Financiers Switch to GOP

[TomCADem]

Source: Wall Street Journal

Managers of hedge funds—private investment partnerships that cater to institutions and wealthy people—are reacting to what some criticize as Mr. Obama's populist attacks on Wall Street, as well as to Democrat-led efforts to raise their tax bills. They had hoped to be protected from such a tax move by their relationships with prominent Democratic members of Congress. "Hedge funds bankrolled the Democrats in the 2006 and 2008 elections, and the very people they helped put in power turned around and screwed them," said Sam Geduldig, a former Republican congressional staffer who is a Wall Street lobbyist.

* * *

The shift started near the end of the 2008 campaign, when Mr. Obama began blaming hedge funds for some of the country's economic problems.

In April 2009, when talks about saving Chrysler through a bankruptcy filing bogged down, the president faulted bond-holding hedge funds for the delay. "They were hoping that everybody else would make sacrifices, and they would have to make none." Mr. Obama said. "I don't stand with them."

* * *

Hedge funds' biggest complaint involved a tax bill. Shortly after Mr. Obama's inauguration, he and some congressional Democrats were pushing a plan to block managers of hedge funds and private-equity funds from paying a low 15% capital-gains tax rate on part of their income.


Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703461504576231121265117538.html

---

The corporate right wing propaganda machine in full effect pushing two mutually exclusive narratives:

1. Liberals are abandoning Democrats because they are too friendly with Wall Street.
2. Wall Street is abandoning Democrats because they have become hostile to Wall Street.

The only commonality in all of these narratives is that no one should vote for a Democrat. Will the public listen to their corporate media masters?

On "liberal" outlets, we get corporate sock puppet attacks about Democrats being no different from Republicans, thus liberals and progressives are encouraged to stay home in 2012 and just let Republicans run the table.

On the right, we get the propaganda about how President Obama and Democrats are hostile to business and the economy, thus they should turn out and support Republicans.

Mother Jones has a wonderful article this month talking about corporate prograganda machine.

[SpiralHawk]

1. Ummmm hmmmm. As if...

As if these corporatist creasy-pants, money-bucks popinjays were ever in the D camp...

As if...
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSrkrpYjWrystnXuVLRgSycofw9LPWxqBWZ1Z5Hu34rD7U_FDaW&t=1

[thecoyote23]

2. For a bit

I think the financier simply foresaw that the democrats were next in line for power and figured they'd win them over with a bunch of campaign cash as a form of damage control. They knew that even with the Fox Propaganda machine during the W years people were fed up with the right. Now they are feeling froggy again and moving their money back to the right because they think it will serve them best there in the coming future.

[aquart]

3. It will. It will identify them.

[notesdev]

4. Same old shell game

[No Elephants]

5. SpiralHawk is right.

Donating to the likely winner--or maybe to both candidates/parties--doesn't mean you are in the Democratic camp, even "for a bit."

[Kolesar]

6. This is *not* a "breaking" news story

This story should be in "editorials".

[No Elephants]

7. "corporate sock puppet attacks" By "sock puppet," do you mean "shill?"

"Sock puppets" usually means people who are not using their own names, not even their own fake names, while media personalities do use their own real names.

No shortage of shills, that's for sure, on message boards or off.

Some believe what they're selling; some will shill anything they're paid to shill. Obviously, the second group deserves less respect (in my view, anyway).

But people who won't even put their customary fake names to the views they're shilling are in a category of lameness/cowardice all their own.

[ixion]

8. "some criticize"

:eyes:

[groundloop]

9. Poor little hedge funds, did the mean old Democrats try to make you follow the rules?

I believe someone nailed it when they said these Wall Street managers are getting pissed off because they couldn't buy enough Democrats to let them get away with financial murder any more.

[midnight]

10. In what way are Democrats NOW becoming hostile to Wall Street?

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jester Messiah]

12. Stopping them from screwing over the poor == screwing them?

GFY, Sam Geduldig.

[dotymed]

13. IMO, both of these "two mutually exclusive narratives are

(hopefully were, if Candidate Obama sticks around) true."

1.)Liberals (and Progressives) have been abandoning the Democratic party because of their (Dems) corporate schilling.
2.) When "Candidate Obama" returned (instead of President Obama), he began showing some hostility to Wall street, while maintaining his Wall street cabinet. Yet, he always "gave away the farm" in "negotiations" with the elite and rethugs.

So, we (he) ended up with both sides of the economic chasm pissed off at him. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

IF, Obama would actually use his bully pulpit and inform the public about the true destruction caused by Wall Street, even though he "seemed" complicit at times, and endorse "The Peoples Budget", which eschews austerity measures in favor of reigning in the "ruling elite."

IF he would now focus on job creation, revenue raising (through taxes on the wealthiest), return to his vision of a green society manufactured in America (instead of caving, aka....Vann Jones firing) and universal health care (non-profit)...etc...all of these things that polls show Americans WANT, IMO, despite the propaganda machine (the Fairness Doctrine could be re-instated to counter this), President Obama could glide to victory. If he actually followed through, America could rise from the ashes...