(Please welcome John Anderson, author of Follow The Money: How George W. Bush and the Texas Republicans Hog-Tied America — jh)
Earlier this morning, Paul Krugman delivered what Scott Horton (“No Comment”) afterwards correctly termed “a devastating judgment” on the Obama administration’s emerging economic policies. Wrote Krugman:
This administration, elected on the promise of change, has already managed, in an astonishingly short time, to create the impression that it’s owned by the wheeler-dealers. And that leaves it with no ability to counter crude populism.
Worse, the feeling is fast growing that this is no mere “impression,” but a reality of sorts. That, under the swami-like (or is Wizard of Oz-like?) influence of former Goldman Sachs chair-cum Clinton administration Secretary of the Treasury-cum former Citigroup vice chair Robert Rubin, the administration has effectively abandoned its own principles for the status quo demanded by a Wall Street elite.
On the economic stage, Rubin’s influence seems omnipresent: Not only Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, but also senior economic advisor and former Clinton Treasury Secretary Larry Summers are both longtime Rubin protégés. But for Summer’s notoriously arrogant, heavy-handed—failed—presidency of Harvard, he rather than Geithner would almost certainly be Treasury Secretary now. It’s worth pondering that some among his fellow Harvard Fellows—the university’s trustees—still haven’t forgiven Rubin for having stiffed them with Summers in the first place.
Given his tempestuous Harvard adventure, Summers, the current administration seems to have concluded, wasn’t sufficiently presentable to be wheeled out as the front man for their economic policy. And so it fell to Geithner, who, in his own way, appears even less presentable, so seemingly weak is he in public. Never was there a time when Treasury needed—nay, demanded—to be seen as trustworthy. Yet, Geithner has already—and quickly—established a reputation for evasion, not to say prevarication.
Given the administration’s—and, particularly, Treasury’s—obvious mishandling of the AIG “retention” bonus situation, you have to wonder how much longer Geithner can last. To remove him now would make President Obama himself appear weak. To leave him in office, however, is an equally unappealing choice. As Krugman keeps reminding us, the administration has done little more than muddle along with its economic policies. Again and again, it’s the old story: Too little, too late. And, meanwhile, faced with the firestorm over bonuses, the president’s political capital is sure to take a hit sooner or later. Obama is almost certainly going to need to come back to Congress and ask for more money for more stimulus. Will he get it? Can he get it with Geithner as his Treasury Secretary?
It should be remembered that Obama’s favorite president, Abraham Lincoln, did not always choose rightly. His own first Secretary of War, Simon Cameron, was corrupt and proved incompetent in high office. For all the current-day “Team of Rivals” talk, Lincoln quickly came to the realization that Cameron was no fit member of the team and dispatched him in short order to Moscow as minister to the court of the Czar. His replacement: The difficult, but talented Edwin Stanton.
In this country’s moment of greatest need, its most important cabinet officer surely was the Secretary of War. Yet Mr. Lincoln saw fit to sack Cameron. And he was right to do so. He did not have time to waste—nor did the nation.
It is an example that his admirer, Mr. Obama should consider following.
Mr. Obama might also want to consider following the lead of another great American president enmeshed in crisis—a Democratic president, at that, Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Roosevelt too misjudged some of his initial cabinet appointments, none perhaps more so than the Republican industrialist William H. Woodin as Secretary of the Treasury during the first months of the New Deal. Uneasy with Roosevelt and the New Deal, and ill as well, Woodin was gone in less than a year, replaced by Henry Morgenthau, Jr., who would serve successfully in that office for the next eleven years and into the presidency of Harry S. Truman.
Roosevelt, it should also be remembered, staffed the inner circle of his New Deal administration with bright, energetic, politically astute youngsters, the likes of Ben Cohen, Thomas “Tommy the Cork” Corcoran, Abe Fortas and Jim Rowe. Lyndon Johnson would later follow the same pattern, staffing his administration with the likes of Billy Don Moyers, our own Bill Moyers.
