Brady Dennis has a profile of sorts up on Elizabeth Warren where he poses the following horrible dilemma facing America:
She’s either the plain-spoken, supremely smart crusader for middle-class families that her supporters adore, or she’s the power-hungry headline seeker her critics loathe, a fiery zealot disguised in professorial glasses and pastel cardigans.
Who are these critics who hate this woman with the fiery passion of an economic meltdown?
She has received fervent backing from consumer advocates, labor unions, academics and scores of Democratic lawmakers. Tens of thousands of people have signed online petitions urging Obama to choose her. Her endorsements have ranged from the New York Times to MoveOn.org to Dr. Phil.
Others have made no secret about their distaste for Warren, questioning her qualifications and describing her as an ideologue.
“I get disgusted every time I hear her speak. It’s like she’s sitting in some ivory tower, not understanding the ramifications of anything she says,” Anton Schutz, president of Mendon Capital Advisors, recently told Reuters — a sentiment shared by others in the financial industry, though rarely so candidly. “Any person you put in that role really ought to have some industry experience.”
I love the smell of banksters complaining about someone else living in an “ivory tower” in the morning. It smells like…douchebaggery.





37 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About TBogg
RSS/XML Feed
She’s either the plain-spoken, supremely smart crusader for middle-class families that her supporters adore, or she’s the plain-spoken, supremely smart crusader greedy rich pigs, libertarians, and the stupid people who admire such people feel threatened by.
Fixed?
banksters complaining about someone else living in an “ivory tower”…smells like…douchebaggery.
TOTALLY!
Guess they got tired waiting fer Meggs’ Part II.
So, let’s see… potential consumer advocate is liked by consumers (aka “us, the people”) but loathed by those who make their living sucking the marrow from the bones of consumers (aka “them, the bankers”). Assuming he’s keen to surprise us all by making a vaguely savvy move for a change, it’d be kinda neat to see Sir Change-a-Lot appoint Warren to the post — but I won’t be holding my breath. After all, a lot of consumers are kinda like lefties, and until we get the results of that drug test that spokesman Gibbs ordered during his tantrum the other day, who are they to claim they deserve an advocate?
The bankers, of course, already have an advocate — he’s sitting on the big throne in the White House, so they’ll be fine.
When industry is the source of regulators of industry, it makes them very happy, up until the industry falls apart because it’s unprotected from the ills that regulation protects us all from. The banks are in precarious shape because of the toxic assets that they hold, occasioned by collapse of regulation. Will the facts be the determination of who is chosen, or will it be determined by political considerations? That shouldn’t matter, since we’ve been shown so well that survival depends on protecting the consumer and financial industry from the excesses that destroy the economy.
That criticism is the most resounding endorsement of Warren I have seen yet. When the crooks and maniacs you are supposed to regulate hate and fear you, it means you will be very good at you job.
Just wanted to make the point, TBogg, that it’s really a pretty good profile of Warren; it notes, for example, that Warren started out her research on the 1979 bankruptcy law under the presumption that a lot of deadbeats were taking advantage of it, but did a 180 when she actually looked at the stories behind the filings. Also, it points out that First Lady Hillary Clinton opposed the changes to the bankruptcy law, but Senator Hillary Clinton voted for it.
When she voted for it, Obama still hadn’t won the nomination, right?
The mere fact that she is facing opposition from the industry she could be in charge of regulating is reason enough to nominate and confirm her. Like, tomorrow. But I am sure that the always-noble Republican party will gin up some bogus reasons not to do so…always protecting their masters, the big-money machine. Yes, yes, I know Obama took money from them too…give that one a rest, willya? If you don’t like Obama, just think about the alternative…McCain and Palin, ‘running’ (or is it ruining?) the country. Again, the mind boggles…
Someone needs to tell Anton (a name more suited to a Maitre d’ than a money manager) that people who live in ivory (or glass, or steel, or marble, or granite) towers shouldn’t throw stones.
Others have made no secret about their distaste for Ness, questioning his qualifications and describing him as an ideologue.
“I get disgusted every time I hear him speak. It’s like he’s sitting in some ivory tower, not understanding the ramifications of anything he says,” Al Capone, noted local philanthropist, recently told Reuters — a sentiment shared by others in the industry, though rarely so candidly. “Any person you put in that role really ought to have some industry experience.”
