Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, May 06, 2014

In an interview with Huffington Post, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) discussed her relationship with President Barack Obama, criticizing his administration for being too cozy with Wall Street while praising him for the establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. "I've made no secret about my disagreements with the administration's policies, particularly as they relate to the largest financial institutions," Warren said. "[T]he president chose his economic team, and when there was only so much time and so much money to go around, his economic team chose Wall Street instead of American families who were in trouble. But I also give full credit to the president. If President Obama had not been in the White House, we would never have gotten the consumer agency through. He stood up for it, he fought for it, and he made sure that even when those on his own team might have been willing to throw that agency under the bus, that the consumer agency was something that stayed part of the financial reforms and stayed strong."

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

eberly

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

It's a good interview with Elizabeth Warren.

#1 | Posted by eberly at 2014-05-06 12:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Of course, no opinion stated regarding QE.

#2 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2014-05-06 01:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Of course, no opinion stated regarding QE."

She also didn't state an opinion on the conflict in Timbuktu.

#3 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-05-06 01:58 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

I like Elizabeth Warren more and more and her criticisms of Obama are perfectly fair.

#4 | Posted by danni at 2014-05-06 01:59 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

I wonder what she has to say about Hillary Clinton. If Hillary is smart she will listen to Warren and support those policies, that is what most people want and what this country needs.

#5 | Posted by danni at 2014-05-06 02:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

As if other peoples criticism about Obama isn't fair...LOL!

#6 | Posted by moneywar at 2014-05-06 02:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hillary...lol....at this point what difference does it make.

#7 | Posted by moneywar at 2014-05-06 02:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

He always does the exact opposite of his campaign promises.

#8 | Posted by Huguenot at 2014-05-06 02:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

"As if other peoples criticism about Obama isn't fair...LOL!"

Some is but an awful lot of it certainly isn't.

#9 | Posted by danni at 2014-05-06 02:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

"He always does the exact opposite of his campaign promises."

You don't even believe that yourself, surely you know our troops are out of Iraq, Healthcare reform is reality, we getting ready to leave Afghanistan, etc.

#10 | Posted by danni at 2014-05-06 02:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

OH..and as Elizabeth Warren said, he stuck to his guns about the Consumer Protection Agency.

#11 | Posted by danni at 2014-05-06 02:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

"But I also give full credit to the president," Warren continued. "If President Obama had not been in the White House, we would never have gotten the consumer agency through. He stood up for it, he fought for it, and he made sure that even when those on his own team might have been willing to throw that agency under the bus, that the consumer agency was something that stayed part of the financial reforms and stayed strong."

"... the president chose his economic team, and when there was only so much time and so much money to go around, his economic team chose Wall Street instead of American families who were in trouble.

The choice to bail out big banks kept many a senior from losing their pensions, much less the economic turmoil it would have caused across the board for small business that was already fighting a severe recession.

Considering that the GOP was not going to allow any more of a stimulus to help average Americans than we got, further hurt for them in those regards would have been even worse.

It's easy to quarterback from the sidelines, but I would not be surprised had Warren been Pres that she might have come to the same conclusion.

#12 | Posted by Corky at 2014-05-06 02:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

surely you know our troops are out of Iraq

Because the president of Iraq made 0bama pull them out. 0bama wanted to keep them there longer, remember danni? Well, I guess you don't. What a surprise. BTW, surely you know they were replace by mercenaries which you proggies used to decry when Bush used them.

Healthcare reform is reality

LOL. There certainly has been "reform". I think America was expecting a more positive reform though.

we getting ready to leave Afghanistan,

After five years we are "getting ready". Wow. Maybe we'll actually be out of there by the time he leaves office. But I doubt it.

#13 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-06 02:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has become another calcified federal agency...
www.washingtonpost.com

Warren even wanted it centralized in Washington... why?

#14 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-05-06 02:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Because the president of Iraq made 0bama pull them out."

