Obama's barbed words worry corporate world
WASHINGTON — Relations between President Barack Obama and U.S. corporate leaders have grown tense in recent weeks, with business groups bristling over his sharp rebukes of lenders and multinational companies in particular.
Executives and trade groups that praised Obama's outreach during his post-election transition period say they have felt less welcome since he took office in January. More troubling, they say, are his populist-tinged, sometimes acid critiques of certain sectors, including large companies that keep some profits overseas to reduce their U.S. tax burden.
On Thursday in New Mexico, Obama chastised the credit card industry for sharply raising interest rates or fees with hard-to-find notice. He said consumers should be protected from "all kinds of harsh penalties and fees that you never knew about." Some of the dealings by credit card companies, he said, "are not honest."
He tempered his comments, however, saying Americans must be responsible for the debt they incur.
"Banks are businesses, too," Obama told a gathering in Albuquerque. "They have a right to insist that timely payments are made."
The gentler remarks, after weeks of increasingly sharp rhetoric, reflect Obama's efforts to avoid a full-scale war with business interests. He picks his shots, praising companies that embrace his proposals for health care and other matters, while hammering those that oppose him.
Some business leaders have focused on the harsh words lately, saying the president is being unduly divisive.
"It is traditional class-warfare rhetoric," said Jade West, a lobbyist for the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors. "It's a little bit frightening."
Bill Miller, political director for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, called Obama's remarks "an oversimplification of the real world."
Particularly in the areas of finance and taxation, Obama's language often seems to echo, and perhaps fuel, public anger over matters such as the large bonuses paid to executives of AIG, an insurance giant that was bailed out with public money.
When the president called for ending tax breaks for corporations doing business overseas, he assailed a "broken tax system, written by well-connected lobbyists on behalf of well-heeled interests and individuals."
In proposing to overhaul college loans, Obama said, "We have a student loan system that's rigged to reward private lenders without any risk."
After he accused a handful of Chrysler debt holders of seeking "an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout," some reportedly received death threats.
Rutgers University political scientist Ross Baker says Obama uses such pointed language to create an us-against-them dynamic in which he aligns himself with average Americans and depicts his opponents as selfish powers working just for themselves. Obama's targets, Baker says, usually are unsympathetic and faceless corporations or hedge funds.
"If you use inflammatory, populist language," Baker said in an interview, "it's best to use it on organizations or interests that aren't terribly popular."
"It's a negotiating ploy," he said. In the early stages of a presidency, he said, "you advance your cause very dramatically, even confrontationally."
The ploy can prove potent. On May 8, the final holdouts among Chrysler's creditors reluctantly agreed to accept far smaller repayments from a bankruptcy reorganization than they had first demanded. Obama's public rebukes had taken a toll, as had his hardball negotiations with all of Chrysler's lenders, unions, executives and other key players.
"The only point the president was making was that many creditors went the extra mile and kept Chrysler afloat," said David Axelrod, a top adviser to Obama. A handful of holdouts forced the bankruptcy, he said, "and it was important to explain that fact."
Axelrod said Obama has been consistent in describing groups that support or oppose his policies. For instance, he said, Obama has long criticized multinational companies that postpone or avoid paying certain federal taxes by keeping profits overseas.
The president, he said, is careful "not to castigate the vast majority of working people who are playing on the square."
Leaders of several corporate groups said they want greater access to Obama and his top advisers. Being invited to "summit" discussions with 200 people at the White House isn't enough, they say.
The administration defends its record. Obama invited members of the Business Council to the White House on Feb. 13. A month later he fielded questions from top corporate executives at a forum of the Business Roundtable. And this month Obama lauded Johnson & Johnson, Microsoft and other major businesses trying to hold down employees' medical costs.
Still, some groups seethe over various barbs and proposals, including Obama's bid to end some tax breaks for multinational companies.
The president says his plan will shift more jobs to the United States, but "it does exactly the opposite," said John J. Castellani, president of the Business Roundtable.
Despite the hour that Obama devoted to the trade group's March 12 forum at a Washington hotel, it is coordinating a major lobbying campaign against the president's tax plans.
"The international tax provisions are something that we oppose very, very strongly," Castellani said.