Back in late 2008 Al’s counterparts said “Too bad about the hit your finance system took, it’d be a shame if we didn’t get our money anyway. We might have to withhold our ‘expertise’ and crash your whole economy. Nothing personal, it’s just business.”
Yeah, “industry experience” has served America so well in our public servants so far.
Hasn’t it though? Think of all the wonderful things brought to us by those “industry experience” folks, like Geither, Summers, and Bernanke.
Speaking of the latter, excellent takedown today by Dr. Krugman.
I love the smell of banksters complaining about someone else living in an “ivory tower” in the morning. It smells like…douchebaggery.
That would be sort of a fresh scent that leaves you feeling clean and confident, yes?
The industry would like Warren to understand that the industry must always get its way — even if it results in the destruction of the industry. The wise stewards can always get out with cash and reputations intact.
Warren is just pretending to be concerned about the American consumer. Once she gets in there she will turn into a Leprechaun and gain access to every citizens’ pin numbers and steal all of it. baaahaaahaaaahaaaa!
OT – Via SCOTUSblog:
Equals industry puppet! Give me a freaking break you pompous Ass!
“I get disgusted every time I hear her speak. It’s like she’s sitting in some ivory tower, not understanding the ramifications of anything she says…”
Translates roughly to:
Bitch gonna take my profits! #$%^ that @#$%!
here is mendon in his “everyman” look.
he looks very middle class.
hilarious.
A regulator that will actually regulate? WTF! For Wall st. that is a nightmare. That’s why they HATE Liz. They’ll get her just like they did to Eliot Spitzer. You don’t fuck with Wall st. these are dangerous armed thugs.
Thank you!
luvly!
well, now that makes it easy to know how to go incognito. except somehow the costume didn’t work and he recognized her anyway.
with this reasoning, we can all get pastel cardigans with the logo “Professional Left”. make mine baby blue, baby.
This the usual Obama multi-act play with the usual ending where he screws the left as he sucks up to the corporations.
Act one is Gibbs blast at the left
Act two is the appointment of Warren – but while appointing her he will NOT give her the interim job of starting up the agency – a job he does not need Congress to approve. Treas Sec will appoint a bank friendly person for the start up.
Act three is Warren hearings where sub-committee passes her but then we hear that full Senate can’t bring up her nomination because Obama will not use the nuke option of ending the filibuster on nominations – he is more of a coward than the GOP were on the nuke option on judges nominations.
Act four is the Treas Sec sending up the bank friendly person currently running the agency to replace her in the nomination process.
Act five is a show of hard how it was to get the substitute person approved by the Senate (passes by one vote) and an email requesting donations because of Obama’s success.
This is why 800,000 stayed home for the Senator Brown election in Mass – a message had to be sent – but Obama refused to listen – so more messages need be sent – perhaps including the replacing of Obama in 2012, The alternative appears to be a Democratic Party future standard operating procedure of lies to the left during elections followed by sell outs to the GOP and corporations because “where else does the left have to go” We have to show Obama that there are options for those of us on the left.
True, and if Obama doesn’t nominate her, it will be more “douchebaggery.”
Seems likely to me too, the only part you left out is when Ron Ziegler redux bitches because his boss didn’t get credit for “advancing the Warren nomination”. But I doubt anyone in the “amateur left” will fall for it again, lots of advanced degrees here.
Yeah, after the first half dozen times or so, we wise right up!
Is the tenth fox dead?
Either Ms Warren is in or I’m out…..on the streets working as hard as I can to replace this administration….I did it to get them elected and I swear I will work twice as hard to get them out….Everybody else get the email from the Prez asking for a commitment to vote? HAH!!!!!! TORTURE….AFGHANISTAN….DADT….DOMA…TIMMY AGNEW TAX CHEAT….BIG PHARMA DEALS…RAHM….LARRY….BULLSHIT.
Let’s not forget that it wasn’t the “ivory tower,” but serious, real-world biznizmens who brought the country to this sorry pass.
And replace the administration with what? Republicans? Don’t be silly.
I’m in love with Elizabeth Warren.
There, I said it.
Hey, Elizabeth Warren is love. Why else would birds suddenly appear every time she is near?
I’m with you, but you forget the Three Stooges: Geithner, Summers, and Bernanke.