Warren Buffett would put Obama in charge of a business.

[dkf]

Mon Mar 3, 2008 8:08am EST

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Warren Buffett said on Monday that he would be comfortable putting Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in charge of running a business, though not his Berkshire Hathaway Inc insurance and investment company.

Buffett has said he plans to support the Democratic Party in the 2008 elections, as it seeks to retake the White House.

He has not endorsed Clinton or Obama for the presidency, but said on CNBC television: "I would put either one of them in charge of a business."

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSWEN426420080303
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/17/0164/26739/833/601225

[eshfemme]

1. Considering that Berkshire Hathaway is one of the top most lucrative companies in a century

Yeah, I'd take Buffet's word over Carly Fiorina's any day.

[dkf]

5. Yup.

Gosh that's kind of a mismatch.

[eshfemme]

12. The only reason I am comparing Warren Buffet and Carly Fiorina though is because of Fiorina

She actually fucking said (to try to clarify the earlier gaffe of how Palin wasn't qualified to run a company like HP) that all four presidential and vice presidential nominees weren't qualified to run a company. So Warren's comment was probably an allusion to that comment that she made.

But you're right that it's just totally such a mismatch. Carly Fiorina is an idiot and an incompetent who just happened to escape the ax just because she was a woman. As a woman, that fucking pisses me off because it lets the men go away thinking that all women are like that.

[dkf]

13. He said it in March, way before Carly got into the fray.

So its not like they had to trot him out to rebut her...he volunteered this himself months ago.

[eshfemme]

15. Oh I didn't realize this. Then, this is also another reason for why Carly sucks ass.

Seriously, nothing against CEOs but too many of them are incompetent and rewarded for it. Business needs to be changed, just like politics. Common sense, despite its name, needs to be treasured and encouraged-- not "business sense" because that's just a BS name for being able to BS.

[dkf]

17. I had to edit in the article date afterwards.

My fault. :)

[Flabbergasted]

2. kr

[lapfog_1]

3. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't put Carly Fiorina in charge of anything.

Never mind Sarah Palin or John McLame.

[Wetzelbill]

6. I'd maybe let her walk my dog or something... if I had one

She probably could get through that ok... maybe.

Great just by saying that I think dogs all around the country just got laid off.

[progdonkey]

11. he's met SO many multimillionaire CEOs...

that the whole "CEO mystique" doesn't work on him. "Oh, you just made $350 million last year? I made $5 billion, asswipe." :P Plus, I'm certain he's had to deal with more than his fair share of idiot CEOs who were destroying their companies through greed or simple stupidity.

It's similar to the situation with my sister, who finished her neuroscience PhD earlier this year and is now at Stanford. Most people would think "ooh, this person is such-and-such PhD!!! He/she must be so smart and intelligent; listen to what he has to say!" But my sister told me that even when she was still working on her Masters (well, equivalent--her program went straight to PhD), she met so many people with PhD's who were utter morons--she learned to ask where you got the PhD from, who was on your committee, what you've published, etc.

CEOs are treated with such deference in our society, yet a sizable number of them are just morons who know the right people. But they have a suit and a huge fortune (even though they left their previous company in ruins/debt), so they're treated as though they have some great expertise in economic and business matters (and sometimes in EVERYTHING).

[dkf]

14. Well we sure have seen a few moron CEOs lately.

Cramer's "wall of shame" is very active nowadays.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

18. Buffett makes money the sane way

He buys and owns companies that make money by selling to their markets over the long run and lets them make money by doing what they do best. He's no saint, but he is a rare thing, a sane and rational capitalist. he's also smart enough to know who makes is money for him. Workers.

[vanderBeth]

4. Buffet is a much better than other people on Wall St., IMO

And is the richest man in the world, better than Carly "drive HP into the ground" Fiorina.

[FrenchieCat]

7. He has since endorsed Obama.......

and has become one of his financial advisor.

What he said there, he said back in March.

Billionaire Buffett backs Obama for president
Monday, 19 May 2008 18:07
Warren Buffett, the world's richest man, is backing Barak Obama for US president and thinks current US economic policy will push the dollar lower against other global currencies.

Buffett said he had offered support to both Obama and Democratic rival Hillary Clinton but that since it appeared Obama would win the party's nomination, 'I will be very happy if he is elected president. He is my choice,' he said.
http://www.rte.ie/business/2008/0519/hathaway.html


Warren Buffett to advise Barack Obama on the economy
Posted Jul 28th 2008 3:22PM by Jonathan Berr
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/28/warren-buffett-to-advise-barack-obama-on-the-economy/

[Hippo_Tron]

8. I would too, but being a CEO and being President are not the same thing

In order to be a CEO you not only have to lead and make decisions, but you have to manage people as well. Presidents don't manage people. That is done by the Chief of Staff and on a day-to-day basis it is done by the Deputy Chief of Staff.

Being President is about appointing the right people and making the right decisions. Management skills are nice, but judgment is far more important.

[dkf]

9. Well, I'd say that he is the CEO of the Obama campaign, which

will probably help form the nucleus of his Presidential staff.

I'd consider that he managed that setup. The no-drama bit is definitely Obama's imprimatur.

[LooseWilly]

16. Mmmm

Are you saying that a President doesn't manage the Chief of Staff? Are you saying that a CEO manages people, somehow, more directly?... I'm not buying it.
If anything, the President has to deal with the management/appointment stuff plentily for all the Executive Departments, and at the same time has to manage the Entire Military and appointments of generals and such. And then there're all the embassies/ambassadors...
Mmm... sorry... the idea of corporate job being harder seems ridiculous. The idea of management of people not being a requirement seems ridiculous.

Hmmm, how's this for a test: Can you appoint and manage your surrogates in an election? McCain: fail!!

[pnwmom]

10. Good for him! I wish he were out there campaigning. n/t