Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Tom Skerritt

I LOVE Elizabeth Warren: All aboard - WOO WOO!!!

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, John Bender said:

I watched the hearing.  I've seen many similar hearings.  Of those I've seen with banking executives, to me (and I fully admit this is my opinion), he didn't come off as a total sleazebag.  He seemed honestly concerned over what happened, admitted very clearly that it was a huge problem and a huge mistake and took most of the blame onto himself and stated multiple times the buck stops with him and that's why he was there to get grilled.  

In comparison, I found that he was as forthcoming as he could possibly be.  I know the committee wanted blood, but it changed my opinion of Warren in that moment.  I thought she was showing out for the camera, unnecessarily condescending to a guy who was there desperately wanting to fix the problem that he cause.  He seemed to go quietly with his firing as well.  

I don't know.  It's not like he's a hero or anything and maybe he's not even a good guy - but compared to his counterparts I've seen in a similar grill, I got the impression he was generally an honest guy and that Warren was essentially playing it up for the audience. Just my opinion of the situation.

Again, it's all relative and just my opinion of course.  Warren to me came off as a huge phony, WF CEO did not.

That is your interpretation, and so be it. I see it as the guy is a sociopath, and he can look you in the eye and lie to your face, and you will believe him. There is absolutely no chance that he didn't know what was going on. The numbers simply do not support the idea that things were above board. And these are numbers people. You're trying to tell me that the CEO of a national bank thinks that their numbers can grow that large that fast under normal "honest" circumstances? It's inconceivable to sane logical people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, John Bender said:

@Tom Skerritt i see you were the original person who started this topic so I do apologize for coming in flippantly with my "hot take" on something you obviously know a lot about as well.  Hopefully I laid out my opinion concisely.  I might even support Warren, I'm not sure of all of her politics, I'm really talking about this isolated incident as well as similar grillings I've seen her on the giving end of.  She doesn't distinguish herself from other politicians in my eyes with that kind of stuff, it just comes off as phony to me.

:thumbup:

I'm just tired of these entitled #######s taking advantage honest working people. You may not like Warren's personality and tactics, but I welcome it in situations such as these.

Edited by Tom Skerritt
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tom Skerritt said:

:thumbup:

I'm just tired of these entitled #######s taking advantage honest working people. You may not like Warren's personality and tactics, but I welcome it in situations such as these.

Personality and tactics are secondary.  You don't have a problem with the result of her actions?  She dug the hole deeper.  Why would you be ok with that?  I was a pretty big fan until this incident.  It was a sort of rude awakening to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Tom Skerritt said:

That is your interpretation, and so be it. I see it as the guy is a sociopath, and he can look you in the eye and lie to your face, and you will believe him. There is absolutely no chance that he didn't know what was going on. The numbers simply do not support the idea that things were above board. And these are numbers people. You're trying to tell me that the CEO of a national bank thinks that their numbers can grow that large that fast under normal "honest" circumstances? It's inconceivable to sane logical people.

Gotta be a sociopath to get to the higher levels in the big banks.  Most of these guys are so disconnected from the day to day that they don't think about the numbers so hard (and the peons like me have to send tons of data to correct them when they say the wrong stuff..._

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Personality and tactics are secondary.  You don't have a problem with the result of her actions?  She dug the hole deeper.  Why would you be ok with that?  I was a pretty big fan until this incident.  It was a sort of rude awakening to me.

I disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tom Skerritt said:

 

8 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Personality and tactics are secondary.  You don't have a problem with the result of her actions?  She dug the hole deeper.  Why would you be ok with that?  I was a pretty big fan until this incident.  It was a sort of rude awakening to me.

I disagree.

 

which part?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The Commish said:

which part?

I disagree that she made the problem worse. I can understand why people may think she made things worse in the "now" moment. But on a macro level, she is doing quite the opposite. People are myopic that way.

Edited by Tom Skerritt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tom Skerritt said:

I disagree that she made the problem worse. I can understand why people may think she made things worse in the "now" moment. But on a macro level, she is doing quite the opposite. But people are myopic that way.