West, of the wholesalers' trade group, said Obama remains popular, but he risks overdoing the populist attacks. "There is overreaching that will catch up with them," she said.
A top GOP strategist warned Republicans and their corporate allies to move cautiously.
"Your political opponents are the Democrats in Congress and the bureaucrats in Washington, not President Obama," Frank Luntz wrote in a memo to GOP lawmakers. "Every time we test language that criticized the president by name, the response was negative, even among Republicans."
Castellani said Obama "puts things in a way that very much resonates with public sentiment."
Tax policy for multinational companies "is a very complex issue," he said. "It's incumbent upon us to make it simpler."
May 19, 2009 at 4:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
PREVENTION..It's important to note that these common folks you're referring to have been influenced greatly by a corporate driven media for many generations and taught to think a certain way. Alot of that learning needs to be unlearned! These "common" folks too have to drop the pride and show some fortitude when people are trying to help them. We're in a time of change. So, it's time to change. WE all need to stop fighting it and embrace it. When someone reaches out to help you be careful not to bite too hard, it just might be the one who's there to feed you. And I'm not speaking of our government whatsoever!
May 19, 2009 at 4:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Well, I'll admit that I have not been out to the gun club in awhile... I might have to take a trip on down there.
I see the assault weapon ban as a small, more or less common sense, restriction on the 2nd just as there are small, more or less common sense, restrictions on the 1st. I know that some, particularly in the NRA, do not feel the same... but they don't go running around yelling "fire!" in theaters either, do they? (A silly statement on the surface but if one is truly concerned at a visceral level about the Bill of Rights...)
I keep mine in a safe in the garage, basically just hunting arms, but a friend of mine (a FBI special agent) keeps one of her handguns under her pillow. Speaking of which... if you ever want a real treat, try to get a tour of the gun vault at the Milwaukee Field Office (or, likely, any other Field Office). You would not believe some of the weapons that they seize.
Well, thanks for your reply. I am not sure whether to be glad the fears seem to be unfounded or worried that there seems to be this much unfounded fear.
May 19, 2009 at 4:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
prevention~exactly! That's where I come in.
May 19, 2009 at 3:59 p.m.
May 19, 2009 at 3:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
The second amendment doesn't really refer to guns. It refers to arms such as armaments. So, where do we draw the line? Personally I could use some supercavitating torpedoes for fishing.
From an economic point of view, aren't these gun dealers concerned that with all these people stocking up eventually people won't be buying anymore guns or ammunition? Can they see a boom and bust cycle here? It could end up that there would be fewer dealers and therefore fewer available guns because the rednecks are paranoid.
May 19, 2009 at 8:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
Darwin1: "How are you serving our country while at the same time discounting the people you claim to serve." Too funny Darwin! Believe me--the people that serve are country aren't the only ones that are discounting you!:)
May 19, 2009 at 7:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
joeflint: Don't forget to add Slander/Libel as restrictions to the 1st amendment..
May 19, 2009 at 7:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
DiGriz: Excellent point regarding Lincoln. He broke a whole lot of laws while acting as President. I will point out, though, that these laws were broken to preserve the union...our nation was quite young at the time, I'm not sure what the ramifications would have been if the south had seceeded.
May 19, 2009 at 7:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Grizzy, apparently you like to hear yourself go on and on and on about how smart I think I am while at the same time telling us over and over and over again about how smart you are. How are you serving our country while at the same time discounting the people you claim to serve. Really, you aren't serving anyone but yourself. This whole blog on the gazette is where the neo-brown shirts attack everyone. However, I guess you wouldn't know that because you agree with them.
May 19, 2009 at 5:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
DiGriz, re: 2nd Amendment...
Honest question: Even after some Googling, I cannot find the reason that there is such fear about the 2nd Amendment. It is my understanding that a) since the day it was written, there has been a debate about whether the 2nd was meant only for "well-regulated militias" or for personal ownership. My conviction and my interpretation of both the Constitution and the other early documents (e.g. Federalist, Anti-Federalist, ...) is that personal ownership shall not be infringed. b) Obama is/was a Constitutional scholar so he surely knows the original legal basis as well as some of the intricate legal details that have occurred in the last 222 years.
