"Among Republicans, a mere 25% or support the bailout saying it was needed; among Democrats, its a 50-50 split. Now, the only reason why its 50-50 among democrats is because Obama is the de-facto face of the bank bailouts, and its a pretty good bet that a large part of that 50% whom back the bailouts among Democrats do so out of loyalty to Obama rather than wanting to bailout Wall St on principle."
I like to think it's because most democrats don't have the memory of a pin, and remember those fraught days between the Lehman Collapse and the second TARP vote. Most Republicans ofcourse have a very selective memory, not restricted solely to the economy. Infact the only thing they can remember seems to be Carter...
Sounds more like you enjoy using your race as a shield. But that's not really the point, you said "you made it clear", but other than simply stating it you havn't done anything. If you were responding to yourself i'm sure you would say:
This is patently stupid. How can we be sure? Birth certificate perhaps?
My own experience is that vast vast majoity don't take politics personally. The kinda follow the campaign, listen to their friends, and vote, or not. The tiny percentage who feel vested in it enough to "get tired, burned out, shocked, and hurt" are way way to small a % to swing national races.
What we can do as progressives is put an end to mis-information and explain concise positions in an intelligent and pragmatic manner. And of course make sure that the narrative is one that benefits us rather than hurts. You mentioned primaries, well primary season is now over. Now is the time to take a deep breath, count them chickens and make the best with what you've got.
Record of what? You seem to be doubly upset that Obama is not some uber-progressive rabble-rousing populist, but those of us who recall his 2004 debut know he is pretty much the same guy we voted for in Nov.
We've had the most progressive government and legislation since the 60's. And if you want to get back to those "good o'll days" maybe you should work towards electing legislative majorities like were enjoyed in the mid 30's and 60's.
The great thing about the internet is that there are no colors here other than that of the font. I'm not sure I particularly care what color you are Jerome, or you of me. So why should we care for Jacks?
The best case scenario for consumers is if the agency has real powers and Warren is involved in setting it up.
Volcker was brought out of retirement to a purely advisory role as one among others. Warren OTOH has been appointed to a specific job. And if she thought it was merely symbolic she wouldn't have taken it. Or do you think you know something she doesn't?