Triumph of the Money Party!!! Warren's role downgraded, reports to Geithner

[autorank]

Triumph of the Money Party!!! Warren's role downgraded, reports to Geithner

By Michael Collins



The White House snatched back one of the few bones it's thrown to the people outraged at the looting of the United States Treasury by failed financial concerns - the big banks and Wall Street. The promised appointment Elizabeth Warren as head of the new agency to protect consumers from the financial services industry has been seriously downgraded. Instead of running the Consumer Finance Protection Agency, Warren's role has been diminished to that of special assistant to the president and adviser to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. snip

The people know a fraud when they see it. This one is in sharp relief against the background of the great wealth transfer program from just about everybody to the self-selected few who own the controlling interest in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of our government.

Link: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Triumph-of-the-Money-Party-by-Michael-Collins-100916-598.html

[ProSense]

1. No

it hasn't

I asked before if it's your belief that Warren can't handle Geithner? That she took a position in which she would cave to him? If she is so incapable of negotiating her own position, how would she have handled the bankers?

Why on earth would she leave Harvard to take a "diminished" role?

For weeks people have been screaming for the President to recess appoint Warren to an agency that has yet to be set up under the exact rules described in the law.

Also, a recess appointment have been up by the end of this Congress, effectively the end of this year (see Donald Berwick). Then what? Now that President Obama appointed Warren for a longer term, which gives him more flexibility and Warren more power, some people are unhappy.


Yes, Elizabeth Warren is in charge

[EFerrari]

13. You know, she doesn't have to quit Harvard. She can ask for a leave.

And you are conveniently conflating a recess appointment with an interim appointment.

Plus, it's obvious that Warren can handle Geithner which is why her actual nomination has been fought tooth and nail.

Lastly, your claim that this arrangement gives Warren more power is ridiculous on its face.

[MineralMan]

51. That would be a choice for her to make, though, wouldn't it?

[EFerrari]

60. Are you answering for Pro Sense now?

[MineralMan]

66. Nope. I wouldn't presume to do that. I'm posting my opinion in

this public forum, in response to another post - one written by you. Perhaps you misunderstood the hierarchy of the thread. I'm sure Pro Sense can speak more than adequately. But, sometimes, I post my own opinion here on DU. I hope that is acceptable to you, since it seems to be the way the forum is structured. Of course, you needn't see any of my posts if you choose. Another excellent feature of the Democratic Underground software.

[EFerrari]

108. I'll take that dissertation as a "no". n/t

[snot]

2. Good article -- K&R'd.

"Warren has been challenging Geithner and the socialism for the rich program known as the bailout from her first days as chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel monitoring the bailout. Now we're expected to believe that she will be given real authority to advocate for the people in an unofficial capacity while reporting to Geithner, as well as President Obama."

I believe Warren negotiated the best deal she could get and that it would be better than nothing.

It's no aspersion on her if that proves to be far less than would be best for the country.

[autorank]

5. THNX!

[chimpymustgo]

83. I agree with you. She's doing the best she can for the people.

[OregonBlue]

3. That's ridiculous. Warren met with Obama and Geitner prior to her decision. Do you really think she

is so stupid she would agree to a position that didn't give her any power. If you think she's so great, how can you assume at the same time that she's willing to be a tool? Which is it? Is she a brilliant consumer advocate or is she a simpering idiot?

Isn't this just more Obama derangement syndrome in action? No matter what he does, some people will find a conspiracy.

[EFerrari]

7. What part of this article is conspiratorial?

[pnwmom]

72. This part, for example.

"The people know a fraud when they see it."

The OP is suggesting that Elizabeth Warren is participating in a fraud.

[EFerrari]

125. You're taking one sentence out of context, not an argument.

But that's fine. We were promised an independent agency to support the consumer against the out of control financial sector. What we're getting is an agency who will be answering, arguably, to the financial sector's Cabinet level representative for the foreseeable future. And we are told this is the case because of a -- series of excuses, including the latest, hilarious one, she never wanted the job in the first place.

WTF?

This is the same game they played with the health insurance industry bail-out bill. We're told that the administration can't win a fight so they will go around the fight and, I'll be damned, we come up nearly empty handed again.

Is that fraud or politics? I don't know.

