Barack Obama Maintains Control Over Banks By Refusing to Accept Repayment of TARP Money - WSJ.com

The "Pay for Performance Act," just passed by the House,... is an outstanding example of class warfare. I'm an Englishman. We invented class warfare, and I know it when I see it. This legislation allows the administration to dictate pay for anyone working in any company that takes a dime of TARP money. This is a whip with which to thrash the unpopular bankers, a tool to advance the Obama administration's goal of controlling the financial system. Full Story »

Posted by Walter Cox - via Columbia Journalism Review
Tags Help
Subjects: U.S., Politics
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Walter Cox - Apr 5, 2009 - 2:10 AM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Walter Cox - Apr 5, 2009 - 2:21 AM PDT

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Glenn LaBauve
1.6
by Glenn LaBauve - Apr. 5, 2009

A ninth grade debate student would recieve a failing grade for this tirade.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Walter Cox
3.9
by Walter Cox - Apr. 5, 2009

In this opinion piece, Stuart Varney brings to the table his unique perspective as an Englishman--basically he sees in the Obama administration the purposeful utilization of governmental power to promote class warfare. Not a polished piece, and many of the author's points need further development, but anyone who cares should read this.

In the San Francisco Bay Area, two local banks found themselves in the position of being controlled by the U.S. government because they accepted relatively small amounts of TARP cash during the bank bailout. They did so not out of need--Mechanics Bank and the Bank of Marin are both exceptionally solid and are rated B+--rather they saw it as a civic duty to accept ,and immediately lend out, the TARP cash in order to do their part in stimulating the economy. Only AFTER THE FACT (!!) ... More »

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Paul Keene
1.8
by Paul Keene - Apr. 5, 2009

A prime example of bad journalism, the author conveniently leaves out the "who" part of the story in order to make his point. The author also conjectures on why the money was refused instead of supplying the official Whitehouse reason. In addition, the author contrives a scenario that doesn't even exist. This isn't news, it's fiction.

It's bad enough that Fox can claim to be a fair and balanced news organization, but for a publication like the WSJ to run the article is beyond the pale.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Donald Hall
2.4
by Donald Hall - Apr. 6, 2009

Special pleading based on inference and rumor - precious few facts filtered through a veil of partisanship.

According to the writer, it's all a dastardly conspiracy. This when we're less than 65 days into the new administration, but 6 months into the financial crunch that, I'm sure, the new administration caused retroactively as part of its long-laid plans for usurping tyrannical power. At worst, the jury should still be out on Varney's assumptions. At best, this is fine rightist bloviating.

See Full Review » (7 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

2.4

Poor
from 4 reviews (40% confidence)
Quality
2.4
Information
2.0
Insight
2.2
Style
2.2
Context
1.7
Expertise
1.7
Originality
2.0
Relevance
4.3
Responsibility
2.0
Popularity
2.5
Recommendation
2.0
Credibility
3.0
# Reviews
2.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!