President Obama Awash in Goldman Sachs Money

Posted by politicalpartypooper on April 21, 2010

Yes we can

$994,795.  That’s the amount of money President Obama received from Goldman Sachs employees, members, and owners.  I don’t care what direction you come from, what side of the fence you’re on, or what your perspective is.  That amount of cash from a firm that was just sued by the SEC, and has a history of dubious Wall Street dealings looks bad.  Very, very bad.  How bad?

In the 2000 Presidential election, George W. Bush received over $120,000 from Enron executives, members, employees, and owners.  For that connection to them, he was skewered by the Left and the Press.  Time wrote an expose called Bush’s Enron Problem, while Jonathan Salant of the Associated Press headlined with Bush-backing Enron Makes Big Money Off Crisis.

So far, the press has remained mostly silent about President Obama’s ties to Goldman Sachs.  Even though I am a supporter of President Obama, I truly hope that silence changes.  Bush received from Enron one-eighth of what Obama received from Goldman Sachs.  That in itself is a story.  Bush claimed he never knew that Enron was a house of cards.  I am sure Obama will claim that he never knew Goldman Sachs was the Mafia.  Timothy Geithner will say the same, and White House Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel will just tell us all to fuck off.

The question is, what will the Media say about it?  Anything?  Will the Left be as outraged over this as they were over Bush’s Enron ties?  Will the Right use this as a political poison dart?

All of this, of course, is after the fact, just as Bush’s ties with Enron were.  What can President Obama say that will make any sense?  This looks bad because it is bad, and no amount of White House spin is going to change that.  Probably Obama knew absolutely nothing about Goldman Sachs and their Mafia ways.  There was nothing he could have done.

The problem is, that doesn’t matter.  Not in politics, it doesn’t.  The American people are already fed up with the domination of our government by big business and special interests.  This is just another not-so-subtle example of bad imagery.  It looks like corruption.  It looks like money-f0r-political-favors, not because those favors were already given, but because we are now left to assume that any punitive action taken by the SEC against Goldman Sachs will have been attenuated by all that money they paid President Obama.   That’s what the general public believes when our elected officials accept campaign cash from the Mafia.

Hey, if you are man enough to accept the cash, then you have to be man enough to accept the assumptions that go along with it.  I’m just an ordinary citizen, but even I know that if or when I run for office and I accept large amounts of cash from an organization like Goldman Sachs, it’s going to look like I owe them something.  That’s the nature of the beast in politics.  If you don’t want to look corrupt, don’t accept huge amounts of cash from huge corporations and special interests.

I would think that a little bit of common sense would have whispered this sage advice to our President, and to every politician who came before and will come after.     Ω


5 Responses to “President Obama Awash in Goldman Sachs Money”

  1. The Goldman Sachs situation is miles short of Enron at the moment. The fraud they are accused of bears very little resemblance.

    With regard to GS, their is still so much uncertainty about what evidence the SEC actually has.

    If GS is exposed for more serious crimes, then I have no doubt that Obama will feel some heat.

    • politicalpartypooper said

      The fraud that GS is accused of is worth more money than Enron’s. I’m not defending Enron, but it seems to me that if a mafia insurance scam works once why not do it again and again?

      That is what I think we are going to find out; that this market crash was engineered, and that certain corporations and people profited very, very heavily by it.

  2. Liberty4ever4all said

    Please share with Mr. Cesca.

    Fannie and Freddie Amnesia

    Taxpayers are on the hook for about $400 billion, partly because Sen. Obama helped to block reform.

    Now that nearly all the TARP funds used to bail out Wall Street banks have been repaid, the government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stand out as the source of the greatest taxpayer losses.

    The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that, in the wake of the housing bubble and the unprecedented deflation in housing values that resulted, the government’s cost to bail out Fannie and Freddie will eventually reach $381 billion. That estimate may be too optimistic.

    Last Christmas Eve, Treasury removed the $400 billion cap on what the government might be required to invest in these two GSEs in the future, and this may tell the real story about the cost to taxpayers. In typical Washington fashion, everyone has amnesia about how this disaster occurred.

    The story is all too familiar. Politicians in positions of authority today had an opportunity to prevent this fiasco but did nothing. Now—in the name of the taxpayers—they want more power, but they have never been called to account for their earlier failings.

    View Full Image

    Associated Press
    .One chapter in this story took place in July 2005, when the Senate Banking Committee, then controlled by the Republicans, adopted tough regulatory legislation for the GSEs on a party-line vote—all Republicans in favor, all Democrats opposed. The bill would have established a new regulator for Fannie and Freddie and given it authority to ensure that they maintained adequate capital, properly managed their interest rate risk, had adequate liquidity and reserves, and controlled their asset and investment portfolio growth.

    These authorities were necessary to control the GSEs’ risk-taking, but opposition by Fannie and Freddie—then the most politically powerful firms in the country—had consistently prevented reform.

    The date of the Senate Banking Committee’s action is important. It was in 2005 that the GSEs—which had been acquiring increasing numbers of subprime and Alt-A loans for many years in order to meet their HUD-imposed affordable housing requirements—accelerated the purchases that led to their 2008 insolvency. If legislation along the lines of the Senate committee’s bill had been enacted in that year, many if not all the losses that Fannie and Freddie have suffered, and will suffer in the future, might have been avoided.

    Why was there no action in the full Senate? As most Americans know today, it takes 60 votes to cut off debate in the Senate, and the Republicans had only 55. To close debate and proceed to the enactment of the committee-passed bill, the Republicans needed five Democrats to vote with them. But in a 45 member Democratic caucus that included Barack Obama and the current Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.), these votes could not be found.

    Recently, President Obama has taken to accusing others of representing “special interests.” In an April radio address he stated that his financial regulatory proposals were struggling in the Senate because “the financial industry and its powerful lobby have opposed modest safeguards against the kinds of reckless risks and bad practices that led to this very crisis.”

    He should know. As a senator, he was the third largest recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, behind only Sens. Chris Dodd and John Kerry.

    With hypocrisy like this at the top, is it any wonder that nearly 80% of Americans, according to new Pew polling, don’t trust the federal government or its ability to solve the country’s problems?


  3. Hi there, all is going fine here and ofcourse every one is sharing data, that’s truly fine, keep up writing.

  4. Home Page said

    get the best achieve available

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: