Matt Stoller is trying to convince people to not vote for Obama

[ProSense]

Cenk Uygur, host of Current TV's "The Young Turks," asks Matt Stoller, a fellow at the Roosevelt Institute, why the Obama administration hasn't done more to challenge Wall Street and the big banks, and what Stoller thinks Mitt Romney would do if he were elected. Stoller answers that because Mitt Romney changes his positions so often, he might be easier to convince than Obama. "Barack Obama is a neo-liberal ideologue," Stoller says.
Tune in Weeknights at 8:00/7:00c on Current TV

Read the comments of those he has convinced here: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/04/matt-stoller-obama-as-neoliberal-ideologue.html

[ProSense]

1. Kick, and

Stoller views on Romney and the banks and Paulson and TARP 2 are completely delusional.

He's actually advocating that Romney might not be so bad and the Obama has been worse than Bush.

[Kokonoe]

2. Matt Stoller should just be happy.

Truth be damned.


OK good job.

[ProSense]

4. Yeah

"Truth be damned."

I mean, claiming that Romney would allow the banks to fail and might be better for us than Obama, who should have agreed to more TARP to get cram downs is wonderful "truth."

Anyone who believes that Congress was going to pass a serious cram down package in return for more TARP (more friggin TARP) is delusional.

[cali]

3. what a tool. moron. idiot.

[ProSense]

13. Yeah,

let it sink. It's utterly moronic stuff.

[banned from Kos]

5. The whackjobs at Naked Capitalism love Stoller. They want to "punish"

President Obama for not ginning up bogus fraud cases on bank CEO's.

Because if a person was foreclosed on - it MUST be bank fraud!

[ProSense]

6. Nope

They want to "punish"

President Obama for not ginning up bogus fraud cases on bank CEO's.

Because if a person was foreclosed on - it MUST be bank fraud!

I don't believe that for a second. That's a bogus cover, there is something else driving the drivel Stoller is spewing.

No one would be making the case for Romney and hyping Bush (and pushing more TARP) based on that argument.

[banned from Kos]

7. Well, I would be interested in your theory (and it will be just that).

I provided mine.

read the comments over there - those NC people are nuts.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/04/matt-stoller-obama-as-neoliberal-ideologue.html#comment-703417

[dsc]

9. they were hardly ginned up

the banks wound up settling.

[banned from Kos]

10. they settled on robo-sigs

"fraud" is intentional deception to deprive someone of property. Robo-sigs were just an improper signature done for expediency.

Fraud is still on the table if an AG wants to go there.

[dsc]

12. actually it was the definition of fraud

the signature wasn't there for decoration. It was there to attest the the fact they had certain documentation which they apparently didn't have.

[banned from Kos]

14. Well, 50 state AG's never did muster one single criminal case based on your

definition.

[dsc]

15. Over half of them are GOP and had no desire

and the rest got cut off at the knees by the settlement. The fact they settled is a good indication they knew they were wrong.

[MADem]

8. Mr. "Let the car companies fail" would be easier to convince?

Mr. "Skip that bolt inspection on the big dig, resulting in the death by crushing of a newlywed woman on her way to the airport and a lawsuit costing much more than the price of the inspection" Mitt?

He is an idiot who will say anything to win. He was a shitty governor.

[ProSense]

11. It's delusional.

I mean, who makes the argument that Obama is "neoliberal ideologue" (whatever the hell that means) using an example of him turning down a deal that included more TARP?