Tim Geithner might have proved a fine second-tier member of this administration—with a great deal of luck, he might yet prove a fine first-tier member—but time is ticking, and Geithner’s standing with the public and the Congress is lowering by the minute. He lacks presence, he lacks eloquence, he lacks gravitas.
Faced with the second great crisis of his administration, Franklin D. Roosevelt brushed aside the placeholder Harry H. Woodring (1936-1940) as his Secretary of War and turned to the Republican lawyer-statesman Henry L. Stimson, already 77 years old at the time. Steady, intelligent, experienced, Stimon proved a formidable war secretary. He did not lack gravitas. He did not lack wisdom.
Paul Volcker, the man who once tamed inflation, is 82 years-old, but already serving as chairman of the newly formed Economic Recovery Advisory Board. He surely is not a member of Bob Rubin’s magic circle. Larry Summers is reported to have done everything he could to isolate Volcker and keep his opinions out of the current White House’s economic loop. No wonder: Volcker is no one’s minion.
Volcker does not lack gravitas, he does not lack intelligence or experience. Perhaps if he were paired with the modern-day equivalents of Tommy the Cork, Ben Cohen, Jim Rowe and Bill Moyers, he might be what the doctor ordered.
President Obama could do worse than take the measure of Dr. New Deal.
Related posts:
- Liz Warren and Paul Volcker: “Break Up TBTF Banks,” but Geithner Says “No”
- Will Financial Reform Become Healthcare II: The Sequel?
- Peter DeFazio: Geithner and Summers Should Be Fired
- Reps. Lynch, Kaptur Rip Geithner on AIG Counter-Party Payments
- NY Post Floats JPMorgan Chase’s Dimon to Replace Treasury Sec. Geithner



Spotlight






Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake

Woooo — John Anderson writing a post. Boo yah!
Change alright,small change ,chumped $$ change,and we’re being nickled and dimed to death on Main Street while Wall Street is being sumptiously wined and dined on our tab.
Couldn’t have asked for a finer Boo Yah!
Happy to be here. Thank you, Christy. Thank you, Jane.
Geithner
Must
Go
Welcome to Firedoglake – glad you could join us today.
Thanks for this post. I hope Obama learns of it and follows the historical examples you set. There is one other former President that I wish Obama would look to (in terms of trust-busting and eradicating corruption) Teddy Roosevelt.
During the California energy crisis of 2000, then-Treasury Secretary Summers teamed with Alan Greenspan and Enron executive Kenneth Lay to lecture California Governor Gray Davis on the causes of the crisis, explaining that the problem was excessive government regulation.[8] Under the advice of Kenneth Lay, Summers urged Davis to relax California’s environmental standards in order to reassure the markets. [9]~~~~~~~Wikipedia
BTW, Phil Gramm’s wife Wendy was on the board of Enron.
Gramm went on to lobby for…UBS!
I have to say, I have been surprised by the tactical blunders. It’s as though the bull in the china shop approach that Rahm and Larry Summers tend to take has overwhelmed the more sophisticated and infinitely smarter for the long haul approach that folks like Axelrod have tended to advocate.
And the worst part of it is that I’m honestly not sure what Obama’s position is on any of this. It’s not good to seem like you are playing ideological and fact ping pong at a time when the nation needs a solid hand on the rudder. Whether or not it’s true, it doesn’t matter — if the appearance is there in the public’s mind, then it becomes true regardless.
And that does not help get things done right now.
I’d argue that this is not Obama abandoning his economic principles. He’s never shown any indication that he’s interested in wresting the control of our economy from the “masters of the universe”. He’s spoken out for NAFTA, he claims health care reform needs to be “uniquely American” (read: maintain private insurance industry) and that he’s strongly against nationalization of failed banks.