[prolesunited]

11. +1

She would not willingly agree to be anybody's tool.

I like the idea that she gets to work now and can speak out and is not sitting in a corner with a gag on while the GOP plays their games with the appointment.

[Marr]

95. You act like this sort of thing doesn't happen all the time.

People are given positions all the time for political reasons, then leave later when they find that their input is ignored. I believe Bush Jr. had several staff members who met that description... the fellow who was the 'liaison for faith based initiatives', for example.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

103. She's not so great anymore I guess. She sold-out and should go under the bus.

[SidDithers]

4. Unrec...

Sid

[HughMoran]

86. +/-1

:thumbsup:

[Me.]

6. If It Turns Out YOU Are Right Mr. A

They will pay a price. I just saw the results of a poll that said the country wants to throw all of them out of office, even their own reps, which is not usually the case. Also, Pelosi is now hedging on the tax cuts.

[truedelphi]

52. Pelosi? Hedging? But she is a Democratic leader...

Or something.

And I am gonna vote for her party, or maybe I will hedge...

[Me.]

57. Here You Go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9146933

[autorank]

151. And it could change so easily

[jillan]

8. And if she does - I am certain that Warren will NOT hold back.

[jillan]

9. dupe

[onenote]

10. FAIL. Mr. Collins ought to get a copy of the statute and read it

If he did, he'd understand exactly why Warren technically has to be named an assistant not just to the President, but also to the Secy of Treasury.

The answer, found in sec 1066 of the law, is that until the first director is confirmed by the Senate, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to run the Bureau. As a pure matter of delegation of authority, it is necessary for Warren to "report" to the Secretary in order for her to exercise the duties of an "interim" (in reality, if not it title) director. The fact that she also reports to the President reveals that it is not Warren's role that is diminished here, it is Geithner's. He is her "boss" in name only. He answers to the President. She answers to the President. His participation is a fig leaf to deal with the fact that by statute he is technically the one with authority over the Bureau until a director is confirmed.

[EFerrari]

16. You're actually making Mike's case here, not the other way around.

She answers to Obama and Geitner. She is not independent.

[autorank]

18. Ola

:hi: That's the essence isn't it. "My good friend Tim" wins every battle, but the results are decided before
the contest - just like professional 'rasslin but they don't admit it.

[onenote]

22. Even if she was confirmed for a five year term she could be removed by the President

"for cause", which includes the rather subjective standard of "inefficiency" and which means that for all intents and purposes the director always answers to the President. The fact that she has been designated as an advisor to Geithner doesn't, in reality, mean she's answerable to him since she also works for the President and in the end, that's what really matters. The naming of her as an advisor to Geithner is a legal fig leaf to address the fact that he ostensibly has the authority to run the Bureau until a director in confirmed.

[pnwmom]

31. She answers to OBAMA and she's an advisor to Geitner.

And she'll a good one.

[EFerrari]

44. No, she answers to both. n/t

[pnwmom]

70. Did you read what Barney Frank says about all this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/16/warren-didnt-want-permane_n_719932.html

"She always said she didn't want to be there as a permanent director. Some of the liberals are worried about it. It's almost an insult to Elizabeth. She wouldn't take this if there was the slightest impediment to her doing the job," he said.

An administration official said that Warren will be officially named on Friday as an "assistant to the president," the same title that Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and other top officials hold, as well as a special adviser to the Treasury, overseeing the establishment of the CFPB.

There were extensive and nuanced discussions with the White House, said a source familiar with them, and the interim nomination emerged as her favored choice, as Frank says, but she has still not foreclosed the option of a full nomination or told the administration that she would flatly refuse one.

SNIP

Frank said that he was "delighted" by the administration's choice. "I want to give credit to Tim Geithner for working this out. There's absolutely no chance that she will be anything less than fully independent. She wouldn't have taken the job," he said.

[EFerrari]

126. Yes, thanks, I read that.

Sorry for the late reply.

[truedelphi]

54. Thanks for giving Mr Autorank an assist.

Surprised to see the attacks that are being slung around.

And glad to have some citations that explain everything quite fully.

[zipplewrath]

24. This is an interesting arrangement

I think the special assistant thing has far more to do with ensuring she has "cabinet like" authority. She can't have everything of course, but it gives her more authority than she might otherwise have. It all comes down to Obama. If he wants her to be "under" Timmy, that's what's going to happen. There is what she was promised, and what will develope.

One has to believe that she at least got verbal assurances of some independence, or agreement on what she was to accomplish. Even she knows though that in the end the devil will be in the details.

[Usrename]

12. What a gip!

Could they be any more divisive if they wanted to be?

rec for visibility

[autorank]

20. It's the Washing three step

followed by a punch to the solar plexus.

:hi:

[LiberalAndProud]

14. She gets to define the agency. She reports directly to the president.

Dodd can't block her in committee. She can't get fillibustered. No secret hold will prevent her from beginning the much needed work immediately.

Pardon me while I do a happy dance.




:bounce:

[POAS]

15. "The people know a fraud when they see it."

Really autorank? Is that how you see it? The President and Warren are attempting to perpetrate a fraud on the American people.

Really?

Or maybe you would like to take this opportunity to distance yourself from this statement.

[27inCali]

34. I know a fraud when I see it

these so-called Progressives doing everything they can to demoralize everyone on the Left two months out of an election are the true frauds.

[POAS]

53. And still no response from autorank....

I wonder why.

But to directly address your point;

Frauds to the left of us, frauds to the right. All with one goal in mind, voter suppression.

[pnwmom]

73. I think you're right. n/t

[SoxFan]

98. Amen!

We all knew that the Perpetually Indignant Left would find some way to turn this into a reason to whine. For months, the line was "Obama isn't going to pick Warren"; now that he has found a way to get around Mitch McConnell's obstructionism, they're bitching because she has the wrong title.

This has nothing to do with the merits of the decision and everything to do with sliming the Administration.

[boppers]

109. +1 eom

[Name removed]

128. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ignis]

142. Why not simply ask the Admins to ban anyone who Rec'd it?

Since none of us are "real Democrats," and you're the arbiter thereof. :eyes:

[snot]

17. Sounds like Timmeh can't fire her without Obama's concurrence;

I've yet to see anything supporting the notion that she can boss Timmeh.

Unless Obama clarifies that she WILL have authority to effectuate decisions that Timmeh disagrees with, I'm afraid this essentially means that every time she and Timmeh disagree, she'll have to run to Obama and say, "Timmeh won't let me do X"; and Obama will have to decide.

[EFerrari]

27. That they're going to all this trouble is a measure of how much support she had. n/t

[jaxx]

19. That's weird opednews would trash Warren like that.

I thought they liked her, but this shows they really are just as hateful about her as they are about anyone who is in the Obama administration. Whatever is done, it's never good enough.

Unrec for the hypocrisy.

[janx]

139. Oped News is a blog site.

You, too, can be a famous featured columnist! :rofl:

[NJmaverick]

21. Was this article written by a GOP operative?

It certainly reads like it was. They falsely claim Warren is being short changed while making sure that those that buy into their incorrect spin are properly reminded to direct their wrath at the Dems

[EFerrari]

25. Because the GOP is SO concerned about transparency in government.

Or maybe you refer to some other GOP.

LOL

[NJmaverick]

28. Correction- The GOP is so concerned about winning

and will do anything and everything (as history shows, including rank deception) to try and dampen liberal support for the Democrats. Reduce support from the liberals and the GOP will have to get less votes to win. It's really not all that difficult to figure out.

[EFerrari]

35. You have nothing to say about the article.

Have a nice day.

[POAS]

56. This statement is in the article

and it is quoted in the OP, "The people know a fraud when they see it." The obvious point being that the action of appointing Warren in this manner and Warren accepting is an attempt to perpetrate a fraud on the American people.

My question to you is, do you agree that the President is trying to perpetrate a fraud on the American people?

[EFerrari]

65. You also have nothing to say about the reasoning in this article?

Okay.

[POAS]

78. And you refuse to defend it..telling.

The article itself is bunk especially the part of the President perpetrating a fraud. Autorank can do better and you can certainly have the guts to defend the statement.

Is the president perpetrating a fraud or not?

[EFerrari]

107. The article is bunk is not an analysis. And demanding that I reply

to your straw man isn't one, either.

Would I use the word "fraud"? I don't know. Do I agree with Mike that much of what occurs in DC is "fake drama" or theater? You betchur @ss. This same shell game was used on the public option. The teaching profession is being dismantled in the name of "reform" and yesterday, the State Department certified Colombia's human rights status so they could release the millions we contribute to pay for the crematoria and mass graves. Does that amount to fraud? I don't know. It's dishonest as hell.

[POAS]

104. Why do you not have comments about the merits of this article? n/t

[NJmaverick]

69. I think the more telling point is that the author got one thing right

"people know a fraud when they see it" which is why the reactions to the article are overwhelmingly negative.

[POAS]

79. Your right, and the "author" of this OP

has yet to say if he agrees that the President is a fraud.

You would think that if someone can post an opinion piece they can also defend or attack the main premise quoted.

[janx]

132. Of course he agrees. This is nothing more than a link

to his blog. :rofl:

I'm seeing more and more of this at DU. You click on a link, not knowing where you'll end up, and it turns out to be the OP's blog.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EFerrari]

47. So over the top. autorank has been here for YEARS longer than you have

and his record is clear while yours is not. :)

[Ignis]

90. No, it was written by one of your fellow DUers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html

[geek tragedy]

130. No, just an Obama-hater on the left.

Same shit, different pile of course. That crowd is as of much benefit to progressive politics as the Teabaggers.

[Ignis]

141. Why stop there? Call that fellow DUer any name you like!

Rules are for suckers, right?

[Spazito]

23. Do you really think Ms. Warren is perpetrating a fraud?

Do you think Ms. Warren has the kind of character that would participate in a fraud or, indeed, doesn't have the intellect to recognize a fraud?

Here are her credentials:

Professor Elizabeth Warren is the Leo Gottlieb Professor of Law at Harvard University. She has written eight books and more than a hundred scholarly articles dealing with credit and economic stress. Her latest two books, The Two-Income Trap and All Your Worth, were both on national best seller lists. She has been principal investigator on empirical studies funded by the National Science Foundation and more than a dozen private foundations. Warren was the Chief Adviser to the National Bankruptcy Review Commission, and she was appointed as the first academic member of the Federal Judicial Education Committee. She currently serves as a member of the Commission on Economic Inclusion established by the FDIC. She also serves on the steering committees of the Tobin Project and the National Bankruptcy Conference. The National Law Journal has repeatedly named Professor Warren as one of the Fifty Most Influential Women Attorneys in America, and SmartMoney Magazine recently designated her one of the SmartMoney 30 for 2008. She was also one of eight law professors to be named on the Leading Lawyers in America list compiled by Law Dragon.

http://cop.senate.gov/about/bio-warren.cfm

I think the author of the article you posted does a GREAT disservice to Ms. Warren to even intimate she is participating in a fraud.

[EFerrari]

26. Why, was this arrangement her idea?

Has she commented on it? I honestly don't know and would like to read anything she has to say.

[Spazito]

36. Until the White House officially announces it, she would not be commenting on it....

I AM sure once the official announcement is made, we will most certainly hear from her. Do you believe Ms. Warren would take a position if she was not satisfied with what was offered? In reading her bio, her experience, it does not read as if Ms. Warren is a woman who would participate in a fraud or be incapable of easily recognizing such, would you not agree?

[EFerrari]

45. She seems to be a person with a lot of integrity which is why

I want to know what she thinks.

[Spazito]

49. I think she is a person of high integrity as well...

so I am confident we will hear from her when the official announcement is made.

[MineralMan]

50. I expect that once the appointment is official, she'll provide a

statement. It's not done to make such statements before the appointment is made. Upstaging the President of The United States is not something appointees do.

I imagine she'll say a few words at the announcement, after being praised by President Obama.

[Spazito]

119. Ms. Warren has now made public what she thinks regarding her...

appointment:

Elizabeth Warren: ‘I Accept’

“The President asked me, and I enthusiastically agreed, to serve as an Assistant to the President and Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,” Ms. Warren wrote. Then she added, perhaps in a veiled reference to the president’s decision to appoint her as his assistant now, rather than going through what could be a lengthy Senate confirmation process: “He has also asked me to take on the job to get the new C.F.P.B. started — right now.”