Now, all that said, we have restrictions on our 1st Amendment rights, e.g. "fire!" in a crowded theatre. The only things that I can find that Obama has said is that he supports things like background checks and that he would stipulate that trigger locks and gun safes be mandatory. This does not, per se, infringe on the 2nd Amendment but certainly adds a burden.
So, why the belief that Obama is going to reduce / remove the 2nd? Did I miss something? If so, I too would be alarmed at an erosion of an enumerated right.
May 19, 2009 at 5:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
> When did a bunch of Jewish Socialists save a bunch of Capitalists? When they built fat man and little boy.
OK, it took me just a second to get that and I actually chuckled but you must surely know that although quite a few of the scientists involved in the Manhattan Project were Jewish, few were avowed socialists and very, very few who fled continental Europe for the US or the UK returned after the war.
But, it did make me chuckle.
May 18, 2009 at 1:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
Well for being a kid you seem to be very enamored with me. Let me guess your really a priest. I am flattered you would spend so much time ranting and railing against me. Did your mommy not love you enough?
May 18, 2009 at 10:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
darwin1~ why the chip on the shoulder all the time? Is it that hard to accept others opinions? I've got news for you. Just like me, you truly don't know everything. Infact, we truly know very little in the grand scheme of things. Try admitting that to yourself and you'd be amazed at how liberating that can feel.
May 18, 2009 at 10:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
Wow, listen to the whiny sore losers. Yes, the Republican'ts didn't really lose. They didn't really get fewer votes. Nice delusions. See ya next elections: Vive Che.
By the way. When did a bunch of Jewish Socialists save a bunch of Capitalists? When they built fat man and little boy.
May 18, 2009 at 8:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
NVGRF thinks just because the majority voted for Obama that what he is doing is the correct thing for the country. The President has kept few to none of the promises he made while running for office. His idea for change included putting all the same people in his cabinet. Look at his VP. I don't know if he is smart enough to fight his way out of a wet paper sack.
May 17, 2009 at 7:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
DiGriz~ That was outstanding! A proper education is much needed in this country. Not what the media paints either! Time to turn the TV off and put down the game controllers and pick up a good book and learn some of this country's history. The leadership that is lacking in this country falls soley on the shoulders of US, the citizens of this country. We've got to stop trying to do a patch job on all the problems and start treating it from a cellular level! Namely, our children!
May 17, 2009 at 8:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
NVgrf, that would be because most American's have been lulled to sleep over the years and Obama's crew brilliantly took advantage of that. The man charmed the pants off a nation who is, and remains in a very vulnerable state. You can save the Geo. Bush rebuttle as well for I'm not a fan of either of these so called leaders. It's not about me or you being right or wrong here, it's about the LEADERSHIP of this country...and we have NONE!
May 16, 2009 at 9:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
lol, I still use / love / prefer VMS. Gotta admit, I don't quite see how this became a computing thread.
> Obimbo has ruined the auto industry and the banking industry in a matter of months. Is this the change you people had in mind?
lol ^ 2... you've been asleep since 2005 and woke up in February, right? I mean, you're kidding, right?
I mean, you don't remember W submitting to Congress and then approving the first $700 billion bailout? Which fiscal year did that bailout fall into? The current one. That means, in really simple words, that nearly HALF OF THE CURRENT YEAR'S DEFICIT IS BOTH W'S AND OBAMA'S FAULT. (Obama and McCain both voted for it as Senators.)
You don't recall almost $5 / gas (well, in urban areas on the coasts)? The popularity of the Prius and the 350Z and the new Mustang? GM is just finally getting the new Camaro out the door -- which is great but a day late and a dollar short -- they're getting it to market only a few years after the "muscle car revival" of the mid-2000s. Now they're playing catch-up with high mpg or electric vehicles. Sad, really, considering the potential they had in the 90s with their I4 and I3 engines (nearly 50 mpg on some Geo models) and the EV-1. They had the right ideas and the right tech (if not quite the right vehicles) over a decade ago and instead they focused on short-term gains in this decade by focusing on large SUVs (Suburban, TrailBlazer, etc).
