President Obama Takes on Big Banks: ‘If They Want a Fight, That’s a Fight I’m Willing to Have’
EmailJake Tapper and Sunlen Miller report:
Two days after the voters of Massachusetts sent a Republican to the Senate for the first time since 1972 – many of them fueled by populist anger at Washington, DC, and Wall Street – President Obama used fiery, populist rhetoric to introduce new regulations on the financial industry — almost daring the financial sector to take him on.
“Never again will the American taxpayer be held hostage by a bank that is ‘Too Big to Fail,”the president vowed, suggesting ways to limit the size and scope of financial institutions.
The president said he would work to change the current rules for financial institutions “in which hedge funds or private equity firms inside banks can place huge, risky bets that are subsidized by taxpayers and that could pose a conflict of interest.”
“We cannot accept a system in which shareholders make money on these operations if the bank wins, but taxpayers foot the bill if the bank loses,” he said.
Thus, the president said, he was proposing a new rule he was calling “the Volcker Rule, after this tall guy behind me,” he said, referring to the brobdingnagian former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, lurking to his right.
“Banks will no longer be allowed to own, invest or sponsor hedge funds, private equity funds or proprietary trading operations for their own profit unrelated to serving their customers,” the president said. “If financial firms want to trade for profit, that’s something they’re free to do. Indeed, doing so responsibly is a good thing for the markets and the economy. But these firms should not be allowed to run these hedge funds and private equities funds while running a bank backed by the American people.”
A second rule, the president said, would “prevent the further consolidation of our financial system” by applying the deposit cap in place since the mid-1990s to guard against too much risk being concentrated in a single bank to “wider forms of funding employed by large financial institutions in today’s economy.”
The president cast big banks in an unflattering light.
He said his resolve to enact financial regulatory reform is strengthened by Wall Street returning to old practices, fighting reforms, while there are “soaring profits and obscene bonuses at some of the very firms claiming that they can’t lend more to small businesses, they can’t keep credit card rates low, they can’t pay a fee to refund taxpayers for the bailout without passing on the cost to shareholders or customers — and that’s the claims they’re making.”
Decrying the “army” of Wall Street lobbyists challenging his proposals for financial regulatory reform, President Obama said “if those folks want a fight, it’s a fight I’m ready to have.”
The language matched that used by the President earlier this month – before the Massachusetts loss – when he told Democratic House members nervous about the health care plan hurting them in the November mid-term elections, “if Republicans want to campaign against what we’ve done by standing up for the status quo and for insurance companies over American families and businesses, that is a fight I want to have.”
The president began his remarks today by talking about the more than 7 million Americans who have lost their jobs in the past two years, suggesting that the job losses were the fault of Wall Street. “As we dig our way out of this deep hole, it’s important that we not lose sight of what led us into this mess in the first place,” he said. “This economic crisis began as a financial crisis, when banks and financial institutions took huge, reckless risks in pursuit of quick profits and massive bonuses.”
The president described the Troubled Asset Relief Program to stabilize Wall Street as a “rescue, undertaken by the previous administration” that he found “deeply offensive, but it was a necessary thing to do.”
He said that Wall Street continues to operate by the same rules that led to its near-collapse – ones that allow “firms to act contrary to the interests of customers, to conceal their exposure to debt through complex financial dealings, to benefit from taxpayer-insured deposits, while making speculative investments; and to take on risks so vast that they pose threats to the entire system.”
Thus, the president said he would close loopholes allowing “big financial firms to trade risky financial products like credit default swaps and other derivatives without oversight, to identify system-wide risks that could cause a meltdown, to strengthen capital and liquidity requirements to make the system more stable, and to ensure that the failure of any large firm does not take the entire economy down with it.”
The president stood in the Diplomatic Reception Room of the White House and was flanked by economic advisers including Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Dr. Christie Romer, chair of his Council of Economic Advisers; key Democratic congressional committee chairmen Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.; and former Bush administration Securities and Exchange Commission chairman William Donaldson,
–Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller
Mitt Romney's Full Speech at CPAC 2012 
Romney Makes His Case to Conservatives at CPAC
Obama bailed out the big banks so that they could be profitable again.
