White House: "We are not anti-business"

[Magox]

The White House's Message: "We are not anti-business"

 

The White House has launched a coordinated campaign to push back against the perception taking hold in corporate America and on Wall Street that President Barack Obama is promoting an anti-business agenda.

 

 

Obama has been happy to be seen by voters as cracking down on Wall Street but those efforts have had an unintended result: feeding a sense that the president and his party are indifferent or even actively hostile toward big business, whether those businesses are Silicon Valley tech companies, Midwest manufacturers or Main Street small businesses.

 

Please!!

 

After they've demonized just about every profitable sector of the economy, and enacted (Rammed through against the will of the American electorate) Wall Street Reform, Health Insurance Reform, Credit Card Reform, and now attempting to Reform Traditional Energy sources through Cap and Trade, now they want to all of a sudden act like they are pro-business. Only a total partisan (*^*&%^$^#would believe this crap.

 

I got out ahead of this story a few days ago, with the Obama private sector hirings thread, remember DAVID?

 

Wall Street executives feel burned mostly by the “fat cat” rhetoric employed by the White House to push financial reform. They also do not like many elements of the Dodd-Frank bill, though it did not turn out to be as bad as once feared.

 

Other major corporate titans have also slammed the White House recently.

 

At a recent dinner in Rome, G.E. Chief Executive Jeff Immelt, said “business did not like the U.S. president and the president did not like business,” according to an account in the Financial Times. G.E. subsequently took the extraordinary step of saying said Mr. Immelt’s remarks “do not represent our views.”

 

Immelt also spoke about the generally sour mood among corporate America towards the economy and government policy: "People are in a really bad mood [in the U.S.]," he said. "We [the U.S.] are a pathetic exporter. . . We have to become an industrial powerhouse again but you don't do this when government and entrepreneurs are not in synch."

 

Verizon Communications Chief Executive Ivan Seidenberg, head of the influential Business Roundtable, slammed the administration in a recent speech in Washington.

 

The Business Roundtable, which includes CEO’s of the biggest companies in the U.S., has had ongoing contact with the White House and Seidenberg’s comments were widely interpreted as indicating a major schism between corporate America and the West Wing.

 

In his speech, Seidenberg said he had been invited to the White House 16 times but that the administration was not focused on job growth and was instead “trying to micromanage industries."

 

He called the U.S. corporate tax code a “major impediment to international competitiveness” and described the U.S. as a “fly-over zone” on world trade. He added that financial reform went a “step too far.”

 

The latest themes from Geithner and the White House appear to be direct responses to the major complaints from Immelt and Seidenberg on trade policy and corporate taxation. That is no accident. And the success of the White House effort to shift the perception of corporate America could determine the direction of the economic recovery and the fate of Democrats this fall.

 

However, this article fails in one area. It doesn't mention or even suggest the cynicism of this administrations attempt to woo Campaign donations from the business sector. Knowing that they've demonized many profitable industries, these companies now don't feel the need to contribute to the Democratic party any longer, at least not for now.

 

perfect storm of events — the recession, Wall Street anger at Washington, donors who feel ignored by the White House and interest group dissatisfaction — has Democrats bracing for a brutal fundraising period and fearful of losing dominance in longtime donor stronghold and megarich New York.

 

While the exact quarterly figures won’t be known until after the July 15 filing deadline, a number of Democratic campaign insiders said the past few months were a mighty struggle to raise cash for candidates.

 

It's a humbling moment for Democratic moneymakers in the richest city in the world, an uncomfortable and unfamiliar position for New York fundraisers after a long ride on the gravy train. Beyond a free-flowing financial market that managed to rebound after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, there were 16 flush years of having a Clinton family member in a position of power and working the Big Apple donor base hard.

 

Let's be real here, elections are coming, Obama is already thinking about 2012, now that they've punished these industries, they want to extend an olive branch to them, and say, "You know what guys, this is best for all of us, (chuckle chuckle), and let's move forward together, (AND GIVE ME SOME !@#$ING MONEY), what do you say guys?"

[KD in CA]

How pathetic. If they need to actually make that kind of statement, it proves their guilt more than any policy criticism we could level.

[IDBillzFan]

The White House's Message: "We are not anti-business"

This article from Daily Caller this morning does a great job wrapping up all the points you've been making.

 

What I find particularly intriguing about this administration is that it is completely living up to the off-the-record chatter that it is as thin-skinned as an administration could possible be. If you took the time to revisit the past 18 months, you might be surprised how disjointed its agenda has become. They try to focus on various items, but the very moment they sense they're being criticized about something -- anything -- they send out the mouthpieces to try and get ahead of it, never realizing that what they're really doing is providing justification to the criticisms.

