very dependable for the general population....
It wasn’t long ago that Wall Street experience was considered an advantage for Democrats at Treasury—evidence that the party of labor had some connection to the wealth producers of America. JFK tapped Douglas Dillon (Dillon, Read & Co.), while Bill Clinton chose Robert Rubin ( Goldman Sachs ) and the relatively moderate Texas Senator Lloyd Bentsen. But the Warren Democrats seem increasingly to want to separate themselves from the private economy.
more at WSJ
Capitalism made this country what it is. Regulation is destroying it.
The answer of course is No. That's probably Chuck Schumer, who was for Obamacaer before he was against it.
But Liz certainly is a contender with this move, as the geniuses at the WSJ explain:
You can forgive Antonio Weiss for wondering where he went wrong as a good Democrat. He supports higher taxes—more than $1 trillion in new revenue over 10 years for starters. He favors higher tax rates on capital gains and dividends, and he thinks personal tax rates on the wealthy can rise substantially with little damage to the economy. He also supports the Dodd-Frank law, including the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau it created.
Despite adhering to such liberal Democratic orthodoxy, Mr. Weiss now finds himself the target of a campaign by Senator Elizabeth Warren to block his nomination to become President Obama ’s Under Secretary of the Treasury for Domestic Finance. We doubt this is what Mr. Weiss anticipated when he was using his status and riches on Wall Street to bundle campaign cash for Mr. Obama.
The Massachusetts progressive has framed her war on Mr. Weiss as resistance to Wall Street influence in Democratic policy making. The 48-year-old spent more than 20 years at Lazard, a firm that includes or has included such Democratic luminaries as Felix Rohatyn, Vernon Jordan and Steven Rattner . Now it’s apparently a Scarlet L.
In one sense this is curious since as recently as 2013 Ms. Warren voted to confirm Jack Lew to be Treasury Secretary. Mr. Lew’s job in 2008 was presiding over mortgage disasters at Citigroup , which needed one of the largest federal bailouts. Mr. Weiss succeeded on Wall Street as an investment banker, and Lazard didn’t need a bailout. Is financial competence now disqualifying in Democratic administrations?
The question is worth asking given the current lineup at Treasury. Apart from his brief and unfortunate banking career, Mr. Lew’s experience is in academia and politics. There’s no one at a senior Treasury position with any financial heft.
Mary Miller used to hold the domestic finance job, which is Treasury’s No. 3 post and is supposed to manage federal debt in addition to watching out for financial instability. Ms. Miller at least had run bond funds at T. Rowe Price , but she left Treasury in the autumn.
Ms. Warren’s Wall Street veto is also odd given that she is one of the many Democrats who now consider the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act to be the equivalent of holy writ. That law is based on the premise that all-knowing regulators will be able to identify and manage threats to the financial system. To have a chance of working, this model presumably requires regulators who know something about the markets they are supposed to oversee. We think such faith in regulators is misbegotten, but it’s bizarre if financial ignorance is a policy prerequisite.
It wasn’t long ago that Wall Street experience was considered an advantage for Democrats at Treasury—evidence that the party of labor had some connection to the wealth producers of America. JFK tapped Douglas Dillon (Dillon, Read & Co.), while Bill Clinton chose Robert Rubin ( Goldman Sachs ) and the relatively moderate Texas Senator Lloyd Bentsen. But the Warren Democrats seem increasingly to want to separate themselves from the private economy.
more at WSJ
Parents: White
Grandparents: White
Great Grandparents: White
Relatives proffered by Lizzy Cheekbones validating her Cherokee ancestry: None
Science = Settled.
We have Consensus Lizzy lied about her Cherokee ancestery
Nope. You have ipse dixit.
Pogo, it's obvious you're delusional when it comes to your GF Lizzy Cheekbones.
She can tell you ANYTHING and you'd believe it.
It's obvious only one of us cares about the factual.
Guess which one of us doesn't declare absolutes that he can't prove.
Can you give us the name of Lizzy Cheekbones Cherokee ancestor? Just one name
I can give you the names of all my ancestors going back to about 1450 and more if I had the inclination to go Florence and do some basic research
It's not my family, is it? That's why I have enough sense to not declare an absolute pulled out of my ass.
1450, that's pretty fuckin' extensive. If that research is anything like your Warren work I wouldn't trust that lineage more than about 1950.
No. Weiss is a shithead too. He wants higher min wage, higher taxes on high income earners, etc etc. Liz doesnt like him because he actually worked somewhere, unlike her.Since the OP didn't provide a link: The Elizabeth Warren Veto - WSJ
Warren is opposing Weiss because he was an adviser to Burger King when they acquired a Canadian doughnut company in a tax inversion scheme.
Weiss's background is in international mergers and acquisitions and Warren feels this does not inform him on the domestic protection issues undertaken by the Under Secretary of the Treasury for Domestic Finance.
It's clear that Warren cannot be trusted so perhaps Mr. Weiss is someone the people should support.
No. Weiss is a shithead too. He wants higher min wage, higher taxes on high income earners, etc etc. Liz doesnt like him because he actually worked somewhere, unlike her.Since the OP didn't provide a link: The Elizabeth Warren Veto - WSJ
Warren is opposing Weiss because he was an adviser to Burger King when they acquired a Canadian doughnut company in a tax inversion scheme.
Weiss's background is in international mergers and acquisitions and Warren feels this does not inform him on the domestic protection issues undertaken by the Under Secretary of the Treasury for Domestic Finance.
It's clear that Warren cannot be trusted so perhaps Mr. Weiss is someone the people should support.
I'm not surprised that Weiss worked somewhere and Warren hasn't. He has a Jewish name and obviously worked for his money. That is a novel idea for some folks. I wouldn't be so quick to call him the sh word. If it were not for wealthy business men like Mr. Weiss, many Americans would not have jobs. So there is that too, Rabbi.
Nope. You have ipse dixit.
Pogo, it's obvious you're delusional when it comes to your GF Lizzy Cheekbones.
She can tell you ANYTHING and you'd believe it.
It's obvious only one of us cares about the factual.
Guess which one of us doesn't declare absolutes that he can't prove.
Can you give us the name of Lizzy Cheekbones Cherokee ancestor? Just one name
I can give you the names of all my ancestors going back to about 1450 and more if I had the inclination to go Florence and do some basic research
It's not my family, is it? That's why I have enough sense to not declare an absolute pulled out of my ass.
1450, that's pretty fuckin' extensive. If that research is anything like your Warren work I wouldn't trust that lineage more than about 1950.
Clearly, you don't know dick about anything so we're going to take your skeptical comments with a grain of salt the size of a small planet.
Unlike Lizzy Cheekbones, my history in the USA is a piece of cake. And again, I never invented a fictional narrative for myself in order to get myself into an Affirmative action slot.
I saw the manifest at Ellis Island for my grandfather Francis (not a Cherokee)
I have the list from Francis back to the first one of us down in a little town in the ankle of Italy in 1501. Prior to that we were in Florence. And again, none of them were Cherokee
I don't think there are any politicians who care whatsoever about the middle class. They ALL cater to the big bucks, leaving the middle class and working poor to take it on the chin. From the outside one can easily come to the conclusion that there is a concerted effort to ensure middle class and lower class people stay that way. Both parties have their hand in it. If this sounds like class warfare, get ready, its only just begun. People are going to start waking up and seeing it.
Nope. You have ipse dixit.
Pogo, it's obvious you're delusional when it comes to your GF Lizzy Cheekbones.
She can tell you ANYTHING and you'd believe it.
It's obvious only one of us cares about the factual.
Guess which one of us doesn't declare absolutes that he can't prove.
Can you give us the name of Lizzy Cheekbones Cherokee ancestor? Just one name
I can give you the names of all my ancestors going back to about 1450 and more if I had the inclination to go Florence and do some basic research
It's not my family, is it? That's why I have enough sense to not declare an absolute pulled out of my ass.
1450, that's pretty fuckin' extensive. If that research is anything like your Warren work I wouldn't trust that lineage more than about 1950.
Clearly, you don't know dick about anything so we're going to take your skeptical comments with a grain of salt the size of a small planet.
Unlike Lizzy Cheekbones, my history in the USA is a piece of cake. And again, I never invented a fictional narrative for myself in order to get myself into an Affirmative action slot.
I saw the manifest at Ellis Island for my grandfather Francis (not a Cherokee)
I have the list from Francis back to the first one of us down in a little town in the ankle of Italy in 1501. Prior to that we were in Florence. And again, none of them were Cherokee
Pogo, it's obvious you're delusional when it comes to your GF Lizzy Cheekbones.
She can tell you ANYTHING and you'd believe it.
It's obvious only one of us cares about the factual.
Guess which one of us doesn't declare absolutes that he can't prove.
Can you give us the name of Lizzy Cheekbones Cherokee ancestor? Just one name
I can give you the names of all my ancestors going back to about 1450 and more if I had the inclination to go Florence and do some basic research
It's not my family, is it? That's why I have enough sense to not declare an absolute pulled out of my ass.
1450, that's pretty fuckin' extensive. If that research is anything like your Warren work I wouldn't trust that lineage more than about 1950.
Clearly, you don't know dick about anything so we're going to take your skeptical comments with a grain of salt the size of a small planet.
Unlike Lizzy Cheekbones, my history in the USA is a piece of cake. And again, I never invented a fictional narrative for myself in order to get myself into an Affirmative action slot.
I saw the manifest at Ellis Island for my grandfather Francis (not a Cherokee)
I have the list from Francis back to the first one of us down in a little town in the ankle of Italy in 1501. Prior to that we were in Florence. And again, none of them were Cherokee
Maybe you should just worry about your own life and cease to obsess over the lives of others.
Pogo, it's obvious you're delusional when it comes to your GF Lizzy Cheekbones.
She can tell you ANYTHING and you'd believe it.
It's obvious only one of us cares about the factual.
Guess which one of us doesn't declare absolutes that he can't prove.
Can you give us the name of Lizzy Cheekbones Cherokee ancestor? Just one name
I can give you the names of all my ancestors going back to about 1450 and more if I had the inclination to go Florence and do some basic research
It's not my family, is it? That's why I have enough sense to not declare an absolute pulled out of my ass.
1450, that's pretty fuckin' extensive. If that research is anything like your Warren work I wouldn't trust that lineage more than about 1950.
Clearly, you don't know dick about anything so we're going to take your skeptical comments with a grain of salt the size of a small planet.
When you make a claim you assume the burden of proof. Period.
I don't make the laws of Logic. I just enforce 'em. Tell it to the judge.
Unlike Lizzy Cheekbones, my history in the USA is a piece of cake. And again, I never invented a fictional narrative for myself in order to get myself into an Affirmative action slot.
Nor did Warren. The one time we know of that she had the opportunity to do so, at Rutgers, she declined to do so.
But here again, if you're stating a positive that this DID happen, then you assume the responsibility of documenting it.
Must be great having no responsibilities. Just make it up, plunk it on the internets, and it's a true story.
I saw the manifest at Ellis Island for my grandfather Francis (not a Cherokee)
I have the list from Francis back to the first one of us down in a little town in the ankle of Italy in 1501. Prior to that we were in Florence. And again, none of them were Cherokee
Good work, detective. But nobody declared you have Cherokee ancestry, did they? Your job is to do a similar trace for Elizabeth Warren, so that your absolute has something behind it besides "I said so".