Do you know anything about Stumpf outside what you saw on TV and do you know anything about Sloan at all?  Genuine question.  Your answers thus far seem to indicate a big "no" but I am not assuming anything.  That's why I ask the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"myopic" is an interesting term to describe a POV where one believes the situation is WORSE than it was before because of future impacts that are generally inevitable, but I'll just wait for the impacts before we go that path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, The Commish said:

"myopic" is an interesting term to describe a POV where one believes the situation is WORSE than it was before because of future impacts that are generally inevitable, but I'll just wait for the impacts before we go that path.

But that's like saying something that is "awful" is worse than something that is "terrible". It doesn't make any difference. Particularly if the ultimate goal is to make it better. I appreciate the effort, and it appears to be genuine.

 

And I have my beliefs as to why many do not agree with me here. Most notably I believe that people have a problem with Warren because of the way she looks and the fact that she has a ######.

Edited by Tom Skerritt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Tom Skerritt said:

But that's like saying some that is "awful" is worse than something that is "terrible". It doesn't make any difference. Particularly if the ultimate goal is to make it better. I appreciate the effort, and it appears to be genuine.

 

And I have my beliefs as to why many do agree with me here. Most notably I believe that people have a problem with Warren because of the way she looks and the fact that she has a ######.

This doesn't make sense to me.  My comments were to you specifically saying she made the situation better....that she improved things.  That is categorically incorrect.  AT BEST, they stayed the same, but IMO, they're now worse.  And this is the company I work for.

Who do you think it was providing the updates to the CEO on these operational programs?  HINT:  It wasn't ultimately the people that fell on the sword publicly.  

This is why I asked if you knew anything outside of what you saw on TV...which I noticed you didn't answer.

Edited by The Commish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Commish said:

This doesn't make sense to me.  My comments were to you specifically saying she made the situation better....that she improved things.  That is categorically incorrect.  AT BEST, they stayed the same, but IMO, they're now worse.  And this is the company I work for.

Who do you think it was providing the updates to the CEO on these operational programs?  HINT:  It wasn't ultimately the people that fell on the sword publicly.  

This is why I asked if you knew anything outside of what you saw on TV...which I noticed you didn't answer.

Of course it's worse right now. The company is so unstable right now, I think that's to be expected. But something had to be done, and nobody at Wells Fargo was going to do anything because the money was rolling in by the truckload. Elizabeth Warren is merely a figurehead for somebody doing something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The Commish said:

This doesn't make sense to me.  My comments were to you specifically saying she made the situation better....that she improved things.  That is categorically incorrect.  AT BEST, they stayed the same, but IMO, they're now worse.  And this is the company I work for.

Who do you think it was providing the updates to the CEO on these operational programs?  HINT:  It wasn't ultimately the people that fell on the sword publicly.  

This is why I asked if you knew anything outside of what you saw on TV...which I noticed you didn't answer.

And perhaps your company should have appointed a new CEO from outside the company. Anyone consider that the corporate nepotism might contribute to the same problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Tom Skerritt said:

Of course it's worse right now. The company is so unstable right now, I think that's to be expected. But something had to be done, and nobody at Wells Fargo was going to do anything because the money was rolling in by the truckload. Elizabeth Warren is merely a figurehead for somebody doing something.

:confused:  wut?

It's plenty stable.  It's fine right now.  Long term, I have my doubts.  I do see the difference in our POV though...you're good with doing "something" for the sake of doing "something" to keep up appearances.  I go beyond that to see if it's actually a positive "something" or a negative "something".  Yes, that requires a bit more knowledge of the situation than what's presented on CNN, but it's worth it IMO....especially when it's my employer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Tom Skerritt said:

And perhaps you were confused by my earlier post because I left out a very important "not". See edited post.

You're going to have to be more specific...it's bad enough your take is based on a few hours of testimony broadcast on TV with little understanding of the rest.  Not sure I have the stomach to go back through and try and figure out which one of those posts you're eluding to.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, The Commish said:

:confused:  wut?