 

When they are criticized for being too slow to the oil spill, then send Obama down there for a couple of 20-minute photo ops.

 

When they are criticized for not being angry enough about the oil spill, he announces that he wants to know "whose ass to kick."

 

When they are criticized for not pushing immigration reform, they sue Arizona for a law they didn't even read.

 

When they are criticized for not paying attention to jobs, they announce they're focused like a laserbeam on jobs, and then do nothing.

 

When they are criticized for overspending, they announce they're going to make agencies photocopy on both sides of a piece of paper.

 

This group wouldn't make it past a 30-day hiring probation at McDonalds.

[OCinBuffalo]

This article from Daily Caller this morning does a great job wrapping up all the points you've been making.

 

What I find particularly intriguing about this administration is that it is completely living up to the off-the-record chatter that it is as thin-skinned as an administration could possible be. If you took the time to revisit the past 18 months, you might be surprised how disjointed its agenda has become. They try to focus on various items, but the very moment they sense they're being criticized about something -- anything -- they send out the mouthpieces to try and get ahead of it, never realizing that what they're really doing is providing justification to the criticisms.

 

When they are criticized for being too slow to the oil spill, then send Obama down there for a couple of 20-minute photo ops.

 

When they are criticized for not being angry enough about the oil spill, he announces that he wants to know "whose ass to kick."

 

When they are criticized for not pushing immigration reform, they sue Arizona for a law they didn't even read.

 

When they are criticized for not paying attention to jobs, they announce they're focused like a laserbeam on jobs, and then do nothing.

 

When they are criticized for overspending, they announce they're going to make agencies photocopy on both sides of a piece of paper.

 

This group wouldn't make it past a 30-day hiring probation at McDonalds.

To sum it up: they simply don't believe in any of the things they are being criticized for not doing/caring about. If you don't believe in something, and you have any power at all, chances are you aren't going to do it.

 

But, maybe that's too easy a way to think of it. I believe that many Liberals want to good things to happen for this country and its people. The problem is the methods they choose to bring those good things about are completely f'ed.

 

The real problem is the petulance of the Liberals in DC, and those that make their living off of whipping up angst. Well, once again, their methods are going to screw them over when it comes time to campaign. Might be time to get new methods.

[drnykterstein]

This article from Daily Caller this morning does a great job wrapping up all the points you've been making.

 

What I find particularly intriguing about this administration is that it is completely living up to the off-the-record chatter that it is as thin-skinned as an administration could possible be. If you took the time to revisit the past 18 months, you might be surprised how disjointed its agenda has become. They try to focus on various items, but the very moment they sense they're being criticized about something -- anything -- they send out the mouthpieces to try and get ahead of it, never realizing that what they're really doing is providing justification to the criticisms.

 

When they are criticized for being too slow to the oil spill, then send Obama down there for a couple of 20-minute photo ops.

 

When they are criticized for not being angry enough about the oil spill, he announces that he wants to know "whose ass to kick."

 

When they are criticized for not pushing immigration reform, they sue Arizona for a law they didn't even read.

 

When they are criticized for not paying attention to jobs, they announce they're focused like a laserbeam on jobs, and then do nothing.

 

When they are criticized for overspending, they announce they're going to make agencies photocopy on both sides of a piece of paper.

 

This group wouldn't make it past a 30-day hiring probation at McDonalds.

So now you are criticizing Obama for responding to criticism?

[TheMadCap]

So now you are criticizing Obama for responding to criticism?

 

I believe his point is that their "response" to criticism is to say they are taking steps to address the issue, and then do nothing of importance...

[Magox]

Jared Bernstein, a top White House economic adviser who is on Vice President Joe Biden’s staff, said Wednesday that “President Obama is obviously deeply pro-business, pro-markets.”

 

I wonder what he's thinking when he says such utter bull ****? Does he take a deep gasp, chuckle or knows that a large segment (sheeple) of the population will just believe anything that comes from this administration (erm erm David and Conner), or all of the above?

 

That statement is beyond absurdity. "Obviously deeply" give me a !@#$ing break.

[Chef Jim]

So now you are criticizing Obama for responding to criticism?

 

Good one.

 

No dude, he's saying is good leaders don't respond to criticism with knee jerk reactions, some good ones don't respond at all. Many are actually proactive enough to have already responded to the issues. But here's the problem I don't blame the administration as much as I blame the bureaucratic bull **** that makes it almost impossible to get anything done in a timely and efficient manner. And what is this administrations answer to that? Make the damn bureaucracy bigger.

