This Is the Next Big Fight Between Progressives and the Wall Street Dems

[RiverLover]

This Is the Next Big Fight Between Progressives and the Wall Street Dems
Zoe Carpenter, 11/24/14

...Now the Burger King move is implicated in a fight brewing between some Senate Democrats and President Obama, a clash that throws into relief the split between the party’s Wall Street wing and its progressives. One of the people involved in the deal was Antonio Weiss, a major Democratic fundraiser, the publisher of The Paris Review, and the global head of investment banking at Lazard Ltd, a firm that has put together several major inversion deals. As of November 12, he’s also President Obama’s pick to oversee the domestic financial system—including the implementation of the Dodd-Frank financial-reform act, and consumer protection—at the Treasury.

But a growing number of senators are objecting to Obama’s latest Wall Street nominee. Unsurprisingly, Massachusetts’s Elizabeth Warren is at the front of the insurrection. “Enough is enough,” she proclaimed in the Huffington Post last week. “It’s time for the Obama administration to loosen the hold that Wall Street banks have over economic policy making.”

...Warren isn’t the only one who has concerns about Weiss’s nomination. Dick Durbin, the Senate’s second-ranking Democrat, opposes Weiss’s nomination, too. Independent Senator Bernie Sanders announced on Sunday that he also will vote no. “We need an economic team at the White House which will hold Wall Street accountable and fight for the needs of working families, not more Wall Street executives,” Sanders said in a statement. Although other Democrats on the finance committee have not taken a position on Weiss, a Democratic aide told Bloomberg Businessweek that a number of other senators are privately unsupportive of the nominee. At least a few members of the Party of No will probably boost progressive opposition to Weiss; Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley, who sponsored an anti-inversion bill in 2004, has already taken the nomination as an opportunity to bash Obama’s “hypocrisy.”

http://www.thenation.com/blog/191289/next-big-fight-between-progressives-and-wall-street-dems

"Wall Street Dems" are fake dems, and they should let us know that is where they stand before they even run for an elected position with (D) behind their name.

But does anyone running as a democrat ever admit they're Wall Street before elections?

[noiretextatique]

1. you're nothing but a purist

who is out to destroy the democratic party....just like the teabaggers!!!!!
i thought i would save someone the trouble...

[merrily]

2. Contrary to this article, I

think it's very surprising that someone relatively new to politics, like Warren, took a public stand that strong against the head of her party. Especially since her political career owes a lot to Obama. For better or worse, things like that don't happen every day. Not that I've noticed, anyway.

I'm not sure what Durbin is up to.

[Populist_Prole]

3. Bring it on

Let's get the big decisive battle over and done with at once, rather than in slow motion the way it is now. The main reason being is that I want a polarization so solid and so stark, that the the Wall St side will have to admit and run with that title: No more double-talk.

[RiverLover]

4. Ab-so-freeking-lutely!!!

"wall street dems"

In what world is this acceptable??? Why are they here? They need to just go be what they are, be authentic, be republican.

Even better, give us an actual choice when we vote.

[Populist_Prole]

5. Not only that

"Wall St anythings". I mean, who other than a total tool is going to want to hang that label on themselves? The rapaciously rich sorts of course, but then they've always voted as a bloc that way anyway.

[L0oniX]

6. Not voting for the Wall Street turd way candidate is a vote for Nader.

😂

[hifiguy]

7. Lotsa luck, Senator Warren

but Obama is nearly as pure a creation of Wall $treet as HRC is. They own him, for the most part. He let them ALL off the hook and prosecuted no one of importance. Never forget that.