Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:26 PM Jan 2012

Hey purists: there's NO WAY Obama could have recess appointed Elizabeth Warren to head CFPB

NO WAY. The REPUBLICANS would have BLOCKED IT.

Now we have a SUCCESSFUL appointment, thanks to our president's FAR-SIGHTED and POLITICALLY-REALISTIC moves.

So pull your heads out of your butts and drink a BIG STEAMING CUP OF REALITY.

72 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hey purists: there's NO WAY Obama could have recess appointed Elizabeth Warren to head CFPB (Original Post) MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 OP
This will go well. n/t racaulk Jan 2012 #1
Rather her run for Senate in case we lose Nelson's seat, she will most likely beat Brown. FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #61
Heh. Brickbat Jan 2012 #2
I'm sure the fact that she said she didn't want it had NOTHING to do with it. nt TheWraith Jan 2012 #3
GOOD POINT!!! Please remind us all of the link to here statement so that MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #6
gold, jerry.. frylock Jan 2012 #59
She did want it. She did the hard work of putting it together. RC Jan 2012 #16
She might have wanted it before we gave her an obstructing congress, but after that, it was clear... joshcryer Jan 2012 #24
The Republicans knew she would do a good job and did everything they could to block her nomination. RC Jan 2012 #30
The Republicans hate the CFPB and Warren would've been obstructed for years. joshcryer Jan 2012 #36
And Warren said this herself? Or was someone speaking for her? MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #38
The quoted words are hers. Do you think she wanted to run a neutered organization? joshcryer Jan 2012 #41
Let me get this straight. We shouldnt appoint anyone the republicons dont like because rhett o rick Jan 2012 #46
No, she was never nominated, she was appointed to run a new agency. The agency itself... joshcryer Jan 2012 #49
Your post #36 implies that she shouldnt have been nominated because of the rhett o rick Jan 2012 #51
We don't really know how it went down in the back room discussions. joshcryer Jan 2012 #55
Yeah, there's that little detail. CakeGrrl Jan 2012 #54
Don't confuse 'em with facts... SidDithers Jan 2012 #62
This message was self-deleted by its author DJ13 Jan 2012 #4
What are you talking about? She has to clean up after little Snottiescottie. lonestarnot Jan 2012 #5
She has moved on, and so should you nt ecstatic Jan 2012 #7
Who are the Purists? n/t Lisa D Jan 2012 #8
I think that he means those who value principles over principals. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #69
They can't pull their heads out of their butts. bluestate10 Jan 2012 #9
She didn't want it, Barny Frank said as much, and her Senate run proves she didn't want it. joshcryer Jan 2012 #10
She had ample opportunity to say it herself. MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #12
yeah, she just decided since she has no job she might as well run for Senate JI7 Jan 2012 #13
Maybe Ms. Warren never attended the "never an unspoken thought" school. Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #17
Good point, here's some videos demonstrating her shy side MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #22
So you believe that Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #66
Did you *see* the Oversite Committee for Warren? She did *not* have to put up with their garbage... joshcryer Jan 2012 #20
You don't think Ms. Warren can speak for herself? MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #26
She already has. joshcryer Jan 2012 #33
Great! Show us a link. MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #40
Sure: joshcryer Jan 2012 #42
Just to be perfectly clear, Manny. She has *already done what she wanted to do*. joshcryer Jan 2012 #47
I think she's going to be more effective as MA's next Senator, anyway Terra Alta Jan 2012 #11
I hope so. My concern is that she'll MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #18
Some folks just can't handle good news. JTFrog Jan 2012 #14
Some folks are highly amused by certain good news MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #15
A fella sure can be amusing. JTFrog Jan 2012 #21
You should have posted this yesterday MFrohike Jan 2012 #19
He was too busy. Major Hogwash Jan 2012 #25
My post is sarcasm MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #27
And now I feel dumb MFrohike Jan 2012 #43
Don't. It's tough to tell reality from fiction on DU these days nt MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #53
I've seen enough of your posts to know this slay Jan 2012 #57
And who says America doesn't manufacture anything anymore ... BEHOLD ... JoePhilly Jan 2012 #23
Soft kitty, warm kitty, Lisa D Jan 2012 #28
Didn't you hear? He just appointed Richard Cordray JohnnyRingo Jan 2012 #29
The sad reality is that Cordray is no Warren. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #50
I think you should google Mr. Cordray. PragmaticLiberal Jan 2012 #52
Bingo. Rich Cordray is not just some guy. He actually was in the trenches. Ikonoklast Jan 2012 #65
Cordray could be the second coming of Christ intent on driving out the money lenders Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #67
I'm from Ohio JohnnyRingo Jan 2012 #70
We need Elizabeth Warren in the Senate. JDPriestly Jan 2012 #31
This masterpiece took four edits? Robb Jan 2012 #32
Nice. joshcryer Jan 2012 #34
LOL JohnnyRingo Jan 2012 #35
If I were smarter and a better writer, then it would have taken fewer. MannyGoldstein Jan 2012 #37
Nah, it's difficult to make a sarcastic, derisive post, that maybe will pass scrutiny and has... joshcryer Jan 2012 #39
Wow. I smelled that from over here. Missy Vixen Jan 2012 #45
I did. I've yet to be convinced Warren wanted to sit on a neutered organization... joshcryer Jan 2012 #48
ROFL!!... SidDithers Jan 2012 #63
Winning. girl gone mad Jan 2012 #44
She knew she'd be a lighning rod and so did Obama Canuckistanian Jan 2012 #56
I'm certain if she wanted to she could've got the nomination. She already fought... joshcryer Jan 2012 #60
We feel your pain. onenote Jan 2012 #58
she's going to make a great senator fishwax Jan 2012 #64
There was no way ProSense Jan 2012 #68
Hey name caller. Stick it. mmonk Jan 2012 #71
It's ok. I'll deal with it since I want her as my Senator. n/t PhoenixAbove Jan 2012 #72
 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
6. GOOD POINT!!! Please remind us all of the link to here statement so that
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:32 PM
Jan 2012

the PURISTS will see how RIDICULOUS, PUNY and INCREASINGLY IRRELEVANT they are.

 

RC

(25,592 posts)
16. She did want it. She did the hard work of putting it together.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:46 PM
Jan 2012

And she did want to be the first director to make sure it go off the ground and going properly.

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
24. She might have wanted it before we gave her an obstructing congress, but after that, it was clear...
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:53 PM
Jan 2012

...that she wasn't going to get anywhere with a congress that has repeatedly tried to neuter it. There's no evidence that she moved on to greener pastures not under her own volition, and with a greater vision than sitting as a chief for an agency that will be obstructed for years.

 

RC

(25,592 posts)
30. The Republicans knew she would do a good job and did everything they could to block her nomination.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:59 PM
Jan 2012

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
36. The Republicans hate the CFPB and Warren would've been obstructed for years.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:08 PM
Jan 2012

They would've subpoenaed her every other week, for years. Rather than sit and wait for the American people to elect sane politicians, she decided to get elected herself.

Now there are 44 senators who just want to say, “You know, we don’t like that outcome. So we want to change it. We want you to rip the arms and legs off this agency.” Um, my answer is no. The agency is here to do a job, a job that desperately needs to be done, a job that Republicans and Democrats and libertarians and people who don’t care about politics at all care about — and that is being able to read their financial contracts, know what the price is, know what the risk is, not be overwhelmed with unreadable fine print. That’s what we’re headed toward and that’s what I want to see happen.

...

No, what they want to do is they just want to slow this thing up. They want to find another way to see if they can complicate it and keep it from moving forward and mire it in fighting. Let me be clear: There are more restrictions on this agency than any of the other banking regulators. We already have restrictions on our budget that none of the others have. We’re subject to a veto. No other agency, so far as I know, in government who can be vetoed by other agencies.


http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/07/exit-interview-elizabeth-warren-im-not-through-throwing-rocks/

This is a woman who is a fighter and I'm tired of people speaking for Warren.

She might've wanted it.

In the end she did not want it.

