RSS Feed Menu
The Huffington Post reports on the revelations in car czar Steven Rattner’s new tell-all book.
In “Overhaul”, his upcoming chronicle of his reign as “car czar,” Steven Rattner offers an insider’s account of the Obama administration’s rescue of the auto industry. And he pulls no punches when it comes to describing the foibles of such heavyweights as Rahm Emanuel, Tim Geithner, Larry Summers and Sheila Bair.
Though the 58-year-old financier lasted only six months, with his sudden resignation sparking speculation that a pay-for-play scandal at his old private equity firm was becoming an unhealthy distraction, Rattner has plenty of tales to tell.
And Rattner’s account is sure to attract interest within the Beltway, as one of the first books penned by an Obama administration insider.
Rattner depicts White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as a force to be reckoned with who disparaged unions — once quipping “Fuck the UAW” — and who effectively supervised Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner during his first rocky months on the job by dictating his public appearances and staff picks.
He also depicts infighting between economic advisers Larry Summers and Austan Goolsbee and describes FDIC Chair Sheila Bair as a stubborn obstacle to the work of the auto rescue team. And Rattner paints colorful portraits of auto executives such as Fiat Chairman Sergio Marchionne, who once barked to Chrysler executives, “Do you think I am fucking stupid?”
Click here to read more.
jg bennet // Sep 2, 2010 at 4:49 pm
he sounds like a republican does he not? these guys are not the radicals that they are marketed as.
who was it that created the largest tax hike in us history? ronald reagan!! is obama a 21st century reagan? IF HE DOES NOT LET THE BUSH TAXES EXPIRE HELL YES HE IS!! especially with the deficits and unpaid tax deductions…
Let’s rev up our DeLoreans, restart our flux capacitors, and return to the roots of modern-day Republicanism.
Among conservatives, Ronald Reagan is remembered as the tax-cutter in chief: the supply-side hero whose Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 slashed the top marginal tax rate by more than half.
But the truth is that after his first year in office, Reagan was actually willing (if not always happy) to compensate for gaps in the government’s revenue stream by raising rates.
In 1982, for example, he agreed to restore a third of the previous year’s massive cut.
***It was the largest tax increase in U.S. history.*** THAT IS REALLY RADICAL!!
The Gipper also raised taxes in 1983. And 1984. And 1986. The party sainted him for his efforts.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/24/why-the-gop-will-raise-taxes.html
oh and before you go into denial read the below facts of political thinking….
If you were asked to judge a policy proposal for addressing a social issue, which would be more important to you, the content of the proposal or the party that wrote it?
Most of us would answer that the specific policies would be much more important than the political party that proposed it. Most of us would be dead wrong.
Political marketers know that they have to target swing voters (undecideds, independents, etc.) with their ads and other efforts because trying to change the mind of committed party members is next to impossible.
In The Neuroscience of Political Marketing, I described research by Drew Westen at Emory that showed political messages were processed primarily in an emotional, not rational, way.
A study by social psychologist Geoffrey Cohen at Yale shows that cognitive dissonance plays a big role in the way people evaluate political issues, and that they will adjust their beliefs (and maybe facts) as needed to resolve that dissonance.
Cohen’s experiment was simple. He organized two groups of subjects, one composed of liberal Democrats, the other of conservative Republicans.
Then, he showed them very different proposals on the topic of welfare.
One policy proposal was very liberal, and involved large expenditures of tax money. The other was harshly conservative, and proposed far lower levels of assistance and expense.
As you might expect, the liberal subjects preferred the free-spending plan while the conservatives liked the restrictive plan.
Here’s the bizarre twist: when the subjects were told that the plan they didn’t like had been proposed by their own party, their attitudes changed and they favored the plan they had initially opposed.
Liberals thought that cracking down on welfare was a good idea, while conservatives found they could justify opening the coffers for this important social purpose. They even wrote essays explaining why the policy they now favored was appropriate.
And, as Neuromarketing readers could anticipate, the subjects were unaware of this influence.
jabbermule // Sep 3, 2010 at 9:34 am
“Rattner depicts White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as a force to be reckoned with who disparaged unions — once quipping ‘Fuck the UAW’”
For once I find myself agreeing with Rahm.
abj // Sep 3, 2010 at 9:53 am
Too bad Rahm’s sentiments didn’t guide administration policy. I think I’m starting to develop a new-found respect for the guy.
‘Test Article’ For “Unique Article Wizard” | Travel First Aid Kits // Sep 3, 2010 at 11:05 am
[...] Car Czar: Rahm Sаіd “F*** thе UAW” | FrumForum [...]