Obama in the Tank for Pritzker

The American Spectator ^ | 9/26/2008 | Edward Sisson

[Paul Revere 76]

Today's banking crisis demonstrates that keeping our banks safe is the President's highest responsibility. If our banks are collapsing, we can't pay our bills, and our government can't fund health care, fight wars to defend us, rebuild our roads, or make our cities safe from hurricanes and other natural disasters.

Franklin Roosevelt's first "fireside chat" famously began, "I want to talk for a few minutes with the people of the United States about banking." Our next President's first words to the nation are also likely to be "about banking." So which man do we want to be talking to us about banking in January 2009? Obviously, we want someone who understands why banks fail, because he'll be able to keep our banks safe.

Which makes it all the more significant that Barack Obama has posted on his campaign website a naive and ignorant defense* of his campaign finance chair, Penny Pritzker, concerning her key leadership involvement in the largest bank failure in the 18 years between the last great banking crisis (the 1980s S&L debacle) and today's even-more-massive banking crisis. The excuses, misdirections, and spin Senator Obama offers in defense of this billionaire failed bank executive are Pritzker spin from start to finish, and expose Obama's profound inability to understand why banks fail and how to keep banks safe.

Seldom has the special access of the wealthy into the inner deliberations of a Presidential candidate been more clearly exposed by the candidate himself. Just as the press is "in the tank" for Obama, Obama is in the tank for Pritzker. And a man in the tank for Pritzker cannot keep our banks safe.

[Harry Wurzbach]

Yet another left-wing “crook” and “liar.”

[Jeff Head]

Obama is an abject part of the criminal conspiracy that has created this mess...and they have done it with a will.

NOW WE KNOW WHAT A COMMUNITY ORGANIZER DOES

[vietvet67]

[Caipirabob]

OMG - LOL!!!!!!

[Dick Bachert]

On December 13, 1803, President Thomas Jefferson sent a short
letter to Albert Gallatin, Secretary of the Treasury. This is
what he wrote:

“From a passage in the letter of the President, I observe an idea
of establishing a branch bank of the United States in New
Orleans. This institution is one of the most deadly hostility
existing, against the principles and form of our Constitution.

The nation is, at this time, so strong and united in its
sentiments, that it cannot be shaken at this moment. But suppose
a series of untoward events should occur, sufficient to bring
into doubt the competency of a republican government to meet a
crisis of great danger, or to unhinge the confidence of the
people in the public functionaries; an institution like this,
penetrating by its branches every part of the union, acting by
command and in phalanx, may, in a critical moment, upset the
government. I deem no government safe which is under the
vassalage of any self constituted authorities, or any other
authority than that of the nation, or its regular functionaries.

What an obstruction could not this Bank of the United States,
with all its branches, be in time of war! It might dictate to us
the peace we should accept, or withdraw its aid. Ought we then
give further growth to an institution so powerful, so hostile?

That it is so hostile we know, 1. From a knowledge of the
principles of the persons composing the body of directors in
every bank, principal or branch, and those of most of the
stockholders; 2, From their opposition to the measures and
principles of the government, and to the election of those
friendly to them; (Note Mr. Jefferson’s reference to what Roger
Sherman called “the friends of paper money”!); And 3, from the
sentiments of the newspapers they support (note that even Mr.
Jefferson had problems with an “establishment media” and this was
1803!).

Now, while we are strong, it is the greatest duty we owe to the
safety of our Constitution, to bring this powerful new enemy to a
perfect subordination under its authorities. The first measure
would be to reduce them to an equal footing only with other
banks, as to the favors of the government. But, in order to be
able to meet a general combination (or alliance) of the banks
against us (the Constitutionally constituted government), in a
critical emergency, could we not make a beginning towards an
independent use of our own money, towards holding our own bank in
all the deposits where it is received, and letting the Treasurer
give his draft or note, for payment at any particular place,
which, in a well conducted government, ought to have as much
credit as any private draft, or bank note, or bill, and would
give us the same facilities which we derive from the banks. I
pray you to turn this subject in your mind, and to give it the
benefit of your knowledge of details; whereas, I have only very
general views of the subject. Affectionate salutations,
/s/ Thomas Jefferson”

[Eastbound]

Heh! I mistakenly read that as ‘commodity organizer,’ as in ‘money.’

[Jeff Head]

Well, when he’s pushing, as a politician, a “bailout” plan that happens to funnel $120+ billion to his original employer, ACORN, I can see how you could easily call it that.

[sergeantdave]

More than 95% of the American people have paid their mortgages, car loans, credit cards and other debts, some at usurious rates, on time and in good faith.

And now some banks tell us they’re broke and need a few trillion more to get back in the black.

The bankers and politicians have squandered that enormous and decades-long good faith payment made by the American people, in this and other areas.

There needs to be a ball-busting solution targetted at these crooked politicians and bankers to assure main street that this won’t happen again. They need to be punished. Perhaps the US House might come up with a package that can settle this down in the taxpayer’s favor.

Frankly, I think we’re on the edge of a storm as these Marxist thieves try to steal trillions more and place the boot of fascism on our necks.