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
41. The quoted words are hers. Do you think she wanted to run a neutered organization?
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:17 PM
Jan 2012

Please spare me.

I just want to be really clear about this: The reason we have an agency is because President Obama stood behind it. And all those fights and all those compromises that were put on the table over the last couple of years, he said no — strong independent consumer agency. The reason we don’t have a good strong director in place right now — whether it’s me or somebody elseI lay directly at the feet of those in Congress who voted against this agency to begin with and who are doing everything they can to stick a stick in the spokes to keep the wheels from turning.

...

I don’t know. I mean, it’s a hard question. I’ll just put it this way. I threw rocks before I ever got to this town and I’m not through throwing rocks now. So if there’re folks who don’t like what I do, so be it, but I’m still ready to fight.


This is not a woman scorn by Obama, this is a woman agitated by the obstructionists in Congress, and who, when totally thrown into the political game, decided she was going to get back at them in the best way possible.

Run for Senate.

Run for Presidency.
 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
46. Let me get this straight. We shouldnt appoint anyone the republicons dont like because
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:24 PM
Jan 2012

they will obstruct them??? So we appoint people that they like?

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
49. No, she was never nominated, she was appointed to run a new agency. The agency itself...
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:28 PM
Jan 2012

...was very much obstructed, in every way imaginable. She could've dealt with the nomination, that's no big deal. She had already spent all that time dealing with the obstructionists. But she wanted to continue fighting on the other side, as a politician as opposed to an obstructed agency head.

Appoint whoever you want.

Don't be annoyed when the person who built the agency and who spent many hours a day trying to get things done but was obstructed at every move decides they don't want to run it.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
51. Your post #36 implies that she shouldnt have been nominated because of the
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:37 PM
Jan 2012

trouble the republicons would have caused. If I misunderstood, I apologize. My point is that we should keep good people out of positions just because the republicons dont like it. In fact that's when we should do it.

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
55. We don't really know how it went down in the back room discussions.
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 12:07 AM
Jan 2012

She might've said that she actually did want to run it, personally, I can give that to anyone who wants her to have been running it, but I suspect she was given the option that she could run for Senate, and she said, "You know what, let's do it." Her Exploratory Committee was launched a whole month after the CFPB was launched. In political time frames that is very short. She had already made that decision before Cordray got the nod, you don't run a Senatorial campaign lightly, it wasn't as if "Oh, I'm not picked, I'll run for Senate." In fact, she had hinted, when Cordray was nominated, that she was going to run a Senate campaign:

I left Washington, but I don’t plan to stop fighting for middle class families. I spent years working against special interests and have the battle scars to show it – and I have no intention of stopping now. It is time for me to think hard about what role I can play next to help rebuild a middle class that has been hacked at, chipped at, and pulled at for more than a generation—and that that is under greater strain every day.

In the weeks ahead, I want to hear from you about the challenges we face and how we get our economy growing again. I also want to hear your ideas about how we can fix what all of us – regardless of party – know is a badly broken political system. In Washington, I saw up close and personal how much influence special interests have over our law-making, and I saw just how hard it is for families to be heard. I want to hear your thoughts about how we can make sure that our voices –our families, our friends, and our neighbors — are heard again.

We have a lot of work to do in our commonwealth and our country. We need to rebuild our economy family by family and block by block. We need to create new jobs and to fix our broken housing market. We need to make sure that there is real accountability over Wall Street and that the greed and recklessness that created the last financial crisis do not create the next one. We need to restore the hope of a secure retirement and the promise of a good education. We need to stop measuring our economy by profits and executive compensation at our largest companies and start measuring it by how many families can stand securely in the middle class.

I am glad to be back home. And I’m looking forward to discussing with you what we can accomplish together.


That was about 2 weeks after Cordray was picked, around two weeks later she launched her campaign. Again, in political time frames this is a very short period of time, for her to just have made that decision. It was well planned and orchestrated.

I find Warren to be a fighter, and I think she sat down, saw what her options were, and decided that ultimately she didn't want to have to deal with the headaches of having a neutered organization that had to have its hand held. Her rhetoric after she stepped down from the agency (the very agency that she built) is very strong, she's going to "keep throwing rocks," as she said.