And now that they show a profit, they are the enemy?
Only if you’re a politician like Obama who is embarrassed that your party lost an easy race, and you need an enemy fast.
btw why did Obama force banks like Wells Fargo who didn’t want bailout money to take it anyway?
Can you spell c-o-n-t-r-o-l ?
Posted by: Joe White | January 21, 2010, 12:40 pm 12:40 pm
Just another assault on Capitalism by President Obama!
Posted by: James Danley | January 21, 2010, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
What we’re hearing (and, Jake, it would be the perfect follow-up) are the words of one George Schwartz Soros. When it comes to finances, Obama & Company will trumpet the Soros philosophy to the bitter end.
What Obama knows about finances and the Fed you could lose in a thimble. He’s Soros’ puppet and George hates the dollar.
Posted by: Dell | January 21, 2010, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm
two things:
1. obama is such a bumbling amateur that he can’t even keep his stories straight!! first, he’s been trying to take credit for rescuing the financial system even though bush is the one that put tarp in place. NOW obama, trying to hop on the populist train that is
actually headed straight at his left-wing policies, is doing
a 180 on his supposed success by saying “oh the previous administration did tarp, not me – I didn’t have a choice”.
2. apparently this is too difficult for the media to grasp but the anger in the country is NOT directed at wash., d.c., per se, rather AT OBAMA AND THE LEFT-WING DEMS! if it wasn’t, voters would be sending MORE democrat teammates to assist obama. instead they’re
voting the exact opposite of obama and left-wing dems.
iow obama cannot tap into this anger because IT’S DIRECTED AT HIM and left-wingers!!
Posted by: mike | January 21, 2010, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
Whatever legislation gets passed will be so watered down it will still be a win for Wall St.
This is a lame attempt to look like he is getting mad… we all know Wall St. is in Obamas pocket and he needs them to win a second term.
Posted by: more fail | January 21, 2010, 12:48 pm 12:48 pm
What a joke. The reason we got into this mess is the mortgage crisis. Why doesnt he stamp on his own party members, who wanted the rules for lending relaxed, and tell the real story as to why we got into this mess.
Your hatred of wall street will backfire. When wall street is doing well then the private sector does well, hence more jobs are created. That is basic econimics that Obama is failing to mention thinking everybody is so dumb they will beleive his SOROS propoganda.
Posted by: Louise | January 21, 2010, 1:03 pm 1:03 pm
I wonder if anybody in the private sector, incl wall street, will be going out of their way to get Obama a 2nd term as President. I’d be very surprised?
Posted by: Louise | January 21, 2010, 1:04 pm 1:04 pm
‘If They Want a Fight, That’s a Fight I’m Willing to Have’
He who fight and run away live to fight another day.
Can’t wait to see the new regulations that the banking industry has written.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | January 21, 2010, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm
Didn’t he say the same thing in the Mass election?
Posted by: another crisis, another photo-op | January 21, 2010, 1:09 pm 1:09 pm
OMG I’ve heard that before!
Posted by: Thinking | January 21, 2010, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm
“Bring ‘em on!”…..?
Posted by: twc | January 21, 2010, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm
Louise: I’m willing to bet that Obama does not run for a second term.
Posted by: Annie | January 21, 2010, 1:23 pm 1:23 pm
1.Take over auto industry…check
2.Try and take over health care….pending
3. Take over the banking industry…pending
Let’s see, what else do I need to do to socialize this country.
Posted by: Obama's Brain | January 21, 2010, 1:24 pm 1:24 pm
ANOTHER fight he’s willing to have?? well, I guess if Pelosi was standing next to me, I’d feel pretty confident about picking fights too! One point of that finger, and who knows what she can turn you into.
Posted by: cindy | January 21, 2010, 1:28 pm 1:28 pm
brobdingnagian? lurking? what?!?