The bureau, she says, “can go a long way toward repairing a gaping hole in the budgets of millions of families.”

It is, she says, “based on a pretty simple idea: people ought to be able to read their credit card and mortgage contracts and know the deal. They shouldn’t learn about an unfair rule or practice only when it bites them — way too late for them to do anything about it. The new law creates a chance to put a tough cop on the beat and provide real accountability and oversight of the consumer credit market. The time for hiding tricks and traps in the fine print is over.”

snip

“It’s time for all of us to pull up our socks and get to work,” she wrote.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/17/elizabeth-warren-i-accept/?hp

Now she has spoken, do you think the intimation in the OP article that Ms. Warren is participating in a fraud either knowingly or unknowingly is right or is doing Ms. Warren a GREAT disservice by intimating such?

[librechik]

129. I read this too, and it has relieved my mind considerably

I have a lot of trust in Ms Warren to overcome any BS she may find strewn in her path by finance types like Geithner who would prefer they never had to deal with any ladies in the club room.

Go Elizabeth, and kick em where it counts!

[Spazito]

140. I am glad you are not buying the article's intimation Ms. Warren...

would EVER be part of perpetrating FRAUD, I certainly don't either and hope we see a retraction soon.

[pnwmom]

74. Barney Frank says she doesn't want a permanent position. Do you believe him? n/t

[EFerrari]

134. Maybe not on this, no, although he may be going on the best info he has. n/t

[pnwmom]

75. Why would you think she'd leave her job at Harvard to accept

any appointment that didn't give her real power? If you have so little confidence in her judgment, why would you even want her to take the job?

[pnwmom]

29. More progressive paranoia. n/t

[Lost4words]

30. self delete

self delete

[Tarheel_Dem]

38. I'm glad you did that.

:applause:

[Lost4words]

80. I'm glad I can still make someone happy,

whats one partisan more or less, its your world now, good luck with it, I'm out of this fight, I have spent too much emotional capitol with no return.

[Tarheel_Dem]

82. Well, you take care, then. Buh-bye now.

:hi:

[Lost4words]

87. circle D you didnt understand did you, Im not too surprised

:hi: back at ya

[MineralMan]

32. And how do you feel about this, Autorank?

You didn't say. Unrecced for uncommented attack on the Obama Administration.

[EFerrari]

39. autorank knows the author pretty well.

lol

These reflexive personal attacks in lieu of argumentation are hilarious.

[MineralMan]

48. Is Autorank the author? Was I to know that, if that is the case?

I've made no personal attack whatsoever. I asked a logical question. There is a distinct difference between a simple question and a personal attack. In any case, if you believe I have made a personal attack, you have access to the Alert button. I've made no attack whatsoever.

Now, if Autorank is the author of the OP, then I do know his opinion. I would not have asked the question if I knew his identity. Are you sure he wants everyone to know that information, assuming it is the case?

[autorank]

146. I am that man

There's no secret at all.

[DevonRex]

121. So you're saying autorank IS the author of the piece?

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tarheel_Dem]

40. +10000

:thumbsup:

[LiberalAndProud]

42. I agree with you.

It seems like anti-Obamaism to me too.

Is that a disease, or a religion?

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uponit7771]

68. +1

[JTFrog]

76. Well said. n/t

[Hekate]

100. Applying Tricky Dick's own phrase does seem appropriate somehow, doesn't it?

"Rat-fucking"--such a memorable term.

I agree with you here as well: "HE GAVE YOU EXACTLY WHAT YOU ASKED FOR, AND YOU STILL HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT."

Hekate

[EFerrari]

41. Quite a reaction you got here, autorank.

I'll be back later tonight to see if anyone manages to debate the article.

[POAS]

81. Still waiting for you to defend the article or if you are

only here to attract attention with snark about your fellow DUers.

Where is your defense of calling the President a fraud. I'd like to see it!

[formercia]

46. I'm reserving comment

Show me the Money.

[truedelphi]

55. Proud to be uh,

Rec NUMBER ONE...

Numero Uno...

WTF??

[Binka]

58. It Is Being Un-Reced Like Mad ....Troubling To Say The Least n/t

[EFerrari]

61. Discussion on this topic has been swarmed and shut down all day.

I gave Mike a rec, too.

[Binka]

63. Of Course It Has

I'm not surprised though, it is a daily occurrence these days.

[Ignis]

94. Bizarre, isn't it? It must be Opposite Day at DU.

It's hard to recognize this place, these days.

[MineralMan]

59. I apologize for my question about your opinion of this article.

I did not realize that you were actually the original author of the article you posted. I looked at your profile, and the link to your website made that clear to me, along with the links in your signature line. I did not know that. So, you have stated your opinion by posting this. In your own words, "The people know a fraud when they see it." So, you are saying that the Obama Administration is perpetrating a fraud with this appointment. I understand now. So, please accept my apology for asking a question that has been answered.

[autorank]

147. No problem

No apology necessary, none. It was a reasonable question and you would not be expected to know the answer, although
quite a few people know since it's no secret.

[LiberalAndProud]

62. Yes, Richard Hunt is simply thrilled.

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2010/09/16/the-elizabeth-warren-end-run/
Banks cry foul

Naturally, this was an affront to the banking industry, which has spent the greater part of this year trying desperately to keep her away from the agency. Now the industry has a new complaint in its anti-Warren arsenal: process. As Consumer Bankers Association President Richard Hunt told Politico: "This agency must begin its mission with full credibility and confidence from our domestic and international markets and consumers. Circumventing this process is an ill-advised first step."

But administration officials have told the New York Times and other outlets that a months long appointment battle would stand in the way of establishing the agency, and that the stakes are too high to delay.

The move also allows Warren to prove that she has what it takes to lead a body dedicated to the protection of consumers. The banking industry, Republican senators, and financial services lobbyists have hit two themes hard when discussing the Harvard Law School professor: she doesn't have management experience and she's anti-business. The undercurrent of this message is that she's a rabble rouser who would use any influence or power to destroy the banking system and lead pitchforked mobs to destroy laissez faire capitalism

"We think this arrangement will give Warren the chance to clearly establish that she's both an effective manager and a strong but reasonable regulator," says Mike Calhoun, the president of the Center for Responsible Lending, an organization that was part of Americans for Financial Reform.

[EFerrari]

64. The other side screams no matter what we do. That is no measure. n/t

[LiberalAndProud]

67. True. Some scream no matter what. Ironic isn't it?

The bankers are not happy. Bob Corker is not happy. Chris Dodd is not happy. Olympia Snowe is not happy. Susan Collins is not happy.

That makes me happy. Call me evil.

[Tarheel_Dem]

71. Do you think the irony is even remotely recognizable?

:rofl:

"Some scream no matter what"

Indeed, some people just like to bitch & moan, and we're all too familiar with that here at DU.

[Hubert Flottz]

77. Tim Geithner is a snake.

The deck is not just stacked...the Banksters own it.

[OregonBlue]

85. That may be true but how can the appointment of Warren to this position be a negative.

Do you believe she is a savvy strong woman who will get things done or do you believe she is wimp who will fall in line with whatever Timmy says? I for one am quite certain she will get things done and if anyone tries to stop her, we will hear from her loud and clear. That has been her MO so far and I do not believe that will change so, in my own opinion, this article is just a hit piece.

[Lost4words]

89. Lets wait and hear what Ms Warren has to say about the appointment

[OregonBlue]

102. I'm more than happy to wait and see what she has to say. I didn't post this ridiculous story about

her selling out.

[Lost4words]

116. you dont have to defend yourself to me, I can read!

I dont think Ms Warren can sell out to an administration that has sold out!

[metapunditedgy]

106. Uh, because there's more to the story than just the "appointment"?

Maybe they could take turns, with Warren being Geithner's boss half the year. No need to worry though... progressives will always be hamstrung so they can't cause any harm.

[autorank]

150. They hold full title

But they've overplayed their hand.

[earth mom]

84. Huge K & R! Obviously the unwreck crew can't handle the truth once again!

:kick:

[Lost4words]

88. Kick & Rec!

they seem to breed like rabbits but smell like rats, they are all over the place here these days.

[Starry Messenger]

91. Well k & r.

Good lord, my ignore list really came out for this one.

[Binka]

96. LOL I'm Glad You Said That!

We must share the same list!

[Starry Messenger]

97. LOL, I'll bet we do Binka!

:hi:

[mkultra]

92. i thought that was her role while she develops the new agency

you cant appoint someone to a job that doesn't exist yet

[Ignis]

93. K&R for one of DU's great writers.

Here's hoping we see some Change soon that involves Warren not acting in an advisory capacity to Timmy "fiddling while Rome burns" Geithner.

Thanks for continuing to speak the truth to power, even when it results in having to suffer personal attacks from your fellow DUers, Autorank.

:patriot:

[autorank]

149. Thanks so much for your reply!

It's all good with my fellow DUers. Any of us that still have the chance to speak just a fragment of the
truth will do it. The truth is right in front of us, no hidden conspiracies, just actions that speak
loudly.

:hi:

[ipaint]

99. I read here on Du that Obama didn't appoint her interim head

because of the shorter time frame she would be able to hold the position but Barney Frank is saying Warren didn't want the head job for 5 years,seems an interim appointment would have worked, so what's the real story?

They really need to be on the same page with the lame excuses for policy that sucks up to the financial elite, they look like amateurs.

[geek tragedy]

131. He DID add her as an interim appointee.

She's there as long as she wants to be, and she can be named director later.

Right now, she gets to hit the ground running. And she gets to argue policy with Larry and Timmy behind closed doors.

[bvar22]

101. I'm waiting for more info,

but if Warren answers to Geithner who answers to Obama.....I'm not happy.
Neither of them have a sterling track record of advocating FOR the Consumer.

A "Consumer Advocate" needs to be "independent" by definition.

K&R for more information.

[EFerrari]

105. Kick

[autorank]

112. THNX!

[boppers]

111. "Warren's role downgraded"

Wrong before the title's even finished.

What role did she already have that was downgraded, pray tell?

[maryf]

113. K&R

Keep telling it like it is, auto! the truth will out! :hi:

[autorank]

118. THNX!!!!!!!!!

[maryf]

144. Of course

I'd like to say your posts are always a pleasure to read, sometimes it's painful! but thanks again, and here's another :kick:

[Name removed]

114. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sendero]

115. Let's face it..

... we cannot tell at this time how this is going to play out. It has a whiff of the usual bullshit to me, but I can't be sure.

We'll know in a year or so if Ms. Warren has any real power by the nature of the changes that are made. It will be A TOTAL CAKEWALK to tell the difference between policies she would advocate and those her bosses would because SHE HAS SOME INTEGRITY.

So, give up all of the arguing, nobody really knows at this point.

[dionysus]

117. try harder.

[DevonRex]

122. If he tried any harder his head would implode.

:evilgrin:

[Bryn]

120. K & R

for more information

I wouldn't be surprised, though because the Money Party is powerful. I hope Elizabeth will actually work for us The People.

[NYC Liberal]

123. What a load of crap. So, she is participating in a "fraud" then, is she?

:eyes:

Unrecced.

[DevonRex]

124. Don't you know that anybody who works with, for, around Obama is a fraud?

Or a gullible dupe? Or a chump? Or a sell-out? Or a corporatist? :rofl:

[geek tragedy]

127. K&U. Anyone reccing this doesn't care about

policy, they just hate Barack Obama as a human being and see everything through that prism.

Now Elizabeth Warren is part of an evil fraud conspiracy. Because Barack Obama hired her.

Not a single respectable person is recommending this diary.

[xultar]

133. Then that my friend makes you completely unaware of what UNREC MEANS!!!!!! IT DOES NOT

mean that you disagree. Nor does it mean that rec means agree.

It means whether or not a story belongs on the greatest page.

A stupid story can go onto the greatest page if not to taunt the article writer.


RECOGNIZE!!!

[geek tragedy]

135. This article is shit and it belongs in a toilet, not the greatest page.

I've seen more logic employed in monkey shit fights.

[EFerrari]

136. Um, you're too late to rec or unrec this thread.

[geek tragedy]

137. You are correct.

Fortunately, the majority of DU'ers who saw this piece of shit voted to flush it.

[EFerrari]

138. That is the way it works, yes. nt

[Nikki Stone1]

143. No surprise there.

.

[autorank]

145. !

:hi:

[Name removed]

148. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.