So I'm not convinced that her path in life is not a chosen path, that she purposefully and willingly chose on her own volition.

CakeGrrl

(10,611 posts)
54. Yeah, there's that little detail.
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 12:03 AM
Jan 2012

People sure have selective knowledge.

Guess that's what you have to do to hold a grudge.

Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

bluestate10

(10,942 posts)
9. They can't pull their heads out of their butts.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:37 PM
Jan 2012

With the butt muscles slammed shut like powerful steel traps. Look, you can't convince extremists, regardless of extreme Left or extreme Right.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
12. She had ample opportunity to say it herself.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:40 PM
Jan 2012

I'm not sure how running for the Senate once unemployed demonstrates her not wanting to run CFPB.

 

Dewey Finn

(176 posts)
17. Maybe Ms. Warren never attended the "never an unspoken thought" school.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:47 PM
Jan 2012

Unless some people I can think of...

 

Dewey Finn

(176 posts)
66. So you believe that
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 01:13 AM
Jan 2012

"never an unspoken thought" equals "not shy"?

Next time you think a light bulb has gone on over your head, check again. It might just be a tiny balloon full of hot air.

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
20. Did you *see* the Oversite Committee for Warren? She did *not* have to put up with their garbage...
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:50 PM
Jan 2012

...and she is more suited toward a Senatorial and finally a Presidential run in 2016. Her road map is not being a Bureau Chief who would be neutered by a right wing congress when we gave it to her.



I'm tired of this paternalist view of what Warren did or did not want to do. It's so obvious that this strong, powerful woman wants to make a difference in this country, and those who keep wanting her to have been Bureau Chief are just tearing her down.

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
33. She already has.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:00 PM
Jan 2012


You're just not listening and trying to tell everyone else what she wanted to do when you have no evidence for it. Because she didn't not say she wanted it that means she wanted it! Who cares if everyone in her political circles said she didn't want it!

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
47. Just to be perfectly clear, Manny. She has *already done what she wanted to do*.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:25 PM
Jan 2012

There is no telling us what she wanted to do, because she did it.

http://elizabethwarren.com/

You can try to convince us all day and all night that she wanted to sit on an agency that was being obstructed and neutered, I'm not buying that. She's a fighter!

Terra Alta

(5,158 posts)
11. I think she's going to be more effective as MA's next Senator, anyway
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:37 PM
Jan 2012

would love to see her send Scotty packing

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
18. I hope so. My concern is that she'll
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:49 PM
Jan 2012

be another VCIW* like Bernie and Kucinich. However, she's got big brains, big heart, big spine, and big mouth - the whole enchilada - so I suspect that she'll kick the living crap out of knaves, like she did to Timmy Geithner, instead of just whining about them. And the only folks who'll be able to fire her our the good people of out Commonwealth, and we *like* FDR Democrats, so she'll be safe.

*Voice Crying In the Wind

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
15. Some folks are highly amused by certain good news
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:44 PM
Jan 2012

A fella can't be happy and amused at the same time?

MFrohike

(1,980 posts)
19. You should have posted this yesterday
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:49 PM
Jan 2012

You know, before the president pulled off a recess appointment with the senate not technically in recess. That way you wouldn't have the facts to massively undercut your case. Just a tip.

MFrohike

(1,980 posts)
43. And now I feel dumb
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:21 PM
Jan 2012

Whenever I try to get witty on the internet, this happens. You'd think I would have learned by now.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
23. And who says America doesn't manufacture anything anymore ... BEHOLD ...
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:53 PM
Jan 2012

... a new 2012 Manufactured Outrage Widget, fresh off the assembly line !!!!

Lisa D

(1,532 posts)
28. Soft kitty, warm kitty,
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:57 PM
Jan 2012

little ball of fur;
Happy kitty, sleepy kitty,
Purr, Purr, Purr.

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you said Purrists.