Posted by: Me | January 21, 2010, 1:29 pm 1:29 pm
Dude stocks are down -208 will you shut up and quit talking.
Posted by: Obama's Brain | January 21, 2010, 1:32 pm 1:32 pm
OBAMA IS SUCH A SPINELESS LOSER! I HOPE SCOTT BROWN RUNS AGAINST HIM IN 2012!!
Posted by: kelley | January 21, 2010, 1:41 pm 1:41 pm
Supreme Court Overturns Campaign Spending Limits on Corporations, Unions
Corporations Allowed to Spend Freely to Campaign but Still Barred From Direct Contributions
OBAMA WILL DEFINITELY WIN THE 2012 ELECTION WITH THE HELP OF THE UNIONS. THE UNION WILL FLUSH MONEY TO HIM AND NO ONE CAN RESIST THAT HUGE DONATION LIKE HIS TV AD 24/7 ON 2008.
ACORN. SEIU. AMERICORP. …
UNCONTROLLABLE POWER OF UNIONS + BIGGER GOVERNMENT = THE END OF AMERICAN DREAM
SAD SAD SAD UPSET UPSET UPSET
Posted by: talk from sf | January 21, 2010, 1:41 pm 1:41 pm
Let me be clear
We’ve heard that BS before.
Big talk from a broken little president.
Posted by: ollie | January 21, 2010, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm
Someone please tell Obama’s six speechwriters to come up with some new meaningless slogans.
Sadly about 47% of voters still beieve this nonsense.
Posted by: kyle | January 21, 2010, 1:46 pm 1:46 pm
During the campaign it was “That’s a debate I’m willing to have”.
But he never would attend McCain’s townhall debates.
Palin is right–Watch out for Obama’s lip service.
Posted by: kandy | January 21, 2010, 1:49 pm 1:49 pm
His reputation is seriously bruised now that i’m interested to see how he actually survives from now on. The GOP did a great job of staying on message and not letting the WH get away with thier lying to the people (the lies from Soros). Nobody wants Gov running anything, and this administration and congress have proven to us just why its not going to work, they dont seem to know what they are doing.
Posted by: Louise | January 21, 2010, 1:51 pm 1:51 pm
Prove how serious you are Obama.
Tear up that blank check to Freddie and Fannie.
Posted by: ned | January 21, 2010, 1:52 pm 1:52 pm
Come on Mr President , how about some humility? Why such bellicose words? This is this your only available response, to yell/threaten our businesses?
And then be nice to the terrorists who want to kill us? Haven’t you learned anything from this election?
Posted by: jonny | January 21, 2010, 1:55 pm 1:55 pm
Obama has to create villains to make himself look better.
Right now Obama looks pretty bad.
Compared to those arrogant Chicago hacks running our country I think the banks look like saints.
Posted by: millie | January 21, 2010, 1:56 pm 1:56 pm
Dow Drops 200 on Obama Plan to Crack Down on Banks
(Obama in a tantrum like stance, huffing and puffing)
If I can’t have my health care then i will put us into another depression
Posted by: another crisis, another photo-op | January 21, 2010, 1:57 pm 1:57 pm
“A fight I’m willing to have”
Alnost as funny as “It’s time to rein in the excess and abuse”.
After a year of reckless spending and massive debt Obama is suddenly worried about excess?
The hypocrisy is staggering.
Posted by: fran | January 21, 2010, 2:08 pm 2:08 pm
Is it possible for people who dislike Obama’s policies to still agree that a reckless financial system is NOT IN THEIR BEST INTERESTS?
I mean you can hate Obama all you want, but why go after him for simply trying to restore 1999 regulations on the exact same banks that caused the financial crisis in the first palce?
Of course, I’m sure you would say that Obama caused the financial crisis. Nevermind.
Posted by: qwerty | January 21, 2010, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm
I mean you can hate Obama all you want, but why go after him for simply trying to restore 1999 regulations on the exact same banks that caused the financial crisis in the first palce?
What past law did Obama mention he wanted to reinstate?
Posted by: Orszag | January 21, 2010, 2:15 pm 2:15 pm
McCain-Feingold is dead now companies can fight back. So bring this fight on obammie. Things are getting better every day!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Sebenza | January 21, 2010, 2:22 pm 2:22 pm
Compare what Obama said today with the regulations that were in place in 1999 -before congress repealed them – and you will see a lot of similarities.
But I see most of the comments here prefer our banks gambling with our life savings, so I must be missing something.
Posted by: qwerty | January 21, 2010, 2:26 pm 2:26 pm
I’m as upset as the next person about the larger-than-life bonuses the banks are giving themselves. However, Obama is simply using them as an outlet to draw support back to the liberal side, and nothing more. His “anger” is the most transparent thing we’ve seen since he took office.
What we SHOULD be looking into more aggressively and what we SHOULD be more angered about is the fact that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are skating by without a flinch of remorse for THEIR role in the economic collapse. Where is the investigation there? Why are these “giants” not being held responsible for their actions? Where is the anger from Obama? The ranting about banks is legitimate, but until there is some concrete research and talk about the FMs, I would think Obama needs to “cool off” his phony attempt at anger.
Posted by: Shoe | January 21, 2010, 2:26 pm 2:26 pm
Is it possible for people who dislike Obama’s policies to still agree that a reckless financial system is NOT IN THEIR BEST INTERESTS?
I mean you can hate Obama all you want, but why go after him for simply trying to restore 1999 regulations on the exact same banks that caused the financial crisis in the first palce?
Posted by: qwerty |
Sure it’s possible. Some of the talk here is encouraging BUT Obama’s follow-through has been pitiful and the banks are extremely powerful. So if it’s all the same to you I will withhold my praise until he actually wins the fight.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | January 21, 2010, 2:28 pm 2:28 pm
I’m as upset as the next person about the larger-than-life bonuses the banks are giving themselves.
I have a choice not to give my money to a bank. Not so with Fannie and Freddie. Unmentioned of course…
Posted by: $ Bags | January 21, 2010, 2:31 pm 2:31 pm
The great orator needs to mix it up a bit
‘If They Want a Fight, That’s a Fight I’m Willing to Have’
Oooooh, I bet the banks are almost as scared as the majority of the country who was against his health care albatross when he used the exact same rhetoric. But, but, he’s so smart!!! Dude needs to get a clue.
Posted by: Clive | January 21, 2010, 2:32 pm 2:32 pm
“Sure it’s possible. Some of the talk here is encouraging BUT Obama’s follow-through has been pitiful and the banks are extremely powerful. So if it’s all the same to you I will withhold my praise until he actually wins the fight.”
Hey I agree with you, I haven’t seen much follow through either. But Obama is President and when our government produces a policy that would benefit the average american, I can’t see why people wouldn’t support it, despite their obvious dislike for him personally.
Posted by: qwerty | January 21, 2010, 2:32 pm 2:32 pm
I swear is there not anyone this man will not try and demonize. He has done it to the auto industry he has done it to doctors and insurance companies and the banks. But he gives rights to KSM and the undwear bomber let’s don’t upset the terrorist.
Posted by: 'Un-American' | January 21, 2010, 2:35 pm 2:35 pm
I could care less what these “fat cat” bankers get paid (if they get paid more – or less – will our lives be changed?).
But I do hope that those who contributed to get this populist clown elected will get their bonuses slashed (Wall Street contributed more to Obama than to McCain). Hope you boys learned your lesson.
What about all the risk taking by those “fat cats” at Fannie and Freddie? Do they not bear any responsibility? What about Obama campaign advisor Franklin Raines who raked in $90 MILLION from Fannie Mae?
Another day, more hypocrisy, more lies.
Posted by: tjp612 | January 21, 2010, 2:44 pm 2:44 pm
obummer.
Posted by: obummerguy | January 21, 2010, 2:45 pm 2:45 pm
What about all the risk taking by those “fat cats” at Fannie and Freddie? Do they not bear any responsibility? What about Obama campaign advisor Franklin Raines who raked in $90 MILLION from Fannie Mae?
Orszag said the F’s would be a success. Barry listened, you paid.
Posted by: CRA | January 21, 2010, 2:48 pm 2:48 pm
Re: “the banks.”
You don’t get what’s going on. During the depression FDR passed something called the Glass Steagall Act which separated banks from investment firms. That way if the banks lost money the owners could not just pass it off the bad debt to their investors.
Well, Bil Clinton on advice from Rubin and Greenspan, overturned Glass Steagall. So the banks got their bad home loans and sold them to their investment brokerages, which, among other things has destroyed the financial industry. Under Bush the financial industry went wild.
Now Obama has to fix it by brining back Glass Steagall so we can have our old financial system back. You know, the one that made us the richest country in the world. We have to separate banks from investment firms. The same company should not own both.
The banks will fight this, but too bad.
Posted by: Bubbles | January 21, 2010, 2:54 pm 2:54 pm
Bubbles -
It appears most of us can’t recall last year, let alone 1999. But, at least the Mainstream media is not going to help us out by actually explaining anything.
Posted by: qwerty | January 21, 2010, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm
Mr. President, nice words. But,you have been woefully short on actual legislative leadership. Not long ago you were a U.S. Senator. Surely, you appreciate the level of dysfunctional laziness and self-interest that exists there. I admire your expressed motives. But, you have a maddening habit of seeking the least controversial middle ground on tough issues. There are times when you drive to the basket that you simply must run over people! Finally, you may be able to multi-task, but Congress, the people, and especially, the media cannot. Keep it simple. Stay on message.
Posted by: B. Bear | January 21, 2010, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm
Pelosi announces she can’t pass the Senate bill.
Some House Dems call for extension of the Bush tax cuts.
Amazing what one little ol’ election can do.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | January 21, 2010, 2:58 pm 2:58 pm
Re: “I could care less what these “fat cat” bankers get paid (if they get paid more – or less – will our lives be changed?).”
Yes. Remeber the TARP bailouts funded by the taxpayers? The banks are using TARP tax payer money to give themselves million dollar bonuses. They were suppsosed to use the TARP money to start lending to small businesses.
The banks are stealing billions in taxpayer dollars and it needs to stop.
Posted by: Bubbles | January 21, 2010, 3:00 pm 3:00 pm
Come out and read a speech.
Obama’s solution to everything.
That and offer a bribe.
Posted by: larry | January 21, 2010, 3:02 pm 3:02 pm
Re: “WAKE UP AMERICA”
We are awake and we don’t want the GOP back in power. They have destroyed our economy. Brown won in Massachusetts because Democrats stayed home. Obama is a Democrat, not a republican and he should start acting like one.
Posted by: Bubbles | January 21, 2010, 3:02 pm 3:02 pm
Galss-Steagall should be renewed, but the problem won’t be solved until Fannie and Freddie are overhauled, and Barney and Barry will never allow that.
For every dollar banks have, they lend ten. If Obama hits the banks up for $100 billion, that’s a trillion dollars in loans that won’t be made.
And the dope wonders why nobody is hiring.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | January 21, 2010, 3:03 pm 3:03 pm
What is venal here about Obama’s latest “fight”:
A. He borrowed legitimacy by including Volcker, but promptly relegated the man to a dusty closet all year long, while Ben, Geithner and Summers had their way. This bold notion has been available to Obama this whole year, but he let the “too big to fail” scenario metastasize.
B. Now he pulls out the man like a cardboard cutout?! Now?! Hmmm, interesting timing, why now? Either Obama always knew this was the right plan and ignored it to serve his moneyed special interests, OR he doesn’t know or care what is right and is just pulling it out now as the latest macho-man diversion. Both possibilities are disgusting, and beneath the stature we must demand from a President of the United States.
Funny aside: Pelosi, of all people, was quoted today from a story saying she can’t deliver the health care vote: “We’re not in a big rush. Pause, reflect.”
If only they had done that in April and May on all their schemes! If only Obama could do that now.
Posted by: Carol | January 21, 2010, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm
re: “Fannie and Freddie are overhauled”
Fannie and Freddie would fall under Glass Steagall. Why is the right wing so stuck on Fannie and Freddie? Together, they made 16% of the bad loans. Countrywide in Orange County, CA made more. But the issue isn’t just bad loans. It’s what the banks did with the bad loans. They bundled them and sold them to investors.
Remember the S&L crisis? That mess was confined to the Savings and Loan industry (S&L) because Glass Steagall was still in effect. It didn’t wreck the whole financial industry.
We need to bring back Glass Steagall.
Posted by: Bubbles | January 21, 2010, 3:11 pm 3:11 pm
re: “For every dollar banks have, they lend ten. If Obama hits the banks up for $100 billion, that’s a trillion dollars in loans that won’t be made.”
They aren’t lending at all anyway. The banks got billions in TARP money and they were suppsosed to use it to lend to small business, not to give themselves huge bonuses. If some guy on welfare took his welfare check and went on a fancy vacation everyone would have a fit. But if the banks use the taxpayer’s bailout money (welfare) and go on a fancy vacation, people defend them. It makes no sense.
The banks need to pay back the TARP money and they need to start lending again.
Posted by: Bubbles | January 21, 2010, 3:16 pm 3:16 pm
Fannie and Freddie would fall under Glass Steagall. Why is the right wing so stuck on Fannie and Freddie?
$400 billion reasons…
Posted by: Easy $ | January 21, 2010, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm
re: “$400 billion reasons…”
And what about the trillions the banks have lost? Yes, trillions.
Posted by: Bubbles | January 21, 2010, 3:20 pm 3:20 pm
And what about the trillions the banks have lost? Yes, trillions.
That makes it OK. Yeah, that’s the ticket
Posted by: Krugman | January 21, 2010, 3:28 pm 3:28 pm
This what wrong with Washington, It’s always Reactive instead of Proactive. A little to late, We the people of Massachusetts have had it with Washington as it is. The Republicans that are in office now also need to find new careers, we need a complete overhaul of all congress and the Senate. They are there for the people that elected them, not the BIg interest groups, and Big Business. Its about time we make change. So good bye to all there now, we will replace you the next two elections, Independents are now making the difference
Posted by: Michael Jordan | January 21, 2010, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm
The Independent vote in Massachusetts has sent a message to all in Congress and the Senate. That message is Get Your Resume updated, we don’t want you anymore. We need all new blood there, men and Women who will do as they were elected for, to listen to the people and not big industry, If that watered down Healthcare bill had a strong public option then Coakley would have been elected. It was worthless benefitted the Insurance industry, which the Democrats caved into so good-bye. Same thing with the banking industry. The past 14 yrs the Senate and Congress let you do just about what ever you wanted, The rug came out from under you, and what did you do. You Conned the Washington elite to bail you out. No More good bye to all in office at this time, you will be replaced in the next two elections.
Posted by: mpjredsox | January 21, 2010, 4:21 pm 4:21 pm
Who is responsible for the job lost in America?
Let call it as it is and has been during the years of the Bush Admin., BIG OIL COMPANIES, we got fooled by the Oil Companies when oil reached $3.98 a gallon, small businesses failed, big companies had to layoff to survive for stockholders and the snowball began.
Where are we now? In the same place as we are still getting fooled by the Oil Companies. Why? Bush is for Big Oil, Cheney is for Big Oil, and the Elite Billionaires are for Big Oil.
3. Health Care: This is a story I relate to this issue which express the greed of Drug Companies and the Insurance Industry.
A Holy Man was having a conversation with God on day and he said, “God I would like to know what Heaven and Hell is like?”
The Lord led the Holy Man to two doors. He opened one of the doors and the Holy Man looked in..
In the middle of the room was a large round table, in the middle of the table was a large pot of stew, which smell so delicious that it made the Holy Man’s mouth water.
