Comments on: President Obama Picks Former Ohio Attorney General to Run Consumer Bureau, Bypassing Woman Who First Came Up With the Idea

By: Christia Wiese

Christia Wiese — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:02:52 +0000

85% of the world wouldn’t know one from another. Sad, isn’t it.

By: Sally

Sally — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 13:04:32 +0000

ANONYMOUS: The difference between my comment and yours is that there is no basis for the remarks about President Obama “not liking women”. There is basis for your comment.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 21:23:08 +0000

SALLY: “BTW to the commenters below: Nice try trying to deflect from the issue saying President Obama “doesn’t like women”. Too funny!”
Based on the liberal precedent that labels critics of Obama as racist, I thought the same thing — he must have a problem with women. ;-) Now you know how conservatives feel.

By: Sally

Sally — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 20:41:28 +0000

Not naming Warren is a smart move although she is exactly who is needed in that position. The republicans are scared of her and the damage she would do to their Wall Street buddies. They would never have approved the nomination. She will probably be an advisor. She couldn’t possibly do any damage in that capacity……………
BTW to the commenters below: Nice try trying to deflect from the issue saying President Obama “doesn’t like women”. Too funny!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:39:35 +0000

JONAH: “But try telling that to the armchair knee jerk reactors.”
With exception to those who had direct knowledge of the decision and the reasons why, we’re all armchair knee jerk reactors. You don’t have any other choice with the most transparent administration ever. LOL!
JONAH: “I’m thankful for Warren’s service but I think this was a good call by the president.”
Has the president ever made a bad call in your eyes?

By: Lydia

Lydia — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:32:46 +0000

I’d be willing to bet that Warren was okay with this appointment as she knew the repubs would have cited her professor background as too elitist!
Honestly, how can they argue against an experienced attorney general heading a consumer protection agency?

By: Jonah

Jonah — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:22:25 +0000

“Paul Krugman, for instance, writes that “Obama has passed up a chance to symbolically align himself with the public and against the banksters. Sad.”
And that comment by Paul Krugman illustrates just why liberals with good sound ideas never go beyond just having good ideas, and never getting a chance to put their ideas into action. It’s because they value symbolism over substance ie actually doing something.

By: Jonah

Jonah — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:18:46 +0000

“There’s a fair amount of disappointment over the White House’s decision to formally nominate Richard Cordray rather than Elizabeth Warren to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Paul Krugman, for instance, writes that “Obama has passed up a chance to symbolically align himself with the public and against the banksters. Sad.” I don’t really understand this. Whoever is nominated to lead the CFPB is going to spend the next year of his life being filibustered by Republicans. The very best he can hope for is a recess appointment, in which case his tenure in the position would be relatively swift. So the question isn’t who you want leading the CFPB for the foreseeable future. It’s who you want spending his or her time being stopped from leading the CFPB for the foreseeable future. And it’s not clear that the answer to that question is “Elizabeth Warren.” Warren, after all, has another option that she appears to be taking seriously: challenging Scott Brown in the 2012 election. For reasons I’ve outlined here and Bob Kuttner elaborates on here, there’s reason to think she would be a very effective candidate. But if she wants to do that, she can’t spend the next year being blocked from leading the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. She has to spend at least part of it preparing for her candidacy.”
The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein
And considering the posting Warren wrote for HuffPo this morning fully supporting the president’s decision and choice of Corday, I think that what Klein wrote is not only plausible but likely, and something Warren and the president have thoroughly discussed.
But try telling that to the armchair knee jerk reactors.

By: Jonah

Jonah — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:07:33 +0000

@Whatever
“His actions have consistently indicated he’s not very fond of women in general.”
What a ridiculous statement and I can see why you didn’t want to give an actual name. Not only did he nominate Kagen, by also Sotomayer, two female justices in a row, the first president to do so, and also signed the Ledbetter Act for equal pay for women. If you can read and comprehend, the article makes it clear that had the president nominated Warren, she would have been defeated, so why nominate her with that knowledge? Plus, I myself don’t think that anyone should be leading a government agency that they originated as that will cause the agency to be a lightening rod to that person not what it’s suppose to represent. I’m thankful for Warren’s service but I think this was a good call by the president.

By: John

John — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 13:26:36 +0000

That’s whatcha get for appearing in a Michael Moore movie.