Posted on 01/16/2010 3:55:45 AM PST by Cheap_Hessian
WASHINGTON—Democrats' last-minute scramble to salvage the special U.S. Senate election in Massachusetts is offering the first test of a populist pitch that party strategists hope to take to other campaigns this year.
Central to the strategy is the new White House plan to tax big banks as punishment for their role in the financial crisis. President Barack Obama announced the proposal Thursday amid reports that financial institutions bailed out by the government are enjoying healthy profits and paying generous bonuses, and as a bipartisan commission began hearing testimony on banks' role in the economic crisis.
But events Friday in Massachusetts showed how the White House and top Democrats aim to use the bank tax as a political weapon: Senate candidate Martha Coakley, Vice President Joe Biden and others used the issue to portray Ms. Coakley, who is vying to succeed the late Edward Kennedy, as tough on bank executives and portray Republican Scott Brown as coddling them.
The shift suggests Democrats view Mr. Obama's health-care overhaul, his top domestic priority and a leading issue in the contest, as a less effective political topic, and possibly even a disadvantage.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
They are enjoying healthy profits and benefits because he is not making the regulators ENFORCE THE LAWS ON THE BOOKS!
I see no difference between Obama and Hugo Chavez. None.
Hello, this is a tax on consumers, not the banks.
I dare this sorry piece of crap to go down this road.
Especially when his Treasury Dept is trying to legislate a way to confiscate the 401k and IRA funds that are privately owned, by forcing them into Treasuries.
If every single Republican doesn’t include this in their campaign next year, they are nuts. Period.
“Bank Tax Is Centerpiece of Party’s New Populism”
No!
It is just another attack on Free Enterprise and it’s pure Marxism-Leninism from Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals” with the dedication to Satan, “the first radical”, in the introduction.
That’s Barack the Magic Negro’s handbook.
Absolutely— This is a cheap trick of Obama’s to up his poll numbers, making people think he will tax “banks.” If he wants to PUNISH the banks why doesn’t he have the Office of Inspector General and Eric Holder file suits for misuse and recovery of federal funds? Because the banks are his buddies and they know he knows they know he and his campaign got big chunks of the dough.
Not that I agree with populists, but watching elites pretending to be populists is quite amusing.
Obama and the Dems are doing everything they can to destroy our economy, our banking system, and to bring on the Great Depression (21st century style) scenario into this country. They are well on their way to succeeding.
The people of this country ARE NOT STUPID, ARE FED UP, AND ARE ON THE MARCH TO THROW THESE BUMS OUT and no Obama-led attacks on banks, businesses, or evil corporations are going to save the sorry necks of these Demonrats bent on destruction!
(but don’t tell the Corruptocrats - they think their strategy is working....)
I would like to know WHEN the hearings are to expose the LYING hypocrits in Governments resonsibility for the COLLAPSE.Can Anyone say COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT? Can Anyone say ACORN?
Why is the opposition letting this Facist bunch get away with demonizing the Financial sector alone?
Well, Banks are borrowing money from the Fed at 0% interest and then buying treasuries with the cash that are paying 2%.
Any dunce can make money in that environment, the problem is those treasury notes are paid back by...taxpayers.
So basically Obamao wants a cut of that action, and at the end of the day it is merely a tax increase on everyone not just banks.
Leave it to the media to delcare that the center piece of populism is A NEW TAX.
It will be interesting to see the populist reaction to a bank statement entry....... “Fedeeral Check tax at $.25 per item” or “Deposit Flow tax at $1.00/100”
According to the Junk Media's hero, Dear Reader, we are suppose to be mad at the banks and demand “We want our money back” from the people who repaid the TARP money with interest.
However, the money 0 and the Dems spent on bailing out the Auto Workers Unions, their political cronies at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae plus all the “Stimulus” money shelled out to various activist groups we are not suppose to want back?
Not only CEOs work at banks. It’s a kick in the ass to the millions employed in the financial industry. Average Joes and Janes working pay check to pay check in the mail rooms, accounting departments, as secretarys, etc. in banks across the country. So many regular folks in the banking industry lost jobs after the collapse. The commie is punishing the private sector. He’ll be after the oil industry next. How many people does “big oil” employ? Heads up Texas. You’re going to be next. Republicans should be hammering on obama the job killer.
At this point it is just policy wonk chatter by the administration. With 7 out of 10 Americans against 401K tinkering, I wouldn't think it likely to occur. Although as we all know, chatter sometimes makes it to reality...
Uh, I don’t know how to break this to you, but health care is pulling a 60+ negative rate.
And it doesn’t seem to be slowing him a bit.
Moreover, this was brought up in hearings in the Democratic congress in 2008, with the full knowledge that Bush would veto it.
The fact that it’s being given a public comment period by the Treasury Dept (with this idiot in the WH) should give you pause.
They can also tax us at 100%, but I think that is unlikely.
You have more faith than I do, I must say!
When is the Federal government going to take responsibility for its part in the financial debacle? If you force banks to make bad loans, you’re building a house of cards. Eventually, it will fall down. There’s no point in doing again what caused the collapse the last time - bad loans. But certain Democratic politicians don’t want that lesson to be known.
The 401K issue popped up about a year ago when a nutty professor advocated it at a congressional hearing. The committee had to back track and say they weren't going to make 401K changes.
I remember.
Teresa Ghilarducci started this crap when Dems controlled Congress but Bush was in the WH.
It’s a whole new ballgame now. BO is in the WH and his profligate spending is leading to WHEN not IF our currency collapses, without an influx of cash.
He WILL sign such legislation, whereas Bush never would. As we used to say in Cleveland, BO never had a pot to piss in, nor a window to throw it out of.
He doesn’t believe in the liberty borne of private property, as he’s been a social wefare case (via one form or another) from birth to the time he got his book proceeds.
Once you have a program in place, it is hard to change it much. I just don't think the independent voter will tolerate any tinkering. After this health care mess, it is unlikely democrats would even want to test that water.
Federal employees already receive special health care and retirement benefits and as Obama's government grows by leaps and bounds, fewer still will carry the load until they can no longer carry the load and quit leaving Obama as Dictator. That is what you have when the private sector is destroyed/killed and the United States as a country, dies as a Nation. Far fetched? Hardly...we are on the cusp of once again seeing the Free Man fight for his/her Liberty...the age of Obama apparently demands it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