It's plenty stable.  It's fine right now.  Long term, I have my doubts.  I do see the difference in our POV though...you're good with doing "something" for the sake of doing "something" to keep up appearances.  I go beyond that to see if it's actually a positive "something" or a negative "something".  Yes, that requires a bit more knowledge of the situation than what's presented on CNN, but it's worth it IMO....especially when it's my employer.

So we shouldn't hold leaders accountable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, The Commish said:

You're going to have to be more specific...it's bad enough your take is based on a few hours of testimony broadcast on TV with little understanding of the rest.  Not sure I have the stomach to go back through and try and figure out which one of those posts you're eluding to.  

:lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She helped create the CFPB which as far as I can tell has been a catalyst in uncovering a number of scams by major corporations.  She may get up there and grandstand, but all politicians do.  At least with her it seems abundantly clear that she has the average American's interests at heart.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Ok...spitting out the hook....well done Tom....you got me :bag: 

 

Is it a dog and pony show? Sure. But I cannot sit here and watch this stuff happen and not be outraged. Does it happen at other banks and corporations too? Of course it does. That infuriates me too. And I'm glad that someone like Warren is there to call them on their bull####. I'm just not going to understand how you can argue the contrary. You have a bias. You work for the company. You are directly impacted. I get it. You never questioned how the company was doing so well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Tom Skerritt said:

Is it a dog and pony show? Sure. But I cannot sit here and watch this stuff happen and not be outraged. Does it happen at other banks and corporations too? Of course it does. That infuriates me too. And I'm glad that someone like Warren is there to call them on their bull####. I'm just not going to understand how you can argue the contrary. You have a bias. You work for the company. You are directly impacted. I get it. You never questioned how the company was doing so well?

You don't have to....I never made that argument :shrug:  Like I said....I spit out the hook...have a good day :thumbup: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strike her down, and she will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine

 

Quote

Republican senators voted on Tuesday to formally silence a Democratic colleague for impugning a peer, Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, by condemning his nomination for attorney general while reading a letter from Coretta Scott King.

Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, had been holding forth on the Senate floor on the eve of Mr. Sessions’s expected confirmation vote, reciting a 1986 letter from Mrs. King that criticized Mr. Sessions’s record on civil rights.

Sensing a stirring beside her a short while later, Ms. Warren stopped herself and scanned the chamber.

Across the room, Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, had stepped forward with an objection, setting off an extraordinary confrontation in the Capitol and silencing a colleague, procedurally, in the throes of a contentious debate over President Trump’s cabinet nominee.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The GOP gave her more publicity by trying to cut her off, but to suggest it really matters is kind of silly. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Megaton said:

The GOP gave her more publicity by trying to cut her off, but to suggest it really matters is kind of silly. 

Everyone discounted Trump as well.  We'll see if she can gather a coalition of active voters to her.  If she can, this kind of thing can be just what they need to rally behind her.

Edited by James Daulton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, James Daulton said:

Everyone discounted Trump as well.  We'll see if she can gather a coalition of active voters to her.  If she can, this kind of thing can be just what they need to rally behind her.

IMHO, the left is wasting their outrage on trivial matters and when real issues come up, they get lost in the noise. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Megaton said:

IMHO, the left is wasting their outrage on trivial matters and when real issues come up, they get lost in the noise. 

Jeff Sessions as AG might be the worst decision Trump has made so far, including the immigration EO.  There's nothing trivial about this.  And you can be sure that McConnell's comments yesterday will make their way into commercials in 2018 and 2020.

And in any event, the right spent eight years being outraged about mostly trivial stuff about a president far more popular than Trump, and it got them a Breitbart editor-in-chief running the country, a president who rolls over for Wall Street at the drop of a hat, governor's mansions and statehouses across the country, and a Senate that can muzzle the words of Coretta Scott King in order to defend an AG nominee so bassackwards he was too racist for a judgeship 30 years ago. The "consistent outrage" model seems to be fairly effective.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Idiotic, tone-deaf decision by the Republicans.  Typical. 

