Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Did Obama hint he's going to appoint Elizabeth Warren?

One interesting nugget from Obama's presser: He seemed to hint strongly that he is leaning towards appointing Elizabeth Warren as his key Wall Street consumer cop, which would throw a big bone to liberals who strongly support her and want to see Obama take a stand on something they care about.

The left has mounted a campaign to get Warren appointed as head of the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which is central to the success of one of Obama's main achievements, the Wall Street reform bill, on the grounds that she's a highly qualified, very aggressive advocate.

Obama was careful to say that no decisions have been made. But he indicated that an announcement is coming, and if you read between the lines of what he said, it sure sounded like a strong hint that he's leaning towards picking her:

The idea for this agency was Elizabeth Warren's. She's a dear friend of mine. She's somebody I've known since I was in law school. And I have been in conversations with her. She is a tremendous advocate for this idea. his is a big task standing up this entire agency. So I'll have an announcement soon about how we're going to move forward.

I have had conversations with Elizabeth over these last couple of months. But I'm not going to make an official announcement until it's ready.

Obama slightly emphasized the word "official," suggesting the possibility that making it official is all that remains. The White House declined to comment to me when I asked whether Obama was leaning in her direction, beyond saying an announcement is coming. But this is the strongest endorsement of Warren Obama has yet offered in public.

Given the passions she's unleashed, and the symbolic importance she's taken on for liberals, it would be a surprisingly tone deaf move if Obama dangled this out there, only to pull away the football and spark more anger and outrage on the left. At a minimum, if he doesn't appoint her after this, it will set up the left for another round of anger and disappointment.

By Greg Sargent  |  September 10, 2010; 12:37 PM ET
Categories:  Financial reform , economy  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Dear Dems: You can win the argument over Bush tax cuts
Next: Steele: Small businesses don't need lines of credit [UPDATED]

Comments

Just DO IT. Yes we can!

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 10, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Greg, It's been fairly obvious reading the tea leaves that this would be the case.

The debate has been (and hasn't changed) Warren vs. Not Warren. There's really no other competitor (yes Barr and Kimmelman but they aren't really mentioned that often).

Looking at the tea leaves, she's canceled her full time class at Harvard, she's met up with bank lobbyists, the WH has been saying she's "confirmable" (contra Dodd). If they didn't want it to be her, they should have said that the moment this debate began.

Posted by: calchala | September 10, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

So Warren's appointment -- or disappointment -- means more in DC than jobs, stimulus, or immigration do in the US at large? Well, good to know what the think tanks think. I think she's the best choice too, but she's mainly a DC distraction.

If Democrats want to do better in November, they need a big plan to provide jobs. If they want to lose, they will keep triangulating and hoping a Warren nomination will sweep the electorate or something.

Posted by: stonedone | September 10, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

So Warren's appointment -- or disappointment -- means more in DC than jobs, stimulus, or immigration do in the US at large? Well, good to know what the think tanks think. I think she's the best choice too, but she's mainly a DC distraction.

If Democrats want to do better in November, they need a big plan to provide jobs. If they want to lose, they will keep triangulating and hoping a Warren nomination will sweep the electorate or something.

Posted by: stonedone | September 10, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Frankly, it would be an affront to Warren to not appoint her, considering it was her idea and she's undoubtedly qualified.

I think they'll do the right thing here.

Posted by: associate20 | September 10, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

The other aspect of the Bush tax cuts - which the democrats are not considering.


If Obama goes out there - and tries a "class warfare" approach - doesn't that simply re-enforce the perception of Obama-as-a-Socialist ???


Obama is playing right into the storyline.


AND Obama NEEDS the idea that he is doing SOMETHING for the economy - raising the taxes on small business owners - who do the HIRING simply DOES NOT WORK.


Obama hurts himself BADLY on the overall economic issue if he pushes his version.

And this time, it's Obama's fault.

You know - Great - define jamming through Congress a "win" - but if it DRAGS DOWN HIRING - AND DRAGS DOWN OBAMA'S NUMBERS, what good is it ???

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 10, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

stone-

Er, uh, the blog post is about Warren. If you want to talk about other things, have at it, but inferring anything else from Greg's post is kinda stretching it a bit, yes?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | September 10, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Elizabeth Warren


Just another far-left liberal to add to the 33 Far Left Czars Obama has directing policy ???


Where does this perception thing go with Obama - how far left do the democrats want to go ???

WHY doesn't Obama just call up Russia and get some old Soviets to come over and join his administration - I think that will satisfy the democrats.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 10, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest thinks the deficit exploding by another 800 billion over the next 10 years to extend taxes for 1% of the population and passing the debt onto our children and grandchildren is a good idea for capitalism.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

No offense Greg, but was this the most important bit from the press conference that it deserved a whole post on his own. Please tell me you will be posted a little bit more on the preser has a whole, unless you plan to go the Halperin route, and say that the presser was "good but no news" so nothing to see here I guess.

How about discussing the fact, that Obama has only been in office for 2 years, and CNN's Ed Henry had the nerve to ask POTUS if it was a failure that they haven't caught Bin Laden yet??? Really is that considered a failure??? How long did Bush FAIL TO CATCH BIN LADEN, afte 2001? Was Ed Henry available to ask Bushie if he was a failure oh 2 years later cause he hand't caught Bin Laden yet.

Also, after all the verklempting over Obama's "suppsoed walkback" of his Mosque comments, how about discussing what I thought was a great answer to Fox News question about Park51.

Fox News: "Weigh in on the wisdom of building a Mosque within two blocks of Groudn Zero"

POTUS: "With respect to the mosque...if you can build a church on a site, a synagogue on a site, a Hindu temple on a site, then you should be able to build a mosque on a site." "We are not at war against Islam, we are at war against terrorist organizations." To win this war "we need all the allies we can get. The folks who are most interested in a war between the West and Islam are al Qaeda...that's what they've been banking on." POTUS says most muslims have "rejected this violent ideology...we want to be clear on who the enemy is here...it's a tiny minority."

Also, he says it is wrong to send a message to American Muslims that their religion is offensive. "I've got Muslims fighting in uniform for us...they are Americans. We honor their service. And part of honoring their service is that we don't differentiate between them and us. It's just us."

Posted by: lynell33 | September 10, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

BTW, Greg,

please don't take this as criticism about your post topics. Just wanted to know if you were gonna do a little more analysis.

Posted by: lynell33 | September 10, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

I took his comment to be laying the groundwork for a recess appointment. He criticized the GOP for not letting the Senate vote on any nof his people. Of course a recess only gets her to January, doesn't it? Then what?

Maybe she's still going around trying to get support (defuse sopme criticism) from the banksters and others she's going to regulate.

I thought he did very well in the press conference keeping the heat on the GOP and their obstructionism.

Posted by: Mimikatz | September 10, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Ed Henry is a complete twit.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

I thought he diod particualrly well in explaining that the rich would get the same tax cut onb the first $250,000 of income as everyone else, and the real issue was whether they should get $100,000 more on the rest of their millions. He did that very well, making that reporter look like a fool.

Posted by: Mimikatz | September 10, 2010 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Where are the muslims who say that people in the Middle East should not be burning American flags ?


Where are the leaders in the Middle East speaking out against burning American flags ???

Where are the liberals in this country speaking out against burning American flags???


Where is the liberal media ????


BURN BABY BURN


No one in American should have to exercise restraint if the New York Imam is not exercising restraint.

The liberals in the media SHOULD BE CALLING FOR RESTRAINT - not supporting this crazy Imam in New York who is inciting violence in New York City.

The mosque gets people angry and incites violence.


BURN BABY BURN

BURN BABY BURN.

Go for it -everyone should show no restraint if the liberal media can't call for everyone to have restraint.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 10, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

This BS is really too much. Watching Andrea Mitchell Greenspan on MSNBC right now, she's interviewing a twit from Politico (Morton Kady?) and they are discussing two ridiculous falsehoods:

1. That the Dems need to worry about a vote on a tax increase before the election, and
2. That EVERYONE agreed to the sunset of the tax rates as a budget gimmick ten years ago.

Posted by: cmccauley60 | September 10, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest thinks we should base our society on other societies for some reason.

Leading by example doesn't exist in SaveTheRainforest's book. We should only act as decent as those whom we are comparing ourselves to.

In other words, SaveTheRainforest would have been OK with gassing Germans during WWII because hey, it's what the Germans did at the time too!!!!

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

mikefromArlington at 1:07


Suddenly the deficit matters to you.


Obama's deficit is over one TRILLION dollars.

Obama NOW has more debt after less than 2 years - than George Washington through Ronald Reagan COMBINED.


Remember how crazy the liberals were over Reagan's debt? Obama is way above that already.

What you don't realize is Obama's health care plan has ANOTHER 2 OR 3 TRILLION IN DEFICIT -


Did you care about the deficit in the health care bill ??

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 10, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

"Did you care about the deficit in the health care bill ??"

The health care bill lowers the deficit first off.

Second, Obama was handed a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit at a time when revenues were disappearing because we were loosing near a million jobs a month.

Do you think tax revenue is going to magically appear?

Modern day conservatism is one big fairy tale. You all are living in lala land.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

lynell33 wrote,
"How about discussing the fact, that Obama has only been in office for 2 years, and CNN's Ed Henry had the nerve to ask POTUS if it was a failure that they haven't caught Bin Laden yet??? Really is that considered a failure??? How long did Bush FAIL TO CATCH BIN LADEN, afte 2001? Was Ed Henry available to ask Bushie if he was a failure oh 2 years later cause he hand't caught Bin Laden yet."
-----

The left made this a campaign issue. Bush couldn't catch Bin Laden, but by gummy things would change if Obama/Biden got elected. So how's it going?

Posted by: Brigade | September 10, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

"The left made this a campaign issue."

Yeah, because McCain wouldn't say he was willing to send troops into Pakistan to look for him and was trying to frame it as Obama admitting to attacking a sovereign country. McCain ended up looking like the dope.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Rainforest is exercising lots of restraint today with all the "???'s" , BURN, BABY, BURNS and caps...

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | September 10, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

@mikefrom arlington
"Did you care about the deficit in the health care bill ??"

The health care bill lowers the deficit first off.
-----

LOL. Oh, come on. The HCR vote is over. No one ever believed HCR was going to lower the deficit. Even those who said it didn't believe it. Didn't believe it then; don't believe it now. They sent bogus numbers to CBO to get back a bogus number they could use in the debate.

If someone says extending tax cuts for "the very rich" will lower the deficit are you prepared to sign on? I'm sure we can imagine some scenario and cook up some numbers that would produce just such a prediction.

Posted by: Brigade | September 10, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

OT, but I posted a little blurb this morning about President Obama being on the Tom Joyner Morning Show, a nationally syndicated radio show targeted towards African Americans, and here is a little of what he had to say:

"Obama wants blacks 'fired up'"

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0910/the_old_battle_cry_801377f1-089d-4134-910f-6869b1de9da6.html

"President Obama is calling on black voters to get “fired up” for Democrats in the midterm elections.

In an interview with the "The Tom Joyner Morning Show" broadcast Friday, Obama cautioned that a Republican-controlled Congress would be detrimental to the country.

"Part of the thing I’ve got to remind people is that the policies that got us into this mess are the same policies that these Republicans are offering right now,” he said. “And so if African-Americans aren’t fired up right now, you better be fired up, because you could end up in a situation where we could have more of the same from a Republican Congress that’s not willing to move our infrastructure, that’s not committed to investing in people and job training and not committed to investing in our education system. And we could end up slipping back into the same situation that we were in before this recession hit, only worse.”

Posted by: lynell33 | September 10, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Brigade,

Wasn't it McCain who said he would reach into the bowels of Hell to capture Bin Laden or something to that effect????

So how did the "left" make this a campaign issue.

Posted by: lynell33 | September 10, 2010 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Didn't Bush and the Neo-Cons promise to get Bin Laden "Dead or Alive"?

Posted by: lynell33 | September 10, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainForest

appears to believe that he lives in the Middle East, or else he must believe that we should behave like terrorists, over there behave.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 10, 2010 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Wasn't it McCain who said he would reach into the bowels of Hell to capture Bin Laden or something to that effect????

So how did the "left" make this a campaign issue.

Posted by: lynell33 | September 10, 2010 2:05 PM |
..............

McCain said that he would "pursue Bin Laden to the gates of hell".

However; he got lost, and ended up bringing back another extremist nut job, from the wilds of Alaska.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 10, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Where are the muslims who say that people in the Middle East should not be burning American flags ?


Where are the leaders in the Middle East speaking out against burning American flags ???



Where are the liberals in this country speaking out against burning American flags???


Where is the liberal media ????




BURN BABY BURN


No one in American should have to exercise restraint if the New York Imam is not exercising restraint.



The liberals in the media SHOULD BE CALLING FOR RESTRAINT - not supporting this crazy Imam in New York who is inciting violence in New York City.



The mosque gets people angry and incites violence.


BURN BABY BURN



BURN BABY BURN.



Go for it - everyone should show no restraint if the liberal media can't call for everyone to have restraint.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 10, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

umm Brigade, your buddy SaveTheRainforest is the one bringing up the heath care bill and "They sent bogus numbers to CBO". Got a source for that claim or is it just another made up modern day lala land conservative "fact?"

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainForest is giving Jan Brewer stiff competition, in the Triple Space Out Finals.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 10, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainforest doesn't believe the U.S. should lead by example.

He thinks we should act at best as those we are in conflict with.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 10, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

SaveTheRainForest

Believes that "terrorists attack us, because they hate our freedoms", so he wants to accommodate them, by taking away the freedoms of American Muslims.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 10, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

All, check this out, Michael Steele's latest:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/steele_small_businesses_dont_n.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | September 10, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company