Obama may be doing a lot of things right in many areas, but even on the campaign trail it was obvious he has a small vision for our economy, one that maintains the status quo. Guess the sense of economic elitism rubbed off some while he was at Harvard, wouldn’t want to upset that kind of crowd.
Harvard? Upset Harvard? And all this time I thought he was trying not to upset the golden apple cart at Goldman Sachs.
There’s a lot of rotten apples at the bottom of that cart,imho.
More than you think which is why the public is being smoke screened over the bounes flap when there are bigger issues. As an example, the AIG-Goldman Sachs connection is perhaps the biggest scandal being over-looked by the media and our (supposedly diligent) Congressmen!
Hank Paulson and Tim Geithner came up with the “TARP” idea to bail out their buddies on Wall Street….
To disguise an obvious conflict-of-interest, Hank Paulson and his cronies in particular, came up with the idea of using AIG as the “conduit” for $billions ultimately destined for – among others – Goldman Sachs !!
In brief, Hank Paulson – ex-CEO of Goldman Sachs and with huge personal stock-holdings in the latter -”gave” his old firm GS at least $25 billion directly after suggesting GS transform itself into a bank-holding company. Then, GS collected indirectly via AIG another $15 billion or so; for a total of $40 billion from us taxpayers.
Now, here is the real bottom line of this scandal: Goldman Sachs will not have to reimburse the taxpayers the money GS received from AIG. Why? GS will claim that this was – supposedly – settlement of “CDS” counter-trade contracts.
I suspect that part of this is that Obama now feels himself obliged to support his treasury secretary, to give him a chance. But for the life of me I do not understand why he thought (thinks?) that Bob Rubin is the Font of All Economic Wisdom in this country.
Quite apart from NAFTA and, now, Citigroup, Rubin was the front man for the Clinton administration playing footsie with the likes of truly bad guys like Phil Gramm on the odious “deregulation.” Now, THAT is what REALLY got us where we are.
If Gramm & Co., with an assist from Rubin, Summers & Co., hadn’t torn down the edifices of the New Deal, this mess could not possibly have happened.
There are so many smart liberal Dem economists Obama could have called upon–and didn’t. That’s what I really find mystifying.
Well, it’s plain to everyone that the big banks should be busted and the crooks sent to jail. I hope President Obama dumps the banksters and takes on Volker or Stiglitz, jeez, anyone but Paulson, Gaithner, and Summers. Can any money be retrieved from offshore?
Well, let us not forget Mr. Liddy’s own, personal history.
His big break into the ranks of the Fortune 500 came via one Donald Rumsfeld, the then-CEO of Searle, the old pharmaceutical company. It was Big Don who made Big Ed the company CFO.
Later, it was one Hank Paulson who put Liddy on the board of . . . . Goldman.
And, the same Hank Paulson who named Liddy CEO of . . . AIG.
You get the picture.
I couldn’t agree more Mr. Anderson. This rats nest must be taken down once and for all. The only question that remains, is what force on earth will accomplish that task and free all from this treason against the American tax payer?
Yeah, the picture of systematic robbery. The same names popping up just like the names in the PNAC serving the military-industrial complex. I wonder where the other octopus tentacles are.
And I as well. Why is this not the biggest-tent, y’all-come-and-bring-your-wisdom-with-you endeavor of modern times? I don’t get it.
Folks here know I’m impatient with relentless hammering on Obama, but even Obama apologists are running out of material.
Replacing Geithner and, preferably, Summers, two leave Wall Street Alone town criers, would require not only new staff. It would require taking a new course, led by those able to bring it about rather than point at vectors on a map. Obama is, in effect, betting his presidency on his ability to do that, or to stand, Bush-like, and “stay the course”.
This morning, on an EW thread, I suggested that Geithner and Summers might already be past their sell-by dates and took a bit of heat for it. As an alternative to Volcker for TreasSec, I suggested Paul O’Neill. At “only” 73 which, IIRC, is the same age as Leon Panetta. Also unlike Volcker, who spent most of his career in the government except for 5 or so years early on in banking, O’Neill has experience in the “real” economy where he was a very successful CEO of Alcoa for about 12 years. Plus there’s no doubt he’s got the guts to call bullshit whenever he sees it. Even when he sees it coming from decades-long personal friends like Cheney and Rumsfeld.
bedrock!
Shutting down the monster companies is not something that has ever been done before. Doing so with the least amount of disruption ain’t goin to be easy especially without the necessary laws in place.
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress&…..c-example/
Would anyone doubt that the Clinton/Bush legacy of Rubin/Summers/Greenspan created a pretty crappy “talent pool” from which to choose and given Obama’s proclivity for keeping potential and actual crtics in close, the real test for me is what is Obama going to do over the next six months, not what Geithner or Summers are (is) going to do. When you look at how AIG was “run” by Cassano, etc., it would seem reasonable to give Obama a six month to one year period to get something done and ignore that he had to go with Summers at the start. I wait to see if Summers et al can be turned into figureheads, like Obama is doing with the Clintons at SOS.
AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen John Anderson and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
Regardless of Lincoln’s or any other President’s experience, it’s Obama’s learning curve and the recognition of jest where the political power of the Presidency resides that will determine whether or not he and we survive this mess.
Obama is not yet bubbled or bunkered so he has seen just where his political power base is and it is not in the private sector institutions not is it in the status quo of the elected Democratic Party. His power base is in a broad, populist even non-ideological populis and the experience of the last 3 months has taught us all that the dogma’s and institutions he inherited from the not so quiet past are inadequate for the dangerously stormy present.
So, fire Geithner AND Summers, put Krugman in Summer’s spot and Steiglitz in as Sec. of Treasury. That will, of course, require Obama to cast off the imaginary cloak of “bipartisanship” or “new Democrat” and follow the people into a progressive future but it will save the country and the Western World from economic and political disaster.
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, THIS SHIT HAS GONE ON LONG ENOUGH!!
Kissinger and crew…(in the Nixon library there is some stuff about Kissinger approving Nixon..barely)..There was a little story during Obama’s campaign that he may have made a little visit over to the Bilderberger meeting to get evaluated..it’s out there.
Obama’s choice of Emanuel was red flag number one.
Seems that once you get “elected” or “appointed”.. ha ha..the same old cronies come out of the woodwork…never fails…next rotation it will be Jeb.
Sickening and disheartening.
Well, that is a thought. He’s experienced and a decent human being. I much admire him for standing up to Cheney and Bush; and I greatly admire him for pulling back the curtain and telling his story to Ron Suskind.
But he’s a moderate conservative. I’m not sure that’s what we need here.
But: Maybe.
In reply to goldstandard @11
Source: MarketWatch
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — Goldman Sachs Chief Financial officer David Viniar said Friday that the firm rejected overtures from American International Group to settle trades with the troubled insurer at a discount, instead holding the firm to the letter of its contracts.
“We don’t think we did anything wrong. We had commercial terms. It is our responsibility to our shareholders to make sure that we are protecting ourselves. That’s why we enter into these contracts. That’s why we have terms in the first place, to make sure that we are protected,” Viniar said.
When the CFO was asked if Goldman felt any guilt about its possible contribution to AIG’s collapse, Viniar said, “All we did was call for what was due to us under the contracts. So you know, I don’t think there’s any guilt whatsoever.”
Read more: http://www.marketwatch.com/new…..ed-…
Surely Obama is intelligent enough to have made better choices himself. I find it hard to believe that he would just choose all of these people…but, maybe he did.
If Geithner and Summers had any decency about them, they would have resigned by now and Obama would have had a chance to repeat his mistakes. There is support, and there is blind loyalty. It was the latter that was displayed on Leno. The problem is, that it’s the country and the common people who are paying the piper for this unholy marriage of money grubbers and politicians. And there is something about a learning curve being waylaid by stuborness.