Baloney! Obama was able to take advantage of the Iraqis refusal to grant our troops the right to be tried by our military for any crimes they might commit in Iraq as an excuse to desert Malaki and his corrupt buddies. Obama had no interest in keeping troops there, he is now doing exactly the same thing in Afghanistan. He is extricating us from these poorly thought out invasion/occupations while not having to let us be seen as we were at the end of the Vietnam mistake.

#15 | Posted by danni at 2014-05-06 07:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

both parties and many presidents are to close with wall street, not just obama.

#16 | Posted by danv at 2014-05-06 07:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

Conquering Iraq and botching the subsequent occupation put us in a position to have our puppet government get out-maneuvered by Iran. Remember Bremer? (Note to self: Ask right-wingers how he compares to Bremer when they complain about Obama's leadership.)

Bush should have considered the possibility that that part of The Project For A New American Century wouldn't survive his second term, much like an infamous Thousand Year Reich only lasted for twelve.

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-05-06 07:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

yep.

#18 | Posted by Tor at 2014-05-06 07:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Because the president of Iraq made 0bama pull them out."

Baloney!

[...] It was Bush who set the date for that pullout, not 0bama -- and 0bama wanted to extend it.

Nearly 40,000 U.S. troops remain in Iraq, all of whom will withdraw by Dec. 31 -- a deadline set in a 2008 security agreement between Baghdad and Washington. (Bush was president then, danni. GM)...

But continued violence across Iraq, coupled with growing influence by the Shiite power Iran over the government in Baghdad, prompted the Obama administration earlier this year to push to keep thousands of U.S. troops here for years to come.

www.nbcnews.com [...]

#19 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-06 07:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

You don't even believe that yourself, surely you know our troops are out of Iraq, Healthcare reform is reality, we getting ready to leave Afghanistan, etc.

#10 | Posted by danni

We were getting out of Iraq before he ever took office. Helthcare reform is a disaster. It's about time we got out of Afghanistan, we have been there for 13 years. ETC!!!!!!!!!!!!

#20 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-05-06 08:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

It was Bush who set the date for that pullout, not 0bama -- and 0bama wanted to extend it.
#19 | Posted by goatman

Both Iraq and USA wanted to extend it, they just couldn't hammer out the details.
Iran brokered the deal to get Malawi re-elected in a fractured Iraq, and one condition of that deal was USA goes to zero.
See #17.

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-05-06 08:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Trust me, if Obama wanted to force Malaki to grant U.S. forces the right to be immune to Iraqi law and subject to American prosecutions in stead he had the levers at hand to make that happen. Obama maneuvered so as to pull out most of our troops and not be viewed as leaving a failed state behind, it may eventually fail but it isn't like the disaster that befell Saigon when we abruptly just exited Vietnam.

#22 | Posted by danni at 2014-05-06 08:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

"We were getting out of Iraq before he ever took office. Helthcare reform is a disaster. It's about time we got out of Afghanistan, we have been there for 13 years. "

WE already know, you hate Obama.

#23 | Posted by danni at 2014-05-06 08:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

thank you Captain Obvious.

#24 | Posted by AuntieSocial at 2014-05-06 08:36 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

"Too Cozy with Wall Street"

The one precedent no president has broken since at least the time of J.P. Morgan. If even Obama gets it, how out of the loop can Warren be?

#25 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-05-06 08:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Both Iraq and USA wanted to extend it, they just couldn't hammer out the details.

Link?

But at least you admit danni is wrong when she gives credit for the pullout to 0bama when he actually wanted to extend the deadline that Bush established.

#26 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-06 08:39 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Obama maneuvered so as to pull out most of our troops and not be viewed as leaving a failed state behind, it may eventually fail ..

My link from NBC news proves you wrong. Bush set that deadline.

Please provide a link to back up your claim, danni, or my link from nbcnews.com and its facts stand, no matter how much you yammer otherwise.

I just don't understand what compels rabidly blind partisans like you to deny the facts when they are laid at your feet, danni.

