I am getting a little concerned with the Giethner

I have been for Obama all the way thus far - but am having a creeping suspicion about how business is being conducted in the Obama administration ...

I expect Obama to be' hands-on on all important matters - not because I think he is an expert on policy matters - but I do expect him to be an expert on the process.

I expect Obama to solicit opinion that is as diverse as it is deep in its content backed by reasoned arguments and not by ideology alone. The hope is the best idea will bubble up to front based on its merit rather than being helped along by the force of authority. That is the kind of change I was hoping to see.

I somehow feel that this is not how things are being done vis-a-vis the stimulus and Tarp policy bills. I believe Giethner is getting too much of a free hand and I am not liking what I see ..


what do you all think?

I was against that appointment from the beginning.

I don't like Rahm Emanuel either, particularly
the shunning of Howard Dean and other right and
high minded liberals.

is able to think outside the box. I think we need people who can.

and hypothesis or ideology.

This is the republican talking point, Giethner is not
doing enough or he is not man enough for the job, yeah!
just because he knows where all the bodies are buried
the republicans see him as a target.

Would you allow him to at least to fail before joining the
republicans noise machine...dang!

Giethner is personally responsible for the lack of oversight of Citibank when Giethner was at the Federal Reserve. I think Geithner will continue in the ways of Hank Paulsen at the Treasury.

I think Giethner was a very poor choice and that he should be relieved of his Treasury post, and he certainly should not be given any more tax money to waste bailing out these banks.

Never mind that this is demonstrably false when it comes to the stimulus bill. On what do you base your claim that Obama isn't discussing TARP with Geithner and the hundreds of economic advisers he has employed? This thread feels kind of like an asspull.

and leaves everything up to one secretary in the administration. Boy, Obama is really stupid, huh? This is a ridiculous argument. Wall St. hates Geithner's ideas. Why do Dems here not get that?

On the other hand, DUers insist that Wall Street loves this guy.

Geithner has so far refused to do the right thing, either out of foolishness or misplaced loyalty. Every action he has taken has only served to cause further uncertainty and confusion. He has not shown effective leadership. Both the markets and political observers recognize that.

...the other.

Remember, Lehman Brothers was Paulsons former companies largest competition...Goldman Sacs is OK but letting Lehman fail was the match that lit the whole fire.

We could've fixed the problem by tearing down the house of cards slowly vs burning the whole thing to the ground.

the insiders will not fix this mess, just dole out more money with little oversite.

the position of Secretary of the Treasury is probably the most powerful one in all of history. Look how Hank Paulsen used it to stuff money in the pockets of his friends in the dying days of the Bush administration. And that was with nominal Democratic control of Congress!

I feel President Obama could have done much better in picking someone for this position, but then, he has Larry Summers up there at his side, too. His entire Presidency is riding on the shoulders of two guys that I really don't have a lot of confidence in. It's ironic, during the campaign, the focus was put on Obama's possibly being naive when it came to foreign policy, but I fear that with his approach to economic leadership.

Plus he pretty much knows these financial corporations inside and out.

I think Summers was probably the mistake. His arrogance is astounding, his thinking insular, and I can see why he was ousted as Harvard President. He's a brillant man, no doubt, but I don't know if he is a good fit at NEC. His spats with Volcker make me very suspicious.

Examine the premise.

People work so hard to "prove" that Obama is perfect and oh-so-progressive. He's got good points, and he's infinitely better than Junior, but he's a CORPORATIST, and he's not going to rattle the tree of the "everything must be private and for-profit" ideologues.

It's scary, and has been scary for well over a year now how rigidly certain many of the stalwarts are that he's perfect in every way and that all of the faults are the workings of others or clever deception to strategically turn on a dime at some point. Accept the package deal concept.

Yes, there are many sober and level-headed people out there and on this board that realize that he, like all politicians, is a mixed bag, but there are WAAAAAAY too many people who keep finding elaborate ways to fob off all missteps or whatever as the faults of others.

Why must people cling to this bizarre belief that he's squeaky-clean and perfect? It reeks of childish hero-worship.

there is something about the look in his eyes that bothers me, every time I see him. Something is not right or something is being hidden and he cannot face up to it.

I hope I'm wrong, it's just my intuition about people sometimes...