[IDBillzFan]

So now you are criticizing Obama for responding to criticism?

Hey, speaking of people who wouldn't last 30 days at McDonalds...it's Conner, everyone!

 

To answer your question for you, if you refer to my original statement, you will note I find this "intriguing." Frankly, I wouldn't be critical of it because it lends itself well to the narrative now playing out that it will be a long time before the America people again elect a president whose collective executive experience can be written down on a piece of paper, crumbled up and comfortably inserted up the ass of a gnat with room to spare.

 

During the campaign, I felt there were plenty of things for which you could criticize Obama, but I foolishly didn't think a lack of executive experience was worth the battle. I was wrong. It is, without question, turning into his biggest Achille's heel because his behavior to criticism is not that of a leader, but that of a low level clerk who, on his first day of work, wants to know what time he gets to take breaks so he can go to the lunch room to find out the upcoming holiday schedule.

 

Most people do not see him as a leader, and those who still do insist that the rest of us are just not smart enough to grasp the depth and scope with which Obama can envision the world and all of its cures.

[/dev/null]

This group wouldn't make it past a 30-day hiring probation at McDonalds.

 

Do-Do-Do-Da-

 

Hey, speaking of people who wouldn't last 30 days at McDonalds...it's Conner, everyone!

That was uncalled for. Funny, but uncalled for nonetheless.

[OCinBuffalo]

Most people do not see him as a leader, and those who still do insist that the rest of us are just not smart enough to grasp the depth and scope with which Obama can envision the world and all of its cures.

This is the part of this I am really sick of hearing.

 

The people who say this are the same people who will tell us we shouldn't have faith in God, because we shouldn't put our faith in anything we can't see...

 

What fine clothes the Emperor has! Don't you agree?

[Magox]

This is the part of this I am really sick of hearing.

 

The people who say this are the same people who will tell us we shouldn't have faith in God, because we shouldn't put our faith in anything we can't see...

 

What fine clothes the Emperor has! Don't you agree?

You're like a brilliant nincompoop!

 

But I love you Maan!

[IDBillzFan]

That was uncalled for. Funny, but uncalled for nonetheless.

You're right. That was uncalled for, and I believe an apology is necessary.

 

So I just want to genuinely apologize with all my heart to all McDonald's employees who thought I was serious when I suggested that Conner could do their job.

 

We all know better.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

You're right. That was uncalled for, and I believe an apology is necessary.

 

So I just want to genuinely apologize with all my heart to all McDonald's employees who thought I was serious when I suggested that Conner could do their job.

 

We all know better.

 

Thank you, Thank you! Try da veal!

[Magox]

I found this somewhat funny:

 

"We're not there yet. We've got a long way to go. But what is absolutely clear is, we're moving in the right direction. We are headed in the right direction, and that's -- the surest way out of this storm is to go forward, not to go backwards.”

 

So today, our president said that we should look forward, not backwards, yet in the same speech he said:

 

"These folks drove the economy into a ditch,"

 

"It is a little odd getting lectures on sobriety from folks that spent like drunken sailors for the last decade,"

 

After a “vicious recession” and a “decade of irresponsibility” that was a “sledgehammer hitting the middle class”

 

Yup, we should look forward, not backwards.

[Adam]

Hey, speaking of people who wouldn't last 30 days at McDonalds...it's Conner, everyone!

 

To answer your question for you, if you refer to my original statement, you will note I find this "intriguing." Frankly, I wouldn't be critical of it because it lends itself well to the narrative now playing out that it will be a long time before the America people again elect a president whose collective executive experience can be written down on a piece of paper, crumbled up and comfortably inserted up the ass of a gnat with room to spare.

That's naive. I wouldn't be shocked if they do. They will either elect a democrat or republican in 2012. Cause the American people are idiots!

[IDBillzFan]

That's naive. I wouldn't be shocked if they do. They will either elect a democrat or republican in 2012. Cause the American people are idiots!

But will they elect a Democrat or Republican with no executive experience? Remains to be seen.

[Adam]

But will they elect a Democrat or Republican with no executive experience? Remains to be seen.

Wouldn't surprise me at all.

[/dev/null]

You're right. That was uncalled for, and I believe an apology is necessary.

 

So I just want to genuinely apologize with all my heart to all McDonald's employees who thought I was serious when I suggested that Conner could do their job.

 

We all know better.

 

Bah, beat me to the punchline

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Ahmedinijad: "We're not anti-Jew!"

 

Seems a fitting analogue.