GM & the Unions destroyed themselves; hand-in-hand, they headed off the cliff. It's tragic, really, since they have returned to making some really great vehicles in the past six or so years. Don't get me wrong: I love the brand, every vehicle I have ever owned was a GM or a Saturn; however, even as a "brand loyal" customer it is not difficult to state that unfortunately, there can be stark quality differences between their high mpg vehicles and what has been their bread and butter.
To put it in "conservative" terms: the free market has spoken. GM has failed to adapt. If you think bailing out a clearly bankrupt company is the same as destroying it, well, good luck to you.
The banks... wowo... yup, it was the current President in just a few months and not nearly a decade of artificially low interest rates coupled with rampant speculation in housing and oil.
I guess you don't remember (no, of course not) that it was LAST MAY THROUGH SEPTEMBER WHEN THE MARKET DROPPED FROM 13,000 TO 9,000; you know, when W was President. The market continued to trend downwards until March, you know, only six weeks after the last President left office. In the past two months, the markets have GAINED over 30%.
No President, no one man, no one company can possibly "control" the markets. Neither W nor Obama can be directly blamed or praised for market performance.
You sir win the internets.
May 16, 2009 at 8:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
callit... Obama won by a landslide in a democratic election. His policies were the overwhelming peoples choice. You are a member of the minority. Most Americans obviously agree with me, not you.
May 16, 2009 at 11:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
Yes darwin we are very aware of you socialist ideas and disagree with you constantly about them. It didn't require any translation of your comments to figure that out; like would be required if you used a network device that incorporated NAT. It turns out most people that read these posts have already edited the "run" portions of their personal registries to block your socialist from effecting them. And btw, using open source will in no way keep your socialist views from bothering others; this requires a stronger firewall (you'll have to learn that one on your own). --- Pun intended by all.
May 16, 2009 at 7:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
Obimbo has ruined the auto industry and the banking industry in a matter of months. Is this the change you people had in mind?
May 15, 2009 at 10:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
I don't like socialism. I love socialism. I am hoping that we reinstate the Paris Hilton tax, tax the rich and redistribute the wealth to the poor and provide as much government paid for health care and education that we can get from illegal tax havens and rich people.
Well let's see about your computer expertise. What is NAT and how is it used? Let's say I wanted to build a database driven web site but only wanted to use open source software which programs and operating system would I use? What is wrong with Microsoft Certification exams? Let's say I am using Windows XP and want to prevent certain programs from running at startup in the system tray, where would I find that in the registry?
May 15, 2009 at 7:35 p.m.
May 15, 2009 at 6:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
oh andre can copy and paste other peoples words. OK, little andre next time you might try to type words on your keyboard too or is that too difficult for your little fascist brain.
May 15, 2009 at 6:46 p.m.
May 15, 2009 at 3:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
darwin1, I will pray for you as well......
May 15, 2009 at 3:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
'I am as close to Stalin as you people are to Einstein'...thats funny:)
May 15, 2009 at 2:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Oh another excellent post, good job!
May 15, 2009 at 2:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
The level of details in the statements clearly demonstrates a lack of knowledge. How am I like Stalin? Did I help the US defeat the Nazis? Did I get to Berlin before the allies? Stalin didn't slam anyone. He didn't need words he had Gulags and firing squads. Clearly, I am nothing like Stalin.
If one were to read Mein Kampf one would be able to quickly understand how the Republicans are like Nazis. Hitler said that you need three institutions to stage a modern revolution: the military, the media and the churches. All of which the Republicans have sought to control.
Yes, RAF we all know that you can copy and paste. You might try thinking now.
May 15, 2009 at 2:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Well you got your CHANGE. You just have to replace HOPE with FAILURE!
May 15, 2009 at 1:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
"Any idiot can repeat something over and over again. "
-
Exactly, you have bee doing it perfectly for months now.
May 15, 2009 at 1:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
15years~ Those government bodies are made up of American citizens. Government officials aren't some mutated super human entity! These are the people supposedly leading (which means setting the example for others) a country! This is about individual responsibilty. I'm sickened by corporate American greed and their worldviews..no question. I'm more sickened with myself for empowering them to dictate whether I'm going to be poor or wealthy as well! Therefore, I don't allow it to happen anymore. All of the media we allow to creep into our subconscience and teach us how to get further and further in debt isn't anyone's fault but our own! We need to spend less time worrying about what the governments doing and start getting ourselves right! Once we do that, we'll be wide awake enough to start putting the right people in place in these government positions to direct this country in the fashion it's supposed to be! It starts right here, right now with you and me and us all. Let's start raising leaders in our households and not another generation of couch pototoes! Remember, every tater tot starts with an adult potato! Rather than trying to do a patch job some of these lost adults, let's focus on the kids and maybe their example can be what it takes to get through to their elders.
May 15, 2009 at 1:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Darwin, I beg to differ. True, there are some aimless drones out there. It's not hard to see where things are going in this country. You'll find that the one's most proactive about doing something about it are the one's that understand it far clearer than the others. Now, you judge yourself based on that before slamming an entire community in here like you're "Stalin"!
May 15, 2009 at 12:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
I have an idea. Let's take a vote. Oh we did and you stupid losers lost. You don't even know what the word socialist means. You just heard some conservative pundit and now your repeating it. Any idiot can repeat something over and over again. I am as close to Stalin as you people are to Einstein.
May 15, 2009 at 11:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
whoanellie, I agree wholeheartedly with you. What's your plan? I'm not being cocky when I say that either. If there's a way to not allow this to happen, I'm in.
May 15, 2009 at 11:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
"darwin1-You should change your name to Stalin1" Actually I think the name "1 Idiot" would be more appropriate:) Stalin led a country, Darwin1 couldn't lead a dog around the block......No offense intended, of course:)
May 15, 2009 at 11:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
Barry Soetoro: "Americans must be responsible for the debt they incur". Does that include federal and state government or is that just the poor/middle class Mr. Soetoro? We "rewarded" failing banks and the big 3 with bailout money and that didn't work, now punishing big corporations will help who exactly?
May 15, 2009 at 11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
It should worry the corporate world, Obama wants to be in control of everything! If we are to have a socialist government he has to accomplish it in the next 31/2 years. He's moving so fast it makes your head spin! Just you wait and see, if people do not wise up and stop this it will soon be the way.
May 15, 2009 at 10:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
darwin1-You should change your name to Stalin1.
May 15, 2009 at 10:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
NFgrf is living high off his school pension. Every new freebie he gets from Obama just allows him to not have to hit the "early bird" at 4:00 and eat with the normal crowd. Who cares about freedom and trying to keep a job or two in this country, he's retired.
May 15, 2009 at 10:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Businesses always want to privatize gains while socializing their losses. There are no bigger group of crooks and criminals. They have MBA's then manage their employees by bankruptcy or blame them for their mismanagement. They overcharge you in an instant and then take 30 days to get YOU YOUR money back. Then they say "didn't you read the forty page policy on our website"? They stick it to shareholders, stick it to consumers and when finally people have had enough they cry about class warfare. There has always been class warfare - them sticking it to us.
May 15, 2009 at 10:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
The scary thing about Obama is, he truly believes in the things he's doing. He's wrong, but, convicted. That's very scary. I believe his heart is in the right place, his head is completely out to lunch! He needs to brush up on his history and learn from it rather than taking this country further and further down the wrong path like the past few leaders have done for us. NVgrf- I think Thomas Jefferson is sitting on top of his tombstone crying his eyes out right about now!
May 15, 2009 at 10:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Why is it so hard for Obama faithfuls to listen to criticism of him? Everytime something is brought up, these same people have to fire something about George Bush into the air. I agree, George Bush left me scratching my head as well! Both of these clowns have no clue about "principles" and what LEADERSHIP is all about. True leaders respect principles and stand for truth. Bush failed and Obama is right on track with him.
May 15, 2009 at 9:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
Give 'em hell, Mr. President. If you read the article, you will note that he is chastising those who do things that are harmful to Americans. Pease read, or reread, the article! And it was George W. Bush who continually abused the US Constitution and took away the rights of Americans, not Barack Obama. After eight years of that cowboy, Thomas Jefferson must be half way out of the ground!
May 15, 2009 at 8:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
The minute this man moves his lips we lose a little more freedom. The corporate world is worried about their pocket books....the citizens of this country are worried about their freedoms.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.