Obama picks Geithner for Treasury

Can Swamp quit playing games with Obama stories? You left out the next paragraph in the article from the WSJ that spoke to Obama's absenteeism in the financial crisis: "Mr. Obama plans to introduce his entire economic team early next week, hoping to sooth the roiling financial markets and answer RISING PRESSURE on the president-elect TO BECOME MORE INVOLVED." The Tribune has ignored even M.S. media cries for Obama to come out of hiding on the financial crisis and to calm concerns over his damaging corporate tax increase plans.

Another guy from the Clinton Administration: Change We Can Believe In!
Real original Barry

1. Geithner is not from the Clinton Administration - even if he was, the Clinton Administration had an economic expansion and a budget surplus.

2. Obama is not the current President and no longer a Senator. The Democrats only currently own a slim majority can can't pass any legislation without President Bush.

3. As a result of the announcement, stocks have increased.

All it took was for BHO to announce this guy for the post? My question is where have you been BHO? If you would have announced this a week ago maybe I would not have lost as much of my life savings this week. Thank you sir for finally trying to stop the bleeding...

Dan - It's just two short paragraphs. Read it. Geithner was not in the Clinton administration.

Dan failed to read more than one sentence and missed the fact that he DIDN'T pick the 'guy from the Clinton Administration'. Yikes.

Dan apparently is one of those people who see what they expect and/or want to see. The story reported correctly that Summers was the person from the Clinton administration. Geithner joined the Treasury Department in 1988--under the Reagan administration. He continued to serve there under George H. W. Bush. He was appointed president of the N.Y. Fed in 2003 by the current occupant. Real original thinking, Dan.

K-Los, so if stocks rose because of Obama today, how do you explain what's happened to the market since Election Day? (BTW, I know stock's rose because of the pick of Geithner. I'd just like to hear if you're among the throng of Obama supporters who believe a solitary uptick can be credited to Obama, but none of the massive losses since Election Day can be pinned on investor's fears about Obama's policy goals.)

RE:JB
I like to call myself an "independent", and yet a realist. I definitely don't think Obama should be credited for the uptick in the market based on him winning. I think the market is just reacting to some, any sense that the government will make some positive moves to shore up the economy.

Although I consider myself a budget hawk and would like the government to be fiscally conservative, I am in favor of Obama's idea of investing in our core infrastructure that will reap great benefits in the future. Also, sure we can let the manufacturing jobs go; however, they must be replaced be reasonable comparative paying jobs that alternative energy can bring. Service jobs just won't do it.

Dan is correct. According to his bio, Geithner worked within at least three administrations. That included stints during the Clinton years, working for Treasury secretaries Summers and Rubin. While at the NY fed, Geithner has been charged with overseeing the bailout of Wall Street and, in particular, AIG.

Aardmore, please. If the mainstream media invested time reporting actual stories instead of whipping people into a frenzy over Hillary Clinton all week, folks would be aware that Bush has all but checked out even though he's still the president. As K-Los stated, Obama is not in charge, Bush is. Yet, there's been nary a peep from him about what he intends to do about anything. Instead, he's content to allow the country to continue spiraling downward.

Quite hilarious how all the wingnuts are complaining that Obama isn't fixing Bush's mess fast enough.

dan,
These people actually know what they are doing. Geithner and others, Paul Krugman included, have been sounding the alarm on this catastrophe for years. Nobody in power wanted to listen.

The present cataclysm is unfolding too fast to wait two more months for meaningful action. BushCo seems completely silent and motionless. I'll even grant you that the Dems. in congress seem unable to move on this.

We need real leadership.

Here's what I propose;
Bush and Cheney call a press conference and step down immediately, and at the same time call for a unanimous acclimation by both parties in congress to install Obama early. They would have to get something in front of the Supremes to allow this ASAP.

This action might even add a tiny shine to the BushCo legacy; In the end he finally did something right.

Frankly, 60 more days of dithering may push us into GD2.

Dag and Los,

According to AP, he was part of the Treasury department in the Clinton administration.

CM,

President Bush did call for tighter regulation of Fannie and Freddie,
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

but was rebuffed by the democrats - specifically Brothel Barney Frank:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

The market is going down because it wants a stimulus package now rather than later. The rise in the last hour is temporally related to the Geithner appointment but how happy the market is can only be told by the reaction over a little longer time period, If it starts down on Monday then I doubt this appointment meant much.

For those who have been so silent about Bush's failure and are complaining that Obama has not changed very much, you would do well to learn humility, to which if you really want success you could add grace.

Those who said Geithner was ringing the bell for years are wrong. Geithner was responsible for Wall Street regulation and he was a deer in the headlights. His testimony before Congress was extremely weak. This does not instill confidence in the markets or a counterweight to the massive mistakes of the Fed. It simply reinforces the cronyism that is becoming evident in Obama's picks. How about some fresh faces outside of the ruling political elite? Even some private industry people?

I voted for Obama and he is already on the verge of losing my vote. He is miscalculating. We didn't vote for a return to Clintonomics or more of the failed Democratic ideology so pervasive in Washington. I voted for change.

As long as we are grasping at straws, Geithner is working at the Fed, so he worked in the Bush administration.

Jim Cramer faults this guy for his cooperation with Peterson in the failure to support Lehman Bros.

The results of that failure are still being manifest globally.

In WW II they relieved people of command for errors like that.

Actually, Cramer would probably be a better SecTres than this guy.
At least he can explain what is happening and why.

"Actually, Cramer would probably be a better SecTres than this guy.
At least he can explain what is happening and why."

Just what we need in the gvmt -- another blow-hard who doesn't know what he is talking about.

How does that change smell?

Geithner is President of the New York Federal Reserve, the Fed's most powerful branch. Geithner is Helicopter Ben's pilot flying over Lower Manhattan showering the masters of the universe with stacks of cash.

You could not possibly have more continuity at Treasury then Paulson to Geithner.

Enjoy the change.

I am dissapointed to see that Obama feels that to fix the so called "economy", he should hire the NY Federal Reserve's President. *Sigh*....I guess Obama won't be leading in a monetary revolution and really fixing the source of this silly crisis rooted in fractional reserve banking etc.

I wish more people would stand up against corrupt banking practices.

Thanks.