"Nevertheless, she persisted" is going to become the campaign slogan of every woman running for office in the Democratic Party for the next few years.  Nice of him to write that for them.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Megaton said:

IMHO, the left is wasting their outrage on trivial matters and when real issues come up, they get lost in the noise. 

That, if that is what the Dems are doing, is right out of Trump's playbook. Say 10 stupid things, everyone talks about those, and while everyone is talking about those, something real happens without much notice because of the ten stupid things that had been said. Trump 101... unfortunately most of his voters earned a "D" in Trump 101 and dropped out of college to pursue a job in coal. As, Mrs. DeVos, would put it, "there was growth and proficiency there." Um, yeah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Democrats express outrage at every Trump move, it will desensitize moderates and make his job easier.  Keep up the good work though, Pocohontas!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, it seems to be that the Republicans have been "triggered" and are acting like the real "snowflakes" when it comes to Trump anything. It also appears to be that the Senate floor should be a "safe space" to share ideas as long as they are in the realm of Conservatism. It also appears that they will have to take a break and pray for the heathens and sinners on the Senate floor now. Oh, the humanity. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mario Kart said:

Also, it seems to be that the Republicans have been "triggered" and are acting like the real "snowflakes" when it comes to Trump anything. It also appears to be that the Senate floor should be a "safe space" to share ideas as long as they are in the realm of Conservatism. It also appears that they will have to take a break and pray for the heathens and sinners on the Senate floor now. Oh, the humanity. 

Not to mention they're all white and cold and if you get enough of them together they'll shut down public schools.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chet said:

If the Democrats express outrage at every Trump move, it will desensitize moderates and make his job easier.  Keep up the good work though, Pocohontas!

Worked out OK for the Republicans when they did it the past eight years.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Henry Ford said:

"Nevertheless, she persisted" is going to become the campaign slogan of every woman running for office in the Democratic Party for the next few years.  Nice of him to write that for them.

It was absolutely idiotic by McConnell. What did he gain by doing it? Nothing. Maybe all this ends up meaning nothing but 5 million people read the speech on Facebook after Warren posted it there. That's a few more than would've seen it on CSPAN. He just handed a gift to Warren and the Democrats and continued to make Republicans look like a bunch of uptight white men who can't handle uppity women. Just moronic.  

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chet said:

If the Democrats express outrage at every Trump move, it will desensitize moderates and make his job easier.  Keep up the good work though, Pocohontas!

I have more belief that the left will stay on task and concerned with the issues through multiple rounds of opposition than I do that the President will.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Idiotic, tone-deaf decision by the Republicans.  Typical. 

You ever notice that Mitch McConnell kinda looks like a turtle?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, packersfan said:

Worked out OK for the Republicans when they did it the past eight years.  

Republicans can come along but they gotta ride in back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

I have more belief that the left will stay on task and concerned with the issues through multiple rounds of opposition than I do that the President will.  

The way things are going total Opposition is going to be this countries future no matter who is president.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Da Guru said:

The way things are going total Opposition is going to be this countries future no matter who is president.

The Republicans began this approach when Clinton was President. It's severely damaged our government and the public's trust in politicians to put country first but I don't think the Democrats have any choice but to follow suit now, especially when you consider the amount of damage Trump could inflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, packersfan said:

It was absolutely idiotic by McConnell. What did he gain by doing it? Nothing. Maybe all this ends up meaning nothing but 5 million people read the speech on Facebook after Warren posted it there. That's a few more than would've seen it on CSPAN. He just handed a gift to Warren and the Democrats and continued to make Republicans look like a bunch of uptight white men who can't handle uppity women. Just moronic.  

Gavin Newsom @GavinNewsom 22m22 minutes ago

The right side of history:

Coretta Scott King

- or -

Mitch McConnell.

#ByeMitch

 
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, chet said:

If the Democrats express outrage at every Trump move, it will desensitize moderates and make his job easier.  Keep up the good work though, Pocohontas!

They