The peoples sitting around the table was thin and sickly. They seemed to be famished and sickly. They were holding a long spoon that was strapped to their arm, and each found it possible to reach the pot and get a large spoon full, but because the spoon was so long it was impossible to get it to their mouths.
The holy man shuttered at the misery and suffering.
The Lord said you have seen Hell. They went to the other door and looked in, it was exactly like the first.
The people were equipped with the same strapped spoon with the large pot of stew in the middle of the table, but here all the people were well nourished and laughing, talking and health.
The Holy Man said I don’t understand! The lord said it is simple, it took only one skill.
YOU SEE THEY HAVE LEARNED TO FEED EACH OTHER, THE GREEDY ONLY THINK OF THEMSELVES.
QUESTION IS WHICH DOOR DOES THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA BELONG
Posted by: NEWDAYS | January 21, 2010, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm
“The banks are stealing billions in taxpayer dollars and it needs to stop.”
Are they? You are buying into Obama’s populist rants (just as he wants you to).
Do you realize that most of the banks have paid back TARP money with interest? How then are banks “stealing billions in taxpayer dollars”?
Wanna know who is stealing billions in taxpayer dollars? Politicians in DC!
Posted by: tjp612 | January 21, 2010, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm
I want my bank to be profitable. Obama needs to keep his Alinksky views off our economy.
Posted by: GChavez | January 21, 2010, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm
Just so I have this straight … a weakened President picks a fight with the Big Bad Banks but needs a weakened and fragmented Congress to do his bidding for him. Yeah, OK. Careful what you wish for, you just might get the fight of your life.
Posted by: Woody | January 21, 2010, 8:17 pm 8:17 pm
“This economic crisis began as a financial crisis, when banks and financial institutions took huge, reckless risks in pursuit of quick profits and massive bonuses.”
____________
Now I’m really confused: I thought Bush did it.
Posted by: Lone Star Rules | January 21, 2010, 9:06 pm 9:06 pm
The failure of the banks and financial institutions under the last administration almost took the country into another Great Depression – and it’s left the country in TERRIBLE economic shape – while they’re back to paying each other millions of dollars in bonuses.
Of course something has to be done about the banks.
Posted by: tierra | January 21, 2010, 9:08 pm 9:08 pm
Now I’m really confused: I thought Bush did it.
__________________________________
It happened on Bush’s watch.
Posted by: tierra | January 21, 2010, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm
tierra writes: “Of course something has to be done about the banks.”…
.
Any “responsibility taxes” on AIG, Fannie, Freddie, GM, Chrysler?
Posted by: gk | January 21, 2010, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm
Any “responsibility taxes” on AIG, Fannie, Freddie, GM, Chrysler?
_________________________________
What do you see as a ‘responsibility tax’? How would it work?
Posted by: tierra | January 21, 2010, 10:33 pm 10:33 pm
“What do you see as a ‘responsibility tax’? How would it work?”
.
Tune in to C-SPAN. I’m sure you’ll see it being negotiated on there… if they would just ever break away from the countless and endless hours of health care legislation.
Posted by: gk | January 21, 2010, 10:40 pm 10:40 pm
Obama is trying to change the discussion after losing with health insurance. He is trying to drive a wedge between have and have nots once again. Is there changes needed? Of course there are but what we have here is a President in panic mode. Trying to find something to help him hide from his failures.
Posted by: Don | January 21, 2010, 11:46 pm 11:46 pm
Any “responsibility taxes” on AIG, Fannie, Freddie, GM, Chrysler?
Posted by: gk | Jan 21, 2010 10:16:52 PM
______________________________________
What do you see as a ‘responsibility tax’? How would it work?
Posted by: tierra | January 22, 2010, 12:29 am 12:29 am
what we have here is a President in panic mode. Trying to find something to help him hide from his failures.
____________________________________
Bank reform has been on the agenda for a long time. Seems to me the administration is continuing with the business at hand – and graciously waiting for Brown to take his seat. I don’t think this President panics.
Posted by: tierra | January 22, 2010, 12:34 am 12:34 am