JohnnyRingo

(18,623 posts)
29. Didn't you hear? He just appointed Richard Cordray
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 10:59 PM
Jan 2012

People should generally be happy with that fact.

I know there was a time Obama wouldn't make this move for the apparent want of bipartisan cooperation on other issues, but it seems to most he's reaching the end of an all too long rope in that endeavor.

I suppose it could be taken at face value that President Obama is taking partisan action to accomplish long awaited government business, or maybe one can take the cynical view that he either purposely smited Ms Warren at the time, or is using this (and other appointments) to gain inner-party support going into an election year.

The end result in either case is that Obama has stood up to a recalcitrant republican minority to get his job done for the people. Complaining about that seems a bit petty.

On edit:
I reread the intent of the original post and see the sarcastic prose, but still had fun composing a wordy reply that I'll feel free to cut & paste into the inevitable future outrage post. LOL.

girl gone mad

(20,634 posts)
50. The sad reality is that Cordray is no Warren.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:29 PM
Jan 2012

He's a reasonable enough choice, but can't hold a candle to her.

PragmaticLiberal

(904 posts)
52. I think you should google Mr. Cordray.
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 12:01 AM
Jan 2012

Honestly, one could make the argument that in terms of actually cracking down on financial abuses, Warren can't hold a candle to him.

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
65. Bingo. Rich Cordray is not just some guy. He actually was in the trenches.
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 01:00 AM
Jan 2012

He has a track record, and was Warren's choice to head the agency.

Just because some here don't know anything about him, doesn't mean he has no accomplishments under his belt.

Hell, even the asshole Republicans blocking his appointment said he was extremely qualified.

 

Dewey Finn

(176 posts)
67. Cordray could be the second coming of Christ intent on driving out the money lenders
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 01:49 AM
Jan 2012

and it still wouldn't be good enough for some. Ms. Warren was very enthusiastic about the choice. Maybe you should pay more attention to her opinions and less to the cartoon you seem to want to make of her.

JohnnyRingo

(18,623 posts)
70. I'm from Ohio
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 06:00 AM
Jan 2012

He's no stranger around here, and he's more than able to serve consumers.

Cordray is a five time undefeated Jeopardy champion who took on and won billion dollar cases against Bank Of America and AIG. Can your candidate do that? LOL.

It's really silly to try and bash Obama by calling Rich Cordray weak. Find something else.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
37. If I were smarter and a better writer, then it would have taken fewer.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:11 PM
Jan 2012

Thank you for making fun of my handicap.

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
39. Nah, it's difficult to make a sarcastic, derisive post, that maybe will pass scrutiny and has...
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:12 PM
Jan 2012

...no basis in reality.

WARREN 2012!

Missy Vixen

(16,207 posts)
45. Wow. I smelled that from over here.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:23 PM
Jan 2012

Can't wait to read your dazzling rebuttal.

Oh - you didn't write one?

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
48. I did. I've yet to be convinced Warren wanted to sit on a neutered organization...
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:26 PM
Jan 2012

...having to put up with right wing obstructionists for years.

Canuckistanian

(42,290 posts)
56. She knew she'd be a lighning rod and so did Obama
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 12:11 AM
Jan 2012

So she opted to change the system from another angle. And so did Obama.

Win-win, I'd say.

joshcryer

(62,269 posts)
60. I'm certain if she wanted to she could've got the nomination. She already fought...
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 12:32 AM
Jan 2012

...those bastards tooth and nail. Just go back and watch the Oversight Committee hearings. They were rude, despicable trolls. I think she had the strength to continue, but when push came to shove she decided her ability to effect change was in the Senate, not as a chief of an organization that was neutered to death.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
68. There was no way
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 02:04 AM
Jan 2012

Just as there was no way to appoint Goodwin Liu.

"NO WAY. The REPUBLICANS would have BLOCKED IT. "

You're confusing the fact that Republicans did block it with the reality that they left a window open probably misled by the idea that he had already been given a vote on the Senate floor and his confirmation blocked, something that they never allowed with Warren.

Still, for you and everyone enjoying this alleged gotcha moment.



Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Hey purists: there's NO W...