I hear very little scuttlebutt anywhere about the Chicago Mercantile Exchange when discussing the financial meltdown[read HEIST].
Quite intriguing because Goldman is a BIG player there-that’s also where Rahm accumulated his wealth,too.
Now,a little off topic, but the Pritzker family of Chicago benefitted for a $1 billion infusion of cash by Goldman a couple of years ago.Goldman now has a seat on the Hyatt Board.So does Rob Walton[Madrone Capital.].He and Goldman went in it together.
Now,Obama wanted Penny Pritzker for Secretary of Commerce,remember?
The Pritzkers own huge real estate holdings in Chi-town,btw.She demurred,incidentally.
Here’s a few links:
[PDF] CME and Goldman Sachs Partner to Conduct Economic Derivatives Auctions File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – View as HTML
framework that Goldman Sachs has been applying successfully in derivatives markets … owned subsidiary of Chicago Mercantile Exchange Holdings Inc. NYSE, …
files.shareholder.com/downloads/CME/0×0×114787/796adfa1-01de-41d1-8f26-87c2c47cba29/CME_News_2005_6_28_General.pdf – Similar pages
Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc.: Private Company Information … Suskind, the former head of metals trading for Goldman Sachs, is the chairman of the audit committee at NYMEX.
Chicago Mercantile Exchange Announces …
investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=3564772 – 53k – Cached – Similar pages
Dubai Mercantile Exchange Contracts Migrate to CME Group Platform … Feb 1, 2009 … firms such as Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan, Vitol, Shell, … The Globe logo, CME, Chicago Mercantile Exchange, CME Group, …
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressR…..RN20090201 – 60k – Cached – Similar pages
[links repaired by admin]
Well, on the face of it, these were the most “experienced people.” Rubin was wildly–if wrongly–hailed as the economic genius of the Clinton era. Geithner had the supposed advantage that he didn’t need a “learning curve,” having been president of the NY Fed. He was, moreover, NOT Larry Summers. Larry Summers, well, is Larry Summers. He has all the bona fides imaginable. But, then, so did Benno Schmidt back in the day when he was president of Yale University. And Benno too was an utter disaster.
Purported reputations aside, the collective negatives of this crowd are coming out in aces and spades.
I think the criticism here of Obama is a bit shrill.
Le mieux est l’ennemi du bien.
The more I read about the “big sxxx pile” as Atrios at Echelon calls it, the more I wonder just how many people in the financial world understand the complicated and convoluted deals that all these companies made. And who can solve it. Are they many or few? People, like Krugman, who are saying what the problems are might identify the problem but might not have the “insider” or operational knowledge to do the job.
To take that even further, who in the economics/financial world has the knowhow to unravel all this mess? If they know how it works, they work for the very companies that caused it and have obvious biases. If they don’t, they are more political/critics of what is happening, but may not have the knowledge to do the job.
Is this a problem?
Considering that the beneficiaries of this rip-off are well entrenched and have friends in high places, how difficult (and how dangerous) would it be for President Obama to totally upend their universe by nationalizing the Fed and the Big Banks?
Toutes nouveaux sont beaux…or something like that too..:)
Je crois que cette fois ici,plus ca change,plus c’est la meme chose,ne c’est pas?
And you could be right. Any number of highly intelligent, utterly decent-minded friends of mine say the same.
I hope they’re all right.
And, no, I have not, by any means, lost my admiration for Obama. I supported him in the primaries, I voted for him with immense enthusiasm. I think he’s not only eloquent, but extremely intelligent.
But that does not mean that I am not worried.
That is exactly what I think.
If Geithner does decide he needs more time with his family, or if it is decided for him, the last thing Obama would need is a dragged out confirmation battle. This is a concern regarding O’Neill, since some of the Bushbots in the Senate may try to filibuster it or put it on permanent hold. Such a situation with Volcker is highly unlikely.
You know,I think if a financial instrument is too complicated to reconcile or remedy,it should’t exist in the first place.
Would ANYONE realistically buy ANYTHING that cannot be repaired,or at least be well enough designed to troubleshoot? At THESE prices?
Well, I guess that’s the Chinese imported economy for you-made to sell, not to last,or even capable of repair.
The everyman for himself premise underlying capitalism, that has emerged since Ronnie Raygun, is fundamentally flawed. The practioners of the “theories”, the economists, are trying to patch together the fatally flawed system but all the kings horses and all the kings men will not be able to put humpty back together again.
Why Geithner and Summers? I remember reading a year ago that much of Obama’s early money was Wall Street related. Perhaps he planned on changing much of what the Bush administration was doing, but with only modest economic changes. I also recall hearing long ago Obama was influenced by Chicago economics- yecchh.
But lets face it- there had to be tremendous pressure brought to bear on Obama to choose folks comfortable with the status quo- certain Democratic members of congress, fundraisers, and the list could be expanded.
The only hope is that enough obvious failure will engender a true change. And people howling over the crap, pushing for fraud investigations. I do hope that if enough pressure is brought to bear, the administration’s responses will improve. Obama can truthfully say his hand was forced. But I hope that the combination of Wall Street pressure and Obama’s own philosophy are not too much to prevent moving forward. The combination has resulted in a barrage of policies that stink to high heaven.
Indeed, this is not completely different than the legal arena, where pressure to continue/at least not expose Bush’s policies has to be extreme at DOJ. Hopefully a series of lousy but not quite illegal responses will pull them along to a semi sane policy, forced by the courts.
It’s all about the fraud. Hell, most of AIG is probably based on fraud, why bail it out? When we hear leaders of Congress talking fraud investigationss of the banks, then we’ll know progress is being made. Until then, we’re probably screwed.
John,
I have concerns about Obama’s economic team
and have expressed them here.
I do not believe your criticism of Obama
is too shrill.
But, I believe some are going too early and too far
in their lambasting of Obama.
It’s worth remembering that FDR was widely considered a “conservative” Democrat when elected. There was a learning curve there, for the president, and for the nation.
No one could have predicted the New Deal.
Intelligence, political skill–and economic imperatives–won out.
agreed
This brings to mind James Douglass’ recent book JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters. Douglass builds a pretty compelling case that Kennedy was done in by a conspiracy of elements of the national security establishment who regarded his attempts to defuse the tensions of the Cold War via openings to Khrushchev and Castro as treasonous.
I guess Obama chose the people he chose, because he believed that they were the one’s who knew where the bodies were buried; thus providing the best chance of ferreting out the weasels, i.e., he chose the fox to clean up the hen house…of weasels..but the fox abides..
Dear John Anderson,
I voted for you in the 1980 presidential election. ;)
Minnesotachuck – that was exactly what i had in mind. Matt Taibbi’s new article in RollingStone calls this a power struggle/coup – the banksters are not going quietly. The banksters and all the rest of the shadow government. (edited)
Ha! I didn’t. But I do still have a couple of those John Anderson for President buttons. And, somewhere, I have a copy of the Times editorial, “Why Not John Anderson?”
Why not indeed?
And young Mr. Taibbi is probably not far off the mark either.
absolument
All this bien français talk has led me to open a bottle of le vrai Chablis. Santé!
skaal!
slainte!
Here’s a probably naive question, but do you think the Obama administration is listening and maybe even factoring in the critiques of the outer tier of experts, e.g., Krugman, Stiglitz et al?
l’chaim!
dunno, would hope, but nothing more than a hope
More good news, just in from the NY Times:
Merrill Lynch’s $3.6 billion bonus pool has been among the most controversial payouts on Wall Street. But most of those bonuses, which included some 700 awards of over $1 million, would not be affected by a new bonus tax being considered in Congress.
The tax, which passed in the House on Thursday, would affect only bonuses paid during 2009. Typically, Merrill’s bonuses are paid in January, along with the rest of Wall Street’s. But the investment bank pushed $2.5 billion of the bonuses out the door in December in advance of its merger with Bank of America.
good question – i hope so!
oh, frabjous day!
The thing that happens to me re: Obama, is that I hear him speak and I think, “Oh, he’s got it together”….”he makes sense…”..then something happens like choosing Rahm Emanuel…or pretending he didn’t know about the bonuses (he must have, because it was reported on CNN in January)..or keeping Gates on…and getting ready to send a bunch of troops to Afghanistan…but, then I hear about the victory garden and the White House, and I get all warm and fuzzy again…then Bam…something else happens…
Really..I’m trying to have some faith in the guy, but dang…
I dunno. I’ve started watching veg shows on the teevee, because I can’t stand the news anymore. The Repukes are gathering together with the help of the media, and I just can’t stand it anymore.
Anyone want another drink???
**quaffing great quaffs**
Just read that McCain is telling everyone to leave Geithner alone and let him succeed. Thought you should know.
Also this excerpt from HuffPost:
Booyah, ma’am. Couldn’t agree more!
calloo, callay
we chortle in our joy
NOT!
Put it this way: I don’t have cable news on, and won’t until Olbermann and Rachel come my way.
The Brahms Second Piano Concerto (Pollini, for those who care about such things) is on in the background, and there is, yes, there is, a glass of Chablis in my other hand. And thank god for them–both!
Hahahaha! :P
This is turning into quite a party – or we are weeping into our beer.
Snowe is no dope. She’s also a pretty decent senator. She, I can understand the Mainers electing. It’s the other one–Collins–I can’t stand.
So white wine goes with Brahms? Excellent thing to know! I am actually listening to a Saint-Saens piano concerto (number 2, I think) and I’m thinking of doing my lying on the floor, opening the spigot on a box of cheap wine, and letting it rip thing.
It’s Friday Night!!! Partay!
I think I may have opened the door to god knows what!
It takes very little to get us going. Sorry! *g*
It’s the least we can do – very patriotic, too.
Here John..have some on me:
http://www.billaud-simon.com/Chablis.jpg
***pause while we all take another sip***
Could Robert Reich fit in here? Or is he already here?
So it all comes down to this: Does Obama have what it takes? Is he willing to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, and by opposing, end them? Will he do the right thing(s)? And who decides what those things are? That is the Really Big Question, seems to me.
I am being summoned à table.
Do continue the conversation in my absence.
It was a pleasure–as always, Pups!
Till next time.
Yr. Humble & Obedient & Etc. Svt. j
Our very great pleasure, sir. Bon appetit.
Maybe it would help if we did a petition drive and Jane took thousands to the White House – to show we have his back.
The pleasure was entirely ours.
Indeed. But being a fractious bunch, what does it really mean to have his back? I’m one of his defenders, and I’ll be damned if I know how to continue doing that.
What’s that old saying? Hold your friends close. But hold your enemies closer.
Sacre’ bleu…and not a molecule of merlot ANYWHERE dans la maison,on a vendredi,no less!Merde!!
Douglass was here last Saturday to run a 3/4 day peace activism workshop at a church no more than a couple of miles from where I live. He basically gave the same talk he did at a book-signing that is posted on YouTube. I went mainly for the opportunity of a first-hand assessment. His was the first full-length book I’ve read on JFK’s assassination and from what I can tell he breaks new ground in tracing how the evolution of Kennedy’s thinking while in office caused him to be seen as a threat.
but, but I thought Obama was suppose to be a populist
Heh. It doesn’t take much to get this bunch going.
chug chug chug chug!
:-)
This is like early in the Clinton Administration when Bill voted for Nafta.
We would have got the same with Daddy Bush. We would have got the same here with John McCain.