#27 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-06 08:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Both Iraq and USA wanted to extend it, they just couldn't hammer out the details.

Link?

But at least you admit danni is wrong
#27 | Posted by goatman

First of all, I don't "admit" anything, and I certainly don't make any claims about who deserves credit for US troops leaving Iraq (though if I were I'd credit the CinC at the time, as he's at the top of the chain). I simply made a claim about why we don't have troops in Iraq.

Second, if you're asking me for a link, you don't get to also use my unsubstantiated claim as a refutation.

#28 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-05-06 08:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

First of all, I don't "admit" anything,

Actually you did. What you said is opposite of what danni claims. It is what it is.

#29 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-06 08:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Between Goatman and Snoofy, if anyone thinks we have no troops in Iraq he or she is naïve.
We have at the very least non-uniformed troops.

#30 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-05-06 11:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I like Elizabeth Warren more and more and her criticisms of Obama are perfectly fair."

Puritopian!

#31 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-05-06 11:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Between Goatman and Snoofy, if anyone thinks we have no troops in Iraq he or she is naïve.

But, but, but, 0bama ended the war in Iraq and brought all the troops home. Ask any proggie.

#32 | Posted by goatman at 2014-05-06 11:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

I know, Goatman...I know.
God help those taking orders.

#33 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-05-07 12:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

0bama ended the war in Iraq and brought all the troops home.
#32 | Posted by goatman

He didn't want to, but that is what happened.

It happened on his watch, as they say, so he either gets the credit or the blame, any way you slice it.

Feel free to take this opportunity to blame Obama for letting Fallujah fall under the control of ISIL.

#34 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-05-07 04:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

Trust me, if Obama wanted to...

#22 | Posted by danni

LOL your record of predictions is horrible. You predicted HCR would be so successful once rolled ot.....the D's would glide to victory in 2014. You predicted Obama would be a fiscal hawk by the end of his first term.

Where is his budget danni

#35 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2014-05-07 07:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

"But at least you admit danni is wrong when she gives credit for the pullout to 0bama when he actually wanted to extend the deadline that Bush established."

Never mind that he campaigned on pulling out of Iraq and that he did exactly what he said he was going to do.

"You predicted Obama would be a fiscal hawk by the end of his first term."

Deficit is already cut in half. Are you even paying attention?

#36 | Posted by danni at 2014-05-07 08:40 AM | Reply | Flag:

Deficit is already cut in half. Are you even paying attention?

#36 | POSTED BY DANNI

When $1.3 trillion is used as a starting point...

#37 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-05-07 09:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

"[T]he president chose his economic team, and when there was only so much time and so much money to go around, his economic team chose Wall Street instead of American families who were in trouble."

The first sign of trouble from him came before he was elected. As a senator, he supported the Bush bailouts. That was a major warning sign to me and sure enough, he gave us more of the same after he was elected.

#38 | Posted by Sully at 2014-05-07 09:47 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

...agree w Warren's sentiment...

that, and O's weak stance on Keystone XL
and his wishy washy "sometimes I'm gonna
protect the environment and sometimes I'm
not" stance is where he began to seriously
lose me...

Need a President with an actual belief
system, stuff that they stand for, not
continued leaders without the stones to
enact serious policy without consulting
a half dozen opinion polls...

#39 | Posted by earthmuse at 2014-05-07 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

we have plenty of leaders like that...

#40 | Posted by earthmuse at 2014-05-07 12:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

I wonder what she has to say about Hillary Clinton. If Hillary is smart she will listen to Warren and support those policies, that is what most people want and what this country needs.

#5 | Posted by danni

This is warren's biggest flaw: She already said she likes hillary clinton.

This supposed champion of the people has no problem supporting another wall street whore for president.

If she walked the walk, she would run against clinton.

Giving obama credit for creating the consumer protection bureau while failing to go after any wrongdoers, is like buying your kid training wheels after he just got run over by a car on his bike instead of going after the driver.

#41 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-05-07 12:55 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

-failing to go after any wrongdoers,

They are...

www.drudge.com

But as you can see, no one wants to talk about it.

#42 | Posted by Corky at 2014-05-07 12:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

"This supposed champion of the people has no problem supporting another wall street whore for president.

If she walked the walk, she would run against clinton."

Yep. She's already been co-opted by the plutocracy. Didn't take long.

#43 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-05-07 01:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

-failing to go after any wrongdoers,

They are...

www.drudge.com

But as you can see, no one wants to talk about it.

#42 | Posted by Corky

Wake me up when someone big goes to jail. Until then, no one has been held accountable. Would you place a bet that they will?

Funny how they wait 5 years to start wall street investigations. How long is the statute of limitations again...?

#44 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-05-07 01:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Wall Street owns the Democrats. Wall Street is made up of Republicans. And if a third party candidate every became legitimately viable, he/she would inevitably be bought off by Wall Street.

Great. I'll get my coat.

#45 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-05-07 01:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

#44

You must not have read the article at all.

#46 | Posted by Corky at 2014-05-07 01:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

We have at the very least non-uniformed troops.
#30 | POSTED BY DIABLO

That's probably true for every country on the planet to some degree or another.

#47 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-05-07 01:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

Are you ready for Hillary?

This is what Zimmerman is wearing these days...

www.readyforhillary.com

#48 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-05-07 01:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

#48 |

lol, guilt by fabricated, convoluted association.

A new low.

#49 | Posted by Corky at 2014-05-07 01:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Wall Street owns the Democrats. Wall Street is made up of Republicans. And if a third party candidate every became legitimately viable, he/she would inevitably be bought off by Wall Street.

Great. I'll get my coat.

#45 | Posted by rstybeach11

Public election funding would fix all of that immediately.

#50 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-05-07 01:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

"A new low."

lol

#51 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-05-07 01:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

You must not have read the article at all.

#46 | Posted by Corky

Nor did you if you think anyone has gone to jail.

Furthermore those cases aren't even about the perpetrators of the financial collapse. So the administration is STILL not going after those banks.

#52 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-05-07 01:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

This revolving door between Washington and wall street needs to be shut permanently.

It could have been a great idea to get those with the knowledge to help set policy but human greed soured that relationship and has destroyed the prosperity of this once great nation.

Those who destroyed the economy are still in charge when they should be in jail.

Holder and "The Holder Memo" should both be destroyed.

These crooks stole from all of us while giving themselves millions.

We need to make an example of them lest they continue to destroy this nation.

#53 | Posted by drewl at 2014-05-07 01:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nor did you if you think, "they wait 5 years to start wall street investigations."

The real problem with these WS prosecutions is what was legal, not what was illegal.

#54 | Posted by Corky at 2014-05-07 01:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

Warren is correct. Continuing the QE policies of the Rethugs is one way that coziness manifests itself. Bernanke, Geithner and Paulson are all lifelong Rethugs. What is wrong with the economic direction of our country is that Obama has, for the most part, continued Rethug policies. The promise of change was a carefully crafted lie.

#55 | Posted by nutcase at 2014-05-07 02:28 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"Bernanke, Geithner and Paulson are all lifelong Rethugs. "

Hillary would probably appoint one of them to the Supreme Court.

#56 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-05-07 02:42 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

Public election funding would fix all of that immediately.

#50 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

Which would put the party in power in charge of who gets the campaign money. How good is that?

#57 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-05-07 04:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

Which would put the party in power in charge of who gets the campaign money. How good is that?

#57 | Posted by Sniper

The campaign money would be the same for everyone. That's the point. They'd have to win on the strength of their ideas, not on who can appeal to the most billionaires.

#58 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-05-07 04:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't think that's quite the gist of what they are saying. I think that "hard work" implies learning skills that will lead you to wealth, not just expending effort at multiple low paying jobs.

------

Lying hypocrite. You don't get into office in the usa without being bought by wall st. She is doing here job of convincing the idiot sheeple that some are not owned. Con artist.

#59 | Posted by Shawn at 2014-05-07 05:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Deficit is already cut in half. Are you even paying attention?

#36 | Posted by danni

You can pull up a lot of links using Google web search but......
Obama fiscal hawk...there's nothing there. NOTHING.

Coming from the girl who used the term 'pay go' dozens of times, you have some nerve.

I challenge you to tell us what the deficit was when Obama took office and where it is today!!

#61 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2014-05-07 06:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You don't get into office in the usa without being bought by wall st. "

That's correct. The ruling class will allow "good government" reformers like Warren to take office for show, but they won't allow her to actually do anything to reduce corporate power.

#62 | Posted by nullifidian at 2014-05-07 06:24 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

There are a few I respect in our DC government to serve us like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders another. Ron Paul and Kucinich too before they were railroaded out. There desire to strip our rights to own firearms on behalf of plutocrats does truly concerns me.

Wall Street, Goldman, and the Chamber of Commerce are anti-American traitorous entities, IMHO among others.

#63 | Posted by Robson at 2014-05-07 08:30 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

I don't both to sort out the con artists. All you have to understand is that the fix was in long before the dead line. There is no real referendum on power. None what so ever.

#64 | Posted by Shawn at 2014-05-07 10:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

There are a few I respect in our DC government to serve us like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders another. Ron Paul and Kucinich too before they were railroaded out. There desire to strip our rights to own firearms on behalf of plutocrats does truly concerns me.

Wall Street, Goldman, and the Chamber of Commerce are anti-American traitorous entities, IMHO among others.

#63 | Posted by Robson

Question is - why is everyone buying Rand Paul as the same thing as his father? Ron had his own wacky theories, but he didn't kiss up to the Kochsuckers and teabadgers and Rupert Murdochs like Rand does. For every smart thing he says, he says 5 insane things.

Still beats a regular republican though...

#65 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2014-05-08 03:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

Rightie Tightie Lying Continues unabated:

Reinhart and Rogoff did analysis allegedly showing that countries experienced sharply slower growth once their debt to GDP ratio exceeded 90%. With the US and Europe reaching debt to GDP ratios in this range, Reinhart-Rogoff's work was taken as evidence that they would have to reduce spending and/or raise taxes to get or stay below the 90% cutoff. Political leaders and central bankers around the world were happy to trumpet the Reinhart-Rogoff findings.

MIT professors Ash and Pollin, showed that the Reinhart and Rogoff story was not true. Reinhart and Rogoff's cliff depended both on a spreadsheet error and a peculiar way of aggregating growth rates across countries.

If an economy is growing rapidly, its debt to GDP ratio would decline (other things equal) as its GDP rose. When a country's GDP is not rising much, it's much harder to bring down the debt to GDP ratio.

With the academic basis for deficit reduction undermined by this new research, it might have been reasonable to expect there would be a renewed push for measures to stimulate the economy and reduce the high unemployment rates that plague most wealthy countries. However nothing like this happened. The push for deficit reduction in the US and Europe went on just as it had before.

The one exception was Japan, where the government of Shinzo Abe embarked on an aggressive stimulus program. Abe's policies appear to have worked to date, as growth jumped and employment surged.

There isn't much that the economics profession can claim in this debate that makes it look very good. While there is now a large and growing body of evidence that larger budget deficits would boost growth and employment in the current economic environment, those in the political establishment are impervious to evidence at this point. They got all the evidence they needed when they had the Reinhart-Rogoff study they could cite. Now that it turns out that Reinhart and Rogoff were mistaken, they see no reason to re-examine their policies.

Economics is a profession that fixates on the idea of getting incentives right. When two prominent economists can make a major error on work that had a huge impact on economic policy across the world, and face no real consequences or policy changes, it says a great deal about the incentives in the economic profession. (Dean Baker)

#66 | Posted by nutcase at 2014-05-08 05:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort