JANUARY 13, 2013

OBAMA FURIOUS HE WASTED WEEK POSING FOR COIN

POSTED BY ANDY BOROWITZ

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—President Barack Obama was “totally furious” he spent a week of his time posing for a trillion-dollar platinum coin that would never be minted, a White House source confirmed today.

“The President is a super-busy man, so it’s understandable that he’d be mad,” the source said. “It’s not like he has time to sit still for hours on end for a coin that’s not going to happen.”

Mr. Obama devoted much of last week to posing for the trillion-dollar coin on the assurances of outgoing Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who told Mr. Obama that the coin had “a way better than fifty percent chance” of being minted.

Based on Mr. Geithner’s advice, Mr. Obama carved hours out of his schedule to pose for the ill-fated coin, even cutting short meetings with world leaders such as Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

But even as he posed for it, Mr. Obama seemed “fidgety and skeptical” that the platinum coin would ever see the light of day.

“He was like, ‘Look, I’ve got things to do. Is this coin really going to happen, because if not, this whole thing is really messed up,’” the source said.

When Mr. Geithner delivered the news to the President that the coin idea had been scrapped, according to the source, “to say that things got ugly would be a massive understatement.”

The coin fiasco behind him, Mr. Obama has now apparently learned his lesson, the source said: “If this coin idea ever comes up again, he’s going to make Biden pose for it.”

Obama Furious He Wasted Week Posing for Coin : The New Yorker.

Related articles

• US Will Not Mint Trillion-Dollar Coin in Debt Ceiling Ploy (hispanicbusiness.com)
• Obama Trillion-Dollar Coin Rejected By White House, Must Cut, Default or ‘Violate Constitution’ (princevega.com)
• Can We Avert The Coming Debt Ceiling Crisis With A Magic Coin? (mbcalyn.com)
• “An Inane Idea”: With A Trillion Dollar Coin, President Obama Can Fight Dumb With Silly (mbcalyn.com)
• Treasury: Trillion-dollar coin would not be legal (hosted.ap.org)
• Treasury: No $1 trillion coin (cbsnews.com)
• US Treasury won’t mint platinum coin to avoid debt ceiling (todayonline.com)
• Is a one trillion dollar coin the solution for debt? (reuters.com)
• White House nixes idea for trillion-dollar coin (ktvb.com)
• Obama Administration Rejects Platinum Coin Debt-Ceiling Solution (huffingtonpost.com)

Barack The Magic Negro has a plan for a magic coin.

Anything to circumvent the Constitution Or by pass Congress.

The left must think Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is a magician, since they think funds to evade the debt ceiling can be conjured up in the form of a platinum coin.

The left-wing blogosphere has been promoting a loony idea to prevent the GOP from being able to cut spending in debt ceiling negotiations. The idea has gained traction with a Bloomberg News contributor and well-known liberal economist Paul Krugman, and being heavily promoted by sites like Huffington Post. So many people are talking about it that it has a twitter hashtag: #mintthecoin.

The entire idea, which actually dates back to the debt ceiling fight of 2011, is that there is an “obscure provision” that would allow the Treasury Secretary to mint platinum coins. So the left has gone overboard arguing that he create a $1 trillion coin to deposit with the Fed and diffuse the entire debt ceiling fight, in spite of arguments that it is unconstitutional and that the law was specifically about creating coins for collectors. At least one proponent, Joe Firestone who blogs at lefty sites FireDogLake and DailyKos upped the ante urging a $30 trillion or $60 trillion coin be created.

The Huffington Post has pushed the idea over and over and were at it again on Jan. 7. That afternoon, Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman was in the top story on the homepage, “KRUGMAN URGES: MINT THE COIN” blared the headline across the top of HuffPo. Beneath the enormous picture of Krugman it said “‘The Decision Should Be Obvious’ … GOP Congressman Seeks to Ban Platinum Option, Implicitly Admits Coin is Legal… Why Opponents Are Wrong.” On Jan. 9, HuffPo gleefully reported that the White House “Doesn’t Completely Rule It Out” after the press secretary dodged a question on the subject.

There is so much noise coming from the left on this that CNN, Fox News and MSNBC have all mentioned it in recent days. Other outlets from The Washington Post, to Time magazine’s Swampland blog, to The Economist have also covered the campaign. Politico mentioned it in conjunction with the other solution some are promoting, which is that Obama should invoke the 14th amendment to sidestep the fight. The article acknowledged that Obama has already said he will not negotiate with the GOP.

One particular CNN report claimed “It sounds crazy but some economists, some legal scholars say it is legal and could be done.” At least CNN’s reporter Brian Todd included a voice of opposition, not only a proponent. He spoke with WSJ columnist Stephen Moore who said, “I think this is waving pixie dust over the debt and pretending the debt is going to go away by one of these Washington gimmicks.” Todd also poked a bit of fun at the idea by showing a video clip from “Austin Powers.”

In spite of #mintthecoin fans like Krugman, Josh Barro of Bloomberg, and Joe Weisenthal of Business Insider, even some on the left see its flaws. One Atlantic writer called it  a “conspiracy theory,” while a UK Guardian writer compared it to a “mad scientist’s plot.”

The Democracy in America blog from The Economist called the notion a “distraction” from the real fiscal issues facing the U.S. and said it “flirts with the heady unilateral decisiveness of fascism.” Ultimately they concluded it would be better if commentators “would rein in its id, stop its idle chatter about exotic, coin-based, presidential monetary policy, and begin seriously to consider the more probable but less glittering eventuality of a Greek-style default.”

Kevin Drum, of far-left magazine Mother Jones, wrote that it was “horrible, lawless policy” and that the law being cited as support for a $1 trillion platinum coin was actually just a technical correction written to clarify what sort of coins the Treasury can make for coin collectors. “Courts are expected to rule based on the most sensible interpretation of a law, not its most tortured possible constructions,”Drum criticized.

Conservatives and business experts panned the idea. CNBC’s Net Net writer John Carney argued that the #mintthecoin plan was “unconstitutional.” AEI’s James Pethokoukis talked to a bank analyst with Washington Research Group. The analyst told him if the Treasury minted a $1 trillion coin “We [would] see chaos if the market has to confront Treasuries where the debt is backed by Congress and those where it is not backed by Congress. And the $1 trillion coin would expand the money supply by a considerable amount, which could spark serious inflation.”

Ralph Benko, editor of the Lehrman Institute’s monetary policy website, recently attacked the platinum coin proposal, noting its violation of a monetary principle first established by the famed astronomer Copernicus. He also pointed to the hyper-inflation experienced recently in Zimbabwe, when its government violated the same principle.

In spite of left-wing opposition to spending cuts, there is a huge spending problem in the U.S. The editorial board of Investor’s Business Daily reminded readers of that very fact on Jan. 7, writing that Obama’s debt commission “made clear that spending is the driving force behind the nation’s debt crisis.” The final report of the commission said, “We should cut all excess spending — including defense, domestic programs, entitlement spending, and spending in the tax code.”

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/julia-seymour/2013/01/10/left-swoons-loony-magic-coin-plan#ixzz2HmPj0gm6

“He’s the architect of “too big to fail,” Taibbi told Democracy Now hosts Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez. ” When this all blows up — and it’s going to blow up, for sure, because things can’t continue the way they are right now — people are going to look back in history, and they’re going to say, “Who was to blame for this?” And Timothy Geithner is going to be the guy who designed this entire system.”

That picture is quite different from the one President Barack Obama painted in his sendoff to Geithner on Thursday, when he said that the history books would portray him as “one of our finest secretaries of the Treasury.” Geithner will be succeeded by Obama’s chief of staff, Jack Lew, a choice Taibbi described as a signal that the White House intends to keep bailing Wall Street out.

Author and former financial regulator William Black also criticized Geithner, saying he “created crony capitalism, American style” and helped develop regulations that will not prevent further financial trouble for the country. He also scoffed atthe recent deal made by 10 major mortgage-lenders that will include $3.5 billion in payments to almost 4 million homeowners.

“The rest of the supposed $5 billion in settlement is really just what in the commercial world we call ‘troubled debt restructurings,’ which are the things you would do anyway if the government didn’t exist, because in most cases it’s better for the bank not to have the default, to instead reduce the principal slightly,” said Black. “So, none of that is actually a bailout. None of it is actually a settlement. It’s just the banks doing that which will profit maximize for the banks anyway.”

Watch Taibbi and Black discuss Geithner’s legacy and the issues behind the government’s Wall Street bailout, originally aired on January 11, 2013, below.
Raw Story (http://s.tt/1ym7E)

Matt Taibbi  is Rolling Stone contributing editor, and  is an OUR COMMON GROUND Voice

July 9, 2009  Matt Taibbi, Author and Journalist, Rolling Stone Magazine on OUR COMMON GROUND with Janice Graham

I suppose that he can’t be much worse than Timothy Geithner, but that should be scant cause for cheer over the news that the president has nominated Jack Lew as Treasury secretary. Both championed the financial deregulation craze of the Clinton administration, and both are acolytes of Robert Rubin, the former Clinton Treasury secretary who unfettered Wall Street greed and then took his own considerable cut of the action.

Rubin went to work at Citigroup, the world’s largest financial conglomerate whose legality was enabled by legislation he advanced while in government. He made off with a salary of $15 million a year during his decade at that bank, which specialized in toxic mortgage derivatives and had to be bailed out by taxpayers to avoid bankruptcy.

Lew’s association with Citigroup was a far briefer and less rewarding three-year stint, but then the alternative investments unit of which he was chief operating officer in 2008 didn’t do so well with its hedge fund and private equity investments. As Jia Lynn Yang points out in The Washington Post, “Massive losses in that unit helped drive Citigroup into the arms of the federal government, which bailed out the bank with $45 billion in taxpayer money that year.”

Read more

The Week

President Obama’s nominee for Treasury secretary used to be well-regarded on the Right. Not anymore

“There was a time when Republicans liked Jack Lew,” President Obama’s chief of staff and nominee to replace Timothy Geithner as Treasury secretary, says Ezra Klein atThe Washington Post. “That time is no longer.” Senate Republicans, already gearing up for a fight over Obama’s nomination of former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) for defense secretary, are now promising a battle over Lew, also: Sen. Jeff Sessions (Ala.), the top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, is even threatening to filibuster the nomination,vowing in a press release, “Jack Lew must never be Secretary of Treasury.” What do Republicans have against the quiet, slightly nerdy Orthodox Jew who brings his own lunch — a cheese sandwich and apple — to work at his West Wing desk and still resides in the Bronx? Here, five reasons behind the GOP’s newfound hatred of Jack Lew:

1. He’s a tough, wonkish negotiator
Lew has worked in Washington since 1973, and until 2011 he had a reputation as “a committed progressive who Republicans liked and thought they could do business with because he’s also a pretty hard-boiled numbers guy,” says Matthew Yglesias at Slate. Then came the budget wars of 2011, when Lew — then director of the White House Office of Management and Budget — used his deep knowledge of budgetary math against them, refusing to let Republicans offset spending cuts with vague tax-reform “flim-flam.” Don’t let Lew’s “nerdy exterior” fool you, says Massimo Calabresi at TIME. He’s a fierce negotiator and “a passionate progressive on the issue of wealth disparity and programs for the poor” — Democrats credit him with saving Medicaid from GOP scalpels. Republicans simply don’t want to face such “a formidable opponent as Washington heads into more tough negotiations over the budget.”

2. Republicans feel he’s condescending and wily
It’s not just that Lew is a “wonk Zelig” — he has “played a role in every big budget deal since 1983,” says Joshua Green at Bloomberg Businessweek. Republicans chafed at “his insistence on explaining in detail the impact of the cuts Republicans were proposing” during the 2011 negotiations. In fact, “Republicans found Lew condescending, inflexible, and a bit sneaky,” saysThe Washington Post‘s Klein. Democrats dismiss these complaints as “sour grapes,” but as the GOP sees it, Lew “often seemed to be trying to trick them into agreeing to complicated policies that ultimately redounded to the administration’s benefits.” And in at least one case, he did outfox the GOP.

3. Lew is a Democrat’s Democrat
Geithner, the outgoing Treasury secretary, is also wonkish, but he’s mostly a financial technocrat. Lew is a partisan Democrat, and his résumé is impressively full of liberal lore: During his one year at Minnesota’s Carleton College, Lew’s academic adviser was Paul Wellstone, who would go on to become a progressive icon in the U.S. Senate; Wellstone convinced him to enter politics, and his first big job in Washington was budget analyst and negotiator for legendary House Speaker Tip O’Neill, alongside MSNBC star Chris Matthews; and he was Bill Clinton’s OMB director and later Hillary Clinton’s deputy secretary of state before joining the Obama White House. Given the extreme polarization in Washington, this history doesn’t exactly endear him to Republicans.

4. He agrees with Obama
“When it comes to worldview,” says Noam Scheiber at The New Republic, “Lew is Obama in coke-bottle glasses.” That actually makes some Democrats nervous, given both men’s ”romantic [views] about the virtues of a deficit grand-bargain.” But it makes even more Republicans livid, given their hatred of Obama, says Jonathan Chait at New York. It’s absurd, but “Lew’s disqualification,” according to Sessions and other Republicans, seems to boil down to “that he doesn’t agree with Republicans on public policy issues.” This is Obama’s cabinet, and it should reflect his policy views, of course. But I guess in today’s Washington “Lew is unacceptable because Republicans want to pick the person on both sides of the negotiating table.”

5. Republicans are just jockeying for leverage
Among the real sense of being burned by Lew is at least an element of crass political theatrics. The looming confirmation fight is a rare opportunity to grill the president’s chief of staff, and “Republicans say Jack Lew will have to answer for what they view as the president’s bare-knuckle tactics,” says Alexander Bolton at The Hill. The GOP is especially “flummoxed… by Obama’s blunt refusal to even negotiate legislation to raise the debt ceiling,” unlike in 2011, when Bill Daily was chief of staff, and they blame Lew for the change in tactics. Republicans might also use Lew’s confirmation hearings as leverage to extract steep spending cuts in the upcoming budget fight. “They would be foolish not to use this opportunity to lay the foundation for their strategy on the debt ceiling,” political scientist Larry Sabato tells The Washington Examiner. This is one “high-profile hearing that they don’t want to let go to waste.”

Related articles

• Obama nominates Lew to lead Treasury (news.yahoo.com)
• Here’s the Message Obama Is Sending to the GOP by Nominating Jack Lew (cnbc.com)
• Obama nominates Lew to lead Treasury (cnsnews.com)
• Lew is Obama’s Treasury choice (timesleader.com)
• Obama nominates Lew to lead Treasury (hosted.ap.org)
• Why Jack Lew Scares Republicans (swampland.time.com)
• Obama nominates Lew to lead Treasury (kfwbam.com)

How do we reconcile the contradictions that are inherent in Jack Lew— the Carleton College student whose faculty adviser was Professor Paul Wellstone and the Clinton aide who promoted trade agreements and budget policies that Senator Paul Wellstone opposed, the former aide to populist Massachusetts Congressmen Joe Moakley and Tip O’Neill who made at least $1.1. million a year as a managing director of Citigroup—whom President Obama has nominated to replace Tim Geithner as secretary of the Treasury.

A lot of Senate Republicans think they have figured Lew out. They don’t like him. Indeed, they dismiss the veteran Clinton administration and Obama administration aide who currently serves as White House Chief of Staff as “The Man Who Cannot Say Yes to Republicans.” Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, a key Republican on budget issues, said nominating Lew for the Treasury post would be “a mistake.” Barry Johnson, House Speaker John Boehner’s former chief of staff, told Bob Woodward that the problem Republicans have with Lew is that the man who served as both Clinton and Obama’s Office of Management and Budget director was “always trying to protect the sacred cows of the left.”

There’s something to the GOP gripe: Back in 2008 and 2009, Lew fought for a big stimulus plan, and he’s got a track record of defending Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid that goes back to the 1980s.

Yet Lew is, as well, the steady defender of deregulation who headed Clinton’s OMB when the previous Democratic president organized the gutting of New Deal–era Glass-Steagall protections against banker adventurism. He hails from the same inner circle as Geithner and Lawrence Summers. And there was that Citigroup stint. And, while he suggests that Lew’s nomination is likely to be approved, Senator Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, says: “He will be confirmed without my vote. At a time when the middle class is collapsing and millions of workers are unemployed, I do not believe he is the right person at the right time to serve in this important position.”

Read more

If their evil disposition remains concealed for a time, it must be attributed to some unknown reason; and we must assume that it lacked occasion to show itself.  But time, which has been said to be the father of all truth, does not fail to bring it to light.

–Niccolo Machiavelli, The Discourses

The Treasury Department fears that widespread public anger at some of its major economic programs–such as the bank bailout–will deter government officials from intervening in future crises.

As a result, the Treasury Department hopes to regain the public’s trust by issuing a series of economic charts.

Unfortunately, the Treasury’s chart-topping effort will go for nothing.

Emotionally-charged matters–such as child molestation or government bailouts to the rich–don’t lend themselves to “appeals to reason.”

But a different approach might well salvage some public faith in the Treasury Department’s judgment: Greed-test CEOs for future government loans.

After all, drug-testing welfare recipients has become the new mantra for Republicans.

He admitted that he was “shocked” at the breakdown in U.S. credit markets and said he was “partially” wrong to resist regulation of some securities.

“Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder’s equity–myself especially–are in a state of shocked disbelief,” said Greenspan, who had ruled the Fed from 1987 to 2006.

As a disciple of the right-wing philosopher, Ayan Rand, Greenspan had fiercely held to her belief that “The Market” was a divine institution. As such, “it” alone knew what was best for the nation’s economic prosperity.

“Enlightened self-interest,” he believed, would guarantee that those who dedicated their lives to making money would not allow mere greed to steer them–and the country–into disaster.

As he saw it, any attempt to regulate greed-based appetites could only harm that divine institution: The Market.

Greenspan was proved wrong. And the nation will be literally paying for such misguided confidence in profit-addicted men for decades to come.

So if Republicans want to protect the “poor, oppressed taxpayer,” they should demand background investigations for those whose addiction truly threatens the economic future of this country.

That means the men (and occasionally women) who run the nation’s most important financial institutions, such as banks, insurance and mortgage companies.

Thus, in the future, all CEOs–and their topmost executives–of financial institutions seeking Federal bailouts should be required to:

• Undergo “full field investigations” by the FBI and IRS.
• Submit full financial disclosure forms concerning not only themselves but all members of their immediate families.
• Be subject to Federal prosecution for perjury if they provide false information or conceal evidence of criminal violations.
• Periodically submit themselves for additional background investigation.
• Be subject to arrest, indictment and prosecution if the background investigation turns up evidence of criminal activity.

In addition:

• If a bailout-seeking financial institution refuses to comply with these criteria, it should be refused the loan.
• If a CEO and/or other top officials are judged ineligible for a loan, the company should be asked to replace those executives with others who might qualify.
• Those alternative executives should be subject to the same background investigation requirements as just outlined.
• If the institution refuses to replace those executives found ineligible, the Government should refuse the loan.
• If the Government is forced to take over a troubled financial institution, its CEO and top executives should be replaced with applicants who have passed the required security screening.

The United States has a long and embarrassing history of worshipping wealth for its own sake. Part of this can be traced to the old Calvinistic doctrine that wealth is a proof of salvation, since it shows evidence of God’s favor.

Another reason for this worship of mammon is the belief that someone who is wealthy is automatically endowed with wisdom and integrity.

By that criteria, the capos of the Mafia must be presumed to be saints and geniuses.

Following these beliefs to their ultimate conclusion will transform the United States into a plutocracy–a government of the wealthy, by the wealthy, for the wealthy.

Every day we see fresh evidence of the destruction wrought by the unchecked greed of wealthy, powerful men.

When they–and their paid shills in Congress–demand, “De-regulate business,” it’s essential to remember what they really mean.

It means: “Let criminals be criminals.”

The problem with all this is that Hollywood keeps running out of plausible settings for manly heroism – there’s only so many lost arks or are hidden ancient cities you can go after, and after a while all those megalomaniacs bent on taking over the world, or destroying it, all blend together. No one can keep all those Bond villains straight, and murderous madmen are a dime a dozen. That’s why Hollywood keeps changing things up.

This year we got the heroic airline pilot who saves the plane and all the passengers in an impossible situation, even though he was drunk and should have had his license stripped away – which was a nice twist, and you do need a twist, so, presumably, you could even make a thrilling movie about a manly and heroic Secretary of the Treasury saving the world from economic disaster, although that might be a stretch.

Or it might not be a stretch at all – William Hurt played Secretary of the Treasury Hank Paulson in the stunning 2011 HBO film Too Big to Fail – showing us the man who saved our economy, and the world’s, as everything fell apart at the end of the Bush administration. In the movie, Hurt is all forcefulness and then guile, and then blunt and brutal honesty and integrity and so on. It’s very manly, all about saving the day by sheer force of will, and the TARP legislation. As a foil, Peter Hermann plays Christopher Cox, the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, as a preening, prissy and somewhat dimwitted coward – the proper contrast – and there’s even a scene where Hurt, as Paulson, dresses down John McCain as a fool who has jumped in without knowing anything and is ruining everything, pretty much ripping him a new asshole. We see who the real man is. Indiana Jones couldn’t have done it any better. Billy Crudup plays Timothy Geithner, then the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, as the sidekick who sees what’s happening and is worried sick but who needs the firm hand of the hero to steady him for what must be done – think of Batman and Robin. All in all it’s a rip-roaring tale and by all accounts pretty close to the truth. Ah, those were the days.

Those days are gone. Hank Paulson, having won the day for good and honor and righteousness, rode off into the sunset, and young Timmy Geithner got his job. Obama was taking no chances with that appointment – continuity is everything. It’s just that Geithner, as brilliant and careful as he is, has been kind of boring. Nothing much has changed – new regulations and structural changes are still, after four years, in that preliminary discussion phase that never seems to end, or that no one on Wall Street wants to end, and the economy has not roared back to life. It’s doing okay, or a little better than okay, very slowly. There’s no possibility for a movie here. There’s no hero is sight.

Cue the music – the Fairy Godmother singing I Need a Hero perhaps. Timothy Geithner is leaving the administration, as he said he would after Obama’s first term, and now it gets interesting:

President Obama stood side by side in the East Room of the White House on Thursday with his outgoing Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, and the man he was nominating to replace him, White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew.

The men are ordinarily among the least emotive around the White House, yet for 16 minutes on Thursday, as Obama bid farewell to Geithner and formally nominated Lew, there was an unusual spark of emotion.

Obama began with a lengthy soliloquy on Geithner’s value to him and the country. When Geithner reluctantly joined him four years ago, the president said, the financial crisis was burning. But “thanks in large part to his steady hand,” he said, “our economy has been growing again for the past three years.”

A steady hand is a fine thing, but not now:

Turning to Lew, Obama made clear he was picking him as the next Treasury secretary in part because of his knowledge of the mechanics of federal budgets, but also because of his character.

“I value his friendship. I know very few people with greater integrity,” Obama said. “He’s built a reputation as a master of policy who can work with members of both parties and forge principled compromises.”

In short, it’s time to kick ass and get some things done, and that calls for something like a heroic temperament:

“As the son of a Polish immigrant, a man of deep and devout faith,” the president said, “Jack knows that every number on a page, every dollar we budget, every decision we make has to be an expression of who we wish to be as a nation, our values.” …

Lew spoke of his upbringing in Queens using rich oratory to describe his “dreams of making a difference in the world” – something he said he tried to do as a congressional aide and a top official in two administrations.

Change was in the air, and David Graham offers brief notes on who this new guy is:

Before he became chief of staff, Lew directed the Office of Management and Budget, running the numbers for the administration. It was his second tour of duty in that job. He also held it from 1998 to 2001 during the Clinton administration. Prior to returning to his OMB chair, Lew worked for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as deputy secretary for management and resources, a chief operating office-like position he inaugurated. And Obama, who is known for pushing back on aides and asking detailed questions, seems to have an unusual degree of faith in him.

In fact, Graham cites the New York Times here:

When President Obama was locked in painful spending negotiations with House Republicans last spring, his exceedingly meticulous budget director, Jacob J. Lew, went to the Oval Office to propose some complex budget changes. As Mr. Lew delved deeper and deeper into the numbers, Mr. Obama put up his hand, signaling him to stop.

“Jack, it’s fine,” the president said, according to Gene Sperling, Mr. Obama’s economics adviser, who witnessed the exchange. “I trust your values. I trust your judgment on this.”

He knows his numbers, but it’s more than that:

Unlike Geithner, a disciple of Robert Rubin and product of Clinton-era economics, Lew is more closely aligned with class-warrior image that Obama adopted during the election campaign. A staunch liberal, he started his political career canvassing for anti-war hero Eugene McCarthy in 1968 (he was 12); his adviser at Carleton College was Paul Wellstone, later an iconic liberal senator; and one of his first jobs in Washington was working for Democratic lion and former Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill.

He’s one of those idealists about what he sees as right and wrong. That may or may not be heroic, but it’s a change, and he’s the right man for a fight:

Despite his acute partisan sensibility, he has long had a reputation for earning the trust of and working well with Republicans. People who have had to sit across the negotiating table describe him as a fierce, hard-nosed opponent, but one who listens and works hard to come to a mutually agreeable position.

Still that might not be enough:

Having been confirmed by the Senate multiple times already, Lew is one of the few candidates who should have a relatively easy run. But he may have depleted at least some of that good will in the last few weeks, when he has served as one of Obama’s top lieutenants in negotiations over the fiscal cliff. The confirmation hearings could be tense, in part because of the divisive issues sure to face the next treasury secretary: A fight over the debt ceiling is already in motion; the sequester is due to occur on March 1, barring Congressional action; and spending and budgetary issues will remain a major focus for the rest of Obama’s presidency. Perhaps some senator will even ask Lew about his position on the $1 trillion coin.

Geithner was carefully boring, but those days are now gone, although those on the left should not get all that excited:

Don’t take his liberalism to mean that Lew is a wild-eyed socialist though. In fact, he’s a former banker. In 2008, he served as chief operating officer of Citigroup Alternative Investments, a division of the Wall Street behemoth. That group was involved in controversial practices like proprietary trading, and was involved in shorting the housing market as the economy lurched toward collapse. Perhaps in keeping with his resume, Lew has rejected the view of many fellow liberals who argue that deregulation of the financial sector contributed to the crash, saying, “I don’t personally know the extent to which deregulation drove it, but I don’t believe that deregulation was the proximate cause.” Expect to hear muffled howls of unhappiness from the left, which will be glad to see Geithner go but upset at Lew’s positions.

Muffled howls of unhappiness from the left might be a possibility, but the man is a fighter, and Massimo Calabresi at Time explains that he just might scare Republicans:

When push came to shove in the last-minute negotiations between the White House and Republicans to avoid defaulting on U.S. debt in late July 2011, Jack Lew finally lost his cool. “You don’t have to explain this to him, Gene! No! No! No!” Lew shouted at Obama staffer Gene Sperling, who was in the Senate office of a GOP staffer on the Hill and had Lew on speakerphone. The eruption was so surprising, and so emotional, that the Republican staffer hung up on Lew, according to Bob Woodward’s account in The Price of Politics.

The outburst says something important about Lew, whom President Obama has tapped to replace Timothy Geithner as Secretary of the Treasury. Wonky, professional and grounded in decades of staff work in the obscure world of Washington budget politics, Lew has a reputation that is decidedly undramatic. Even partisan Republicans have shown respect for Lew’s grasp of the nation’s finances. “No one was more prepared and more in tune with the numbers than Jack Lew,” House majority leader Eric Cantor told Politico in June 2011.

He knows his numbers, but he’s not a nerd:

Beneath his nerdy exterior, Lew is a passionate progressive on the issue of wealth disparity and programs for the poor. In the original Gramm-Rudman-Hollings “sequestration” talks in the mid-1980s, Lew negotiated the exemptions from automatic budget cuts for Medicaid and other low-income programs. In the 1990s, he again defended Medicaid from the budget ax as President Clinton tacked to the center. And his speakerphone outburst in 2011 was in response to the Republican staffer’s suggestion that Medicaid cuts be added to the revivified sequestration process to avoid debt default.

He seems to want to stick up for the little guy:

This evident passion for what he sees as the moral dimensions in fiscal and economic policy combined with his expertise in the numbers makes him a formidable opponent as Washington heads into more tough negotiations over the budget. And it explains why Republicans are getting ready for an ugly confirmation fight. Alabama GOP Senator Jeff Sessions wrote a draft statement opposing Lew’s appointment that he will release after Obama formally nominates him that says, “Jack Lew must never be secretary of the Treasury,” according to The Hill’s Alex Bolton.

Those are fighting words:

Lew is clearly who Obama wants. After the outburst in 2011, Lew went to the Oval Office to brief the President on the confrontation he’d just had with the GOP staffer, Rohit Kumar. Reports Woodward:

“Mr. President, I just absolutely blew the idea of Medicaid in the sequester out of the water, he said, and provided the details of his explosion, exactly what he had said.”

“It was the right thing to do,” the president said.

Lew and Kumar soon resumed their conversation. Lew would not give on Medicaid, and Kumar finally dropped the idea.

You fight for what’s right – that’s what heroes do – and sometimes you win – and as Matthew Yglesias notes, you don’t accept bullshit:

As Jack Lew moves over to the Treasury Department, I think it’s important to revisit a point that was made but not understood in a lot of reporting on the 2011 debt ceiling battle. At this point, Lew was OMB chief and Bill Daley was chief of staff. Lew’s reputation, at the time, was as a committed progressive who Republicans liked and thought they could do business with because he’s also a pretty hard-boiled numbers guy.

They underestimated him:

It emerged over the course of the negotiations that John Boehner and other Republicans kept trying to kick Lew out of the room to make a deal. That’s because what Boehner wanted to do was make a deal in which spending cuts would be balanced by flim-flam, and Lew kept saying that the flim-flam didn’t work mathematically. To put a balanced package together, Lew insisted that you needed to have real revenue-increasing tax hikes not just “tax reform” and hand-waving. This kept spoiling the party, so Boehner wanted to make deals with Daley – with the political fixer rather than the budget guy. But ultimately you couldn’t get a deal done, because you can’t just smuggle a deal past the OMB.

As for that magic hand-waving, Boehner was arguing that some sizable chunk of any new revenue needed to fix the economy, or all of it really, would come to the government as a result of all the fantastic economic growth spurred by new and very much lower tax rates, and perhaps from better compliance, since any new tax code would be less confusing. The idea was that raising revenue did not require raising taxes – it never does. In fact, raising revenue would enable you to lower taxes, or something.

Lew seems to have said that seemed to be nonsense, so, John, prove it – show me the numbers. That’s why Boehner wanted Lew gone from the room. Lew was pointing out that this Republican notion that you get more tax revenue by lowering tax rates, and taking in less revenue, has never worked in real life, and even if it kind of worked even a little, there’d be no way to quantify just why and how much it worked. Lew said let’s deal with the real world. Boehner was stuck, and embarrassed.

Yglesias puts it this way:

This whole dynamic seems to have poisoned the well to some extent, but in practical terms it was constructive. By the time of the most recent negotiation, Daley was gone and Lew was more powerful than ever as chief of staff. And while Republicans didn’t come to love Lew, we actually had a proper negotiation this time where it was understood from the get-go that a tax increase is a tax increase and flim-flam is flim-flam. There was no more “lets waste weeks of everyone’s time with hand-wavy tax reform proposals that don’t add up.” That’s frustrating if you think a little flim-flam would help massage intra-caucus politics, but much better otherwise.

It was high time for some heroics, depending on your point of view. Everyone sees things differently. The Hill did offer this on Senator Jeff Sessions’ reaction to the nomination of Jack Lew:

The top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee will oppose Jack Lew’s nomination to be Treasury secretary.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) has prepared a statement saying “Jack Lew must never be Secretary of Treasury.”

He is not saying yet whether he will filibuster the nomination, however, which sources say President Obama will announce Thursday.

Ed Kilgore is moderately amazed:

If you support the option of filibustering Cabinet appointments (which Sessions does), and you say someone should “never” be confirmed, and you use such categorical language about someone’s unfitness for an office, then what are you waiting for – a direct sign from God?

This is a different view of heroics:

More basically, today’s conservatives are in the bad habit of using absolute language all the time that destroys their ability to modulate their incessant rage. Sessions is apparently furious at Lew because he claimed during Senate testimony that Obama’s FY 2012 budget was consistent with a course of eventually reducing deficits and debt. From Sessions’ point of view, that was bad, really bad. But what if Obama sent someone’s name up that was worse, far worse? What language would Sessions deploy had Obama nominated Paul Krugman, whom I imagine Jeff Sessions considers evil incarnate?

Bluster and outrage are not heroic. Everyone’s seen the movies. Bluster and outrage are what the evil bad guys display, leading to their downfall. Cool competence wins the day, or as Kilgore puts it:

Rhetoric is just rhetoric, I realize, but at some point congressional Republicans need to realize that this kind of crap is one reason for the impression a majority of Americans have that they are unreasonable, and why their own “base” is perpetually frustrated and disappointed. When you act as though you’d just as soon quit your cushy Senate seat as allow Jack Lew to become Treasury Secretary (which he almost certainly will become), then you move right on to the next hate-fest without a pause, don’t you lose some credibility, or even self-respect?

That’s the way it works in the movies. The evil genius laughs maniacally, all full of bluster, but the cool and competent hero gets the last laugh, and then he only smiles slyly. Credibility and self-respect do not require bluster.

Actually there may be a movie here, the way things are going – but then we already had one pretty good movie about a manly and heroic Secretary of the Treasury saving the world from economic disaster. We don’t need another. Hollywood will have to come up with something else – Indiana Jones’ grandson versus the zombie surfers or something.

President Barack Obama’s choice [of Lew] to lead the White House budget office oversaw a Citigroup unit that profited off the housing collapse and financial crisis by investing in a hedge fund king who correctly predicted the eventual subprime meltdown and now finds himself involved in the center of the U.S. government’s fraud case against Goldman Sachs.

Lew also broke a Graduate Student’s union while working for New York University and before betting against American citizens while at Citigroup.

Related articles

• LIVE: Obama Nominates Jack Lew As Treasury Secretary (businessinsider.com)
• In picking Lew, Obama turns a page at Treasury (wfaa.com)
• Jack Lew To Be Nominated For Treasury Secretary By Obama: Report (huffingtonpost.com)
• OoooooooO no! (theage.com.au)
• Washington insider Jacob Lew widely expected as next treasury secretary (kansascity.com)
• Lew Seen Outside Mold of Past US Treasury Secretaries (voanews.com)
• Washington insider Jacob Lew widely expected as next treasury secretary (miamiherald.com)
• Obama To Nominate Jack Lew As Head Of Treasury (npr.org)
• Jacob Lew next US Secretary of Treasury (israelnationalnews.com)

Another Obama fat-cat banking crony

The reason I call Lew an idiot is because as he was trying to defend the Democrats for not passing a budget over the past 3 years he blamed it on Republicans filibustering the budgets. Only one problem. Senate budget rules don’t allow filibustering. So if this idiot doesn’t know rules and laws how do you think he will do running the Treasury? About as bad as Obama’s tax-cheat did.

Lew was also involved in the banking/housing crisis. At Citigroup (fat-cat banker), Lew was CEO of their Alternative Investment Unit. He invested in hedge funds that bet on the housing market to collapse. Lew profited from the collapse. On top of all this, Lew lied to the Senate Budget Committee.

From The Hill:

President Obama on Thursday nominated his “low-key” Chief of Staff Jack Lew to be the next secretary of the Treasury.

Obama described the Washington veteran as a master of policy and said he knew “very few people with greater integrity” in a ceremony in which he also lavished praised on Timothy Geithner, the man Lew would succeed if the Senate confirms him.

“When the history books are written, Tim Geithner is going to go down as one of our finest secretaries of the Treasury,” said Obama, who recalled having to convince Geithner’s wife to allow him to stay on for his full first term.

The man who stole trillions from taxpayers to reward/bailout his banking buddies and who help Obama spend trillions while accumulating the most national debt ever by a Treasury Secretary will go down as the worst ever. Obama thinks this is great.

“That is why, when he was considering leaving a few years ago, I had to personally get on my knees with Carol to convince him to stay on a little bit longer,” Obama said.

In picking Lew, Obama is elevating a trusted insider and budget expert to be his administration’s economic point man at a time when tax and spending fights are dominating Washington and financial reform is taking a back seat.

“Jack has my complete trust, I know I am not alone in that,” Obama said. “I hope the Senate will confirm him as quickly as possible.

Continue reading>>>

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama nominated White House chief of staff Jack Lew to be secretary of the Treasury Thursday, declaring his complete trust in an aide with three decades of Washington experience in economic policy and a penchant for shunning the limelight.

“He is a low-key guy who prefers to surround himself with policy experts rather than television cameras,” Obama said.

Obama announced his nomination in the ornate White House East Room, flanked by Lew and outgoing Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. The two men and their backgrounds illustrate the nation’s changing economic landscape — Geithner a long time banking specialist with the Treasury and the Federal Reserve took office in 2009 at the height of the nation’s financial crisis and Lew, the budget expert as the government struggles with its debt and deficit challenges.

Obama heaped praise on Geithner for addressing the Wall Street meltdown and shepherding an overhaul of financial regulations through Congress.

“When the history books are written, Tim Geithner is going to go down as one of our finest secretaries of the Treasury.”

Obama highlighted Lew’s past work on economic policy, from his days in the 1980s as an aide to then House Speaker Tip O’Neill to his work on the budget with President Bill Clinton. Obama said he felts “bittersweet” about losing Lew as his White House chief of staff but says “my loss will be the nation’s gain.”

Obama delighted in singling out Lew’s loopy signature, a distended Slinky-like scrawl that captured media attention Wednesday, joking that when he became aware of it he considered “rescinding my offer to appoint him.” If confirmed as Treasury secretary, Lew’s signature will appear on U.S. currency.

A year ago, almost to the day, Obama selected Lew as his chief of staff, taking him from his perch as director of the Office of Management and Budget into the White House’s tight inner circle.

In selecting Lew to replace Geithner, Obama not only picks an insider steeped in budget matters but also a tough bargainer. Some Republicans complain that Lew has been unyielding in past fiscal negotiations, particularly the failed talks for a large deficit reduction deal in the summer of 2011. Some have bristled at what they say is a greater desire by Lew to persuade them rather than negotiate.

If confirmed, Lew would assume the post in time for the administration to tangle anew with Republicans over a confluence of three looming fiscal deadlines — raising the $16.4 trillion federal borrowing limit, averting automatic spending cuts to defense and domestic programs, and the expiration of a congressional resolution that has been keeping the government operating. Those three events, if unresolved, would have a far greater negative effect on the economy than the “fiscal cliff” that Obama and Congress avoided a week ago.

Lew, 57, has often been described as a “pragmatic liberal” who understands what it takes to make a deal even as he stands by his ideological views.

“He’s a political guy. He didn’t get where he is today by being a shrinking violet,” said Paul Light, a public policy professor at New York University and an acquaintance of Lew’s. “But he’s really a doer. He’s the kind of guy you want at the table if you want to get something done.”

One senior Republican senator, Alabama’s Jeff Sessions, voiced opposition to Lew. But while Lew may face a tough confirmation in the Senate, he’s not likely to encounter the type of stiff opposition that is already mounting against former Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican whom Obama has tapped to be his defense secretary.

“We need a secretary of treasury that the American people, the Congress and the world will know is up to the task of getting America on the path to prosperity not the path to decline,” said Sessions, the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee. “Jack Lew is not that man.”

Initial reactions from the business and financial sectors, however, were far more positive.

“One of the realities of Mr. Lew’s appointment is the challenges we face in the country right now — the cliffs we have in front of us,” said Thomas Donohue, the president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “I think Jack is a very experienced fellow on the issues of debt, deficits and budgets.”

Donohue called Lew a “skilled operative,” a “vigorous and strong person,” and a “tough dude.”

Rob Nichols, the president and CEO of the Financial Services Forum, a major banking industry group, said: “Given his experience in the government and private sector, Mr. Lew is well-suited for the job especially at a time when Washington must come together to address our debt situation and put our nation on a long-term fiscally sustainable path.”

Lew’s nomination is the fourth major personnel change in the administration since Obama’s re-election. Obama tapped Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., for the State Department, Hagel to lead the Pentagon and White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan for the CIA’s top job.

Lew was a top aide in the 1980s to O’Neill, a Massachusetts Democrat, playing a role in the Social Security deal between the speaker and President Ronald Reagan in 1983.

Before becoming Obama’s chief of staff, Lew was director of the Office of Management and Budget, a post he also held back in the Clinton administration, serving from 1998 to early 2001. While running OMB during the Clinton administration, Lew helped negotiate a balanced budget agreement with Congress, something that has eluded Washington ever since.

But while the bulk of his experience is in Washington, Lew also worked on Wall Street as managing director and chief operating officer of Citi Global Wealth Management and then Citi Alternative Investments. At the start of the Obama administration, he oversaw international economic issues at the State Department.

Despite his stint on Wall Street, Lew doesn’t have the type of financial experience that Geithner brought to the job at the height of the financial crisis in 2009. Indeed, there’s not as much of a premium on those skills now as the nation’s attention has turned from bank bailouts to fiscal confrontations and brinkmanship.

“The basic financial position and economic position of the country is much stronger today that it was four years ago,” said Michael Barr, who was assistant treasury secretary for financial institutions in 2009 and 2010. “That’s a significant advantage for a treasury secretary coming in.”

During his speech thanking the president and his likely predecessor for the chance to become the next Treasury Secretary, Lew said that he had only recently learned that both he and Geithner “share a common challenge with penmanship.”

The president agreed.

“I had never noticed Jack’s signature,” Obama said to laughs from the crowd. “When this was highlighted yesterday in the press, I considered rescinding my offer to appoint him.”

“Jack assures me that he is going to work to make at least one letter legible in order not to debase our currency,” Obama concluded.

The president says he feels “bittersweet” about losing Lew as his White House chief of staff but says “my loss will be the nation’s gain.”

He notes that Lew was budget director during the Clinton administration, when the budget ran a surplus for three years.

Lew is taking over Treasury as the administration prepares for a new fight with congressional Republicans over the nation’s debt and deficits.

If confirmed, he will replace Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who led the department through the economic turmoil of the first term.

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.

Obama nominated Lew on Thursday, continuing to put a second-term imprint on his Cabinet by choosing yet another close ally to a key government post.

He’s really a doer. He’s the kind of guy you want at the table if you want to get something done

A year ago, almost to the day, Obama appointed Lew as his chief of staff, taking him from his perch as director of the Office of Management and Budget into the White House’s tight inner circle.

[related_links /]

In selecting Lew to replace Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Obama not only picks an insider steeped in budget matters but also a tough bargainer. Some Republicans complain that Lew has been unyielding in past fiscal negotiations, particularly the failed talks for a large deficit reduction deal in the summer of 2011. Some have bristled at what they say is a greater desire by Lew to persuade them rather than negotiate.

AP Photo/CBS News, Chris Usher

If confirmed, Lew would assume the post in time for the administration to tangle anew with Republicans over a confluence of three looming fiscal deadlines — raising the US$16.4-trillion federal borrowing limit, averting automatic spending cuts to defence and domestic programs, and the expiration of a congressional resolution that has been keeping the government operating. Those three events, if unresolved, would have a far greater negative effect on the economy than the “fiscal cliff” that Obama and Congress avoided a week ago.

Lew, 57, has often been described as a “pragmatic liberal” who understands what it takes to make a deal even as he stands by his ideological views.

“He’s a political guy. He didn’t get where he is today by being a shrinking violet,” said Paul Light, a public policy professor at New York University and an acquaintance of Lew’s. “But he’s really a doer. He’s the kind of guy you want at the table if you want to get something done.”

One senior Republican senator, Jeff Sessions, voiced opposition to Lew. But while Lew may face a tough confirmation in the Senate, he’s not likely to encounter the type of stiff opposition that is already mounting against former Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Republican whom Obama has tapped to be his defence secretary.

“We need a secretary of treasury that the American people, the Congress and the world will know is up to the task of getting America on the path to prosperity not the path to decline,” said Sessions, the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee. “Jack Lew is not that man.”

Initial reactions from the business and financial sectors, however, were far more positive.

“One of the realities of Mr. Lew’s appointment is the challenges we face in the country right now — the cliffs we have in front of us,” said Thomas Donohue, the president and chief executive of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a business advocacy group.. “I think Jack is a very experienced fellow on the issues of debt, deficits and budgets.”

Donohue called Lew a “skilled operative,” a “vigorous and strong person,” and a “tough dude.”

Rob Nichols, the president and chief executive of the Financial Services Forum, a major banking industry group, said: “Given his experience in the government and private sector, Mr. Lew is well-suited for the job especially at a time when Washington must come together to address our debt situation and put our nation on a long-term fiscally sustainable path.”

Lew’s nomination is the fourth major personnel change in the administration since Obama’s re-election. Obama tapped Sen. John Kerry for the State Department, Hagel to lead the Pentagon and White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan for the CIA’s top job.

One prominent woman in Obama’s Cabinet, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, resigned her post Wednesday. No successor has been named.

Before becoming Obama’s chief of staff, Lew was director of the Office of Management and Budget, a post he also held back in the Clinton administration, serving from 1998 to early 2001. While running OMB during the Clinton administration, Lew helped negotiate a balanced budget agreement with Congress, something that has eluded Washington ever since.

But while the bulk of his experience is in Washington, Lew also worked on Wall Street as managing director and chief operating officer of Citi Global Wealth Management and then Citi Alternative Investments. At the start of the Obama administration, he oversaw international economic issues at the State Department.

Despite his stint on Wall Street, Lew doesn’t have the type of financial experience that Geithner brought to the job at the height of the financial crisis in 2009. Indeed, there’s not as much of a premium on those skills now as the nation’s attention has turned from bank bailouts to fiscal confrontations and brinkmanship.

Still, Lew will have to address other significant challenges, including completing implementation of the financial regulatory overhaul of 2010.

Lew will probably play a key role in deciding the fate of government-controlled Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the federal housing agencies partly blamed for the collapse of the housing market.

Internationally, he will also be the administration’s point man on issues related to China’s integration into the global economy and Europe’s sovereign debt and financial struggles. The issues aren’t foreign to Lew. While a deputy secretary of state early in the Obama administration, Lew managed the State Department’s international economic policy portfolio.

Obama is expected to nominate Lew as early as Thursday, continuing to put a second-term imprint on his Cabinet by choosing yet another close ally for a key government post.

A year ago, almost to the day, Obama appointed Lew as his chief of staff, taking him from his perch as director of the Office of Management and Budget into the White House’s tight inner circle.

In selecting Lew to replace Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Obama not only would be picking an insider steeped in budget matters but also a tough bargainer. Some Republicans complain that Lew has been unyielding in past fiscal negotiations.

If confirmed, Lew would assume the post in time for the administration to tangle anew with Republicans over a confluence of three looming fiscal deadlines – raising the $16.4 trillion federal borrowing limit, averting automatic spending cuts to defense and domestic programs, and renewing a congressional resolution that has been keeping the government operating. Those three events, if unresolved, would have a far greater negative effect on the economy than the “fiscal cliff” Obama and Congress avoided a week ago.

Official portrait of United States Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner Español: Retrato oficial de Secretario del Tesoro de los Estados Unidos Timothy Geithner (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

OK you got to be pretty sure this guy is not headed for political office. Especially if its one where you have to get votes. He may eventually end up on the boards of several very large corporations. But here is my guess on the timelines after the mandatory holiday to get a sun tan.

Academia is safe. He will most likely be quite the catch for a top Ivy League Diploma Factory. Do some research, opine on some scholarly but politically correct pro democratic research and work your way into a position where you ask the questions and do not have to respond to ignorant politicians who are grandstanding.

A few charitable and or non profits would welcome him on their boards as well. Pro-bono work always looks good. The real pay-off will be networking with other wheeler-dealers.

There will be speaking engagements where he should be able to make his former salary in just one day plus lavish expenses.

A book deal. Several book deals as a matter of fact. Being the former Governor of the New York Fed and being  at ground zero during the 2008 melt-down makes for some fascinating reading.

Then there’s the board seats. Having a former Secretary of Treasury with international contacts would be quite a catch. Given Obama’s constant anti Wall Street tongue lashings may be a little awkward but we’ll get over it.

I predict he will first sit on the boards of foreign non-American global goliaths. They’ll pay well, very well. They will not care about American opinion. They will be able to shield Timothy Geithner from American Press. And he can work on some very interesting problems.

So Timothy Geithner welcome to the private sector. I’m pretty sure that I’ll buy your books. Maybe even buy some tickets to some of your speeches.

George Gutowski writes from a caveat emptor perspective. Follow him on twitter@financialskepti or follow his evil twin brother who is writing a Wall Street Murder thriller at twitter@georgegutowski

OBAMA PRESIDENCY & THE 113TH CONGRESS:

THE HEADLINES….

Obama’s Cabinet Shuffle: Who Is Leaving, Who Was Asked to Stay

Source: ABC News Radio, 1-10-13

JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images

With the departure of Hilda Solis at the Labor Department, we have now seen five members of the President Obama’s Cabinet announcing their intention to leave since the election: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson and now, Secretary of Labor Solis.

Transportation Secretary Ray Lahood has also long suggested he would not stay for a second term.

At least three other cabinet secretaries have been asked to stay as the Obama begins his second term:

• Attorney General Eric Holder
• Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
• Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki

…READ MORE

WASHINGTON — With his choice of Jacob J. Lew to be the secretary of Treasury, President Obama on Thursday will complete the transformation of his economic team from the big-name economists and financial firefighters hired four years ago to budget negotiators ready for the next fiscal fights in Congress.

If confirmed by the Senate, the 57-year-old Mr. Lew — Mr. Obama’s current chief of staff and former budget director — would become the president’s second Treasury secretary, succeeding Timothy F. Geithner, who was the last remaining principal from the original economic team that took office at the height of the global crisis in January 2009.

While the team is changing, so far it is made up entirely of men who have been part of the administration since its first months. Gene B. Sperling, like Mr. Lew a veteran of the Clinton administration, is expected to remain as director of the White House National Economic Council. Alan B. Krueger, a former Treasury economist, continues as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers and Jeffrey D. Zients, a former business executive, as acting director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Read more