Wolraich: Obama at the Gates of... Gates
Dr. C: In Praise of Writing Binges
Maiello: Gatsby Doesn't Grate
Email I received today, from a group, Bold Progressives:
Billionaire New York mayor Mike Bloomberg calls himself "independent." But he shows no independence from Wall Street bankers.
Last year, he cracked down on Occupy Wall Street. Yesterday, he endorsed Republican Senator Scott Brown against Wall Street's biggest foe -- consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren. He's even pulling together other rich donors to raise money for Brown.
Bloomberg has higher political aspirations. It would greatly benefit him to bury the political career of an inspiring truth teller like Elizabeth Warren -- someone known as the "Sheriff of Wall Street" who could hold him accountable for years to come.
We can't let Wall Street billionaires conspire to defeat Elizabeth Warren.
Thanks for being a bold progressive.
--Adam Green and Stephanie Taylor, PCCC co-founders
I like this group.
Elizabeth Warren, if elected, will have an opportunity, against long odds, to bring along enough fellow US senators in support of policies and actions she supports to rein in the big banks who retain such a dominant, outsized, and unhealthy role in our politics and economy.
Bloomberg and the many other monied interests seeking to defeat her must be very afraid of her to be working so hard to defeat her. I guess one US senator willing to seriously challenge the big bank lobby is one too many for them to tolerate.
In supporting Warren's candidacy by no means do I equate that with agreeing with everything she believes and might try to do. But the present lineup in the Senate is grossly imbalanced, in favor of an absurd and corrupt timidity when it comes to scrutinizing the conduct and role of the big banks in this economy, and in their willingness to seriously consider measures that may be necessary to avoid a repeat down the road, such as limiting their size and potential reach over the wider economy.
If and where Elizabeth Warren (if she wins) is off base, in my estimation she will stand little or no chance of prevailing on particular proposals or initiatives she pursues in the US Senate. Even where she is on target and right she will face very, very tough uphill sledding if she is to prevail. If elected, her factual claims will be scrutinized to the nth degree and she will be called on the carpet wherever she is shown to be incorrect. I think there are plenty of checks and balances in place to ensure that she doesn't become a one-person czarina in the US Congress on policies affecting the financial sector. The problem we face is quite the opposite of that.