Obama Getting His On-The-Job Training


RedState: Obama Meanders Through Wall Street Crisis

Look, I’m all for “on-the-job” training in some industries. I’ve gone through a lot of it myself: Arby’s, Starbucks, Wachovia Securities, etc. My latest job, I should note, did not include on the job training.

I find it especially interesting that a municipal government expects on Day 1 that a policy analysis manager shows up ready to lead.

So, if at that level of government I’m expected to have my act together while the ink on the deal is still fresh, why in the world is Barack Obama running for President of the Universe when he clearly cannot make a decision until everyone else has weighed in including his opponent and the current administration?

This is insane that he has made it this far! What in the world is he going to do if he’s elected and needs to act at 3:00 AM? What in the world are we going to do when he can’t decide how to act?

Folks, the biggest threat to national security at this point is not terrorism, it’s the idiocy of indecision by the Democratic candidate!

Funny, this harkens a quote to memory from someone more qualified and sensible… maybe, Gov. Sarah Palin? “You cannot blink.”

Hmm, Barack, maybe lipstick is the difference!


7 Responses

  1. Again, the notes and quotes are clear. “On-the-job training” are kind of your words, more redstate.com than yours, but not really a good point. Obama diagrees with writing a check to a deregulated private industry, but agrees that there needs to be action, mainly re-regulating it.
    McCain seems to need the tutorial as well. “I am a deregulator”.
    “Oh, wait, my buddies are losing their shirts”.
    “We need more regulation, and need to bail these…” thieves “…out, NOW!”
    You tell me who is the flip-flopper, you tell me who can make a decision for himself, and you tell me who is not in the pocket of big banks and oil.
    Thanks Phill Gramm for all of your deregulation, and writing the McCain economic plan.
    Mike, you could write a better policy than that.

  2. Obama still has no plan except to criticize everyone else’s plan. He even said Thursday he’d unveil his plan on Friday and he didn’t unveil anything. Instead, he said he’d sit on his hands and watch.

    There’s leadership.

    Actually, I like Phil’s bill. I don’t really see anything wrong with it. Every other developed nation allows there banks to do it, many with great success. The issue here wasn’t Gramm’s bill, it was the lack of a check between banks bundling the loans and selling them to Fannie without properly qualifying the applicants.

    This is where the regulation piece comes in. Just like Wall St. has the SEC and banks have the Fed, the Treasury and the Congress. Unfortunately, there just wasn’t any regulatory devices to ensure prudence was applied.

    This is the type of regulation and reform McCain is talking about. It’s funny McCain sponsored a 2005 bill to do just that but the Democrats threatened a filibuster if it made it to the Senate floor, thus it was tabled. Here’s the text of his speech:


    It’s pretty hard to imagine that as a flip-flop. No to bailouts, but it became necessary… Heck, I’m fundamentally opposed to government bailouts… but I also recognize that it’s financially unreasonable not to at this point.

    He then called for better regulation… consistent with his 2005 bill. He then said SEC Chairman Cox would be fired if he was President. That’s the only part I disagree with.

    Now you tell me know, since Frank Raines and Jim Johnson are chummy with Obama, perhaps that is why he has no plan. They got rich. Then were forced out. Now they’ve been advising Obama in various capacities.

    Finally, McCain so far is the only candidate that can walk up to a microphone and say “here is what I would do.” Obama didn’t know what to say about the Russo-Georgian conflict, thinks a tax increase would be great right now for everyone running an S-corp or reporting more than $250K, thinks the surge was a joke until called out on it, and then can only standby and bash everyone trying to do something about the financial crisis. Yet, for all the rhetoric and grandstanding… he has no idea what he’d do despite being counseled by all the financial demigods from the Clinton Administration + Warren Buffett.

    That’s real leadership. The change we need.

  3. Here you, go, an article, not an op-ed. Particularly interesting is the legislation that you quoted:
    Let’s give the White House to the lobbyists, then we can all have a stronger voice, as long as we are willing to pay more for it.

  4. Interesting read, Rick Davis sounds like a nice guy working to help increase homeownership. Nothing improprietius there.

    Nothing like cooking the books and walking with millions like a couple of Obama advisors.

    And still, no plan from Obama, only criticism of everyone else. Maybe because he realizes this is lose/lose for him. No matter what happens lending is tightened, much of his faithful will again no longer qualify, rates will go up, and he can’t do anything about the problem.

    Again, too contentious. “Present.”

  5. Obama’s “faithful”, really…
    Racism, just like Covino, seemingly your alter ego.
    “Increase home ownership”, that is a riot, and walking away with millions, Carly Fiorina ring a bell: $45 MM in severance while 20,000 HP employees lose their jobs.

  6. How does referring to Obama’s ‘faithful’ imply racism?

    Obama’s ‘faithful’ is anyone clinging to the notion that government is the solution to household issues and/or is voting for him hoping for a government bailout to promote/maintain home ownership to those otherwise unqualified.

    With regard to Fiorina, whom I had to study in ethics and policy for my senior year, just before her termination… I recall her as highly regarded in doubling down with Compaq after the tech bust in 2001. It was a bold move that even her critics regard as pivotal to position HP for the future. HP had to cut jobs as a result of the merger, so that part makes little sense as the basis for an argument.

    HP is now Dell’s largest PC manufacturer rival. And she didn’t receive $45 million in severance. It was $21 million straight cash. The remainder you reference was already earned stock and pension funds and are not part of her severance.

    To that I say, if a private company willingly accepts that deal, then more power to Fiorina. It would seem you wouldn’t blast her for making money and setting up HP for success. Rather, you should assail HP’s board for agreeing to such a deal.

    Finally, Fannie and Freddie are not private sector firms. They’re GSE’s and, as a result, our tax dollars should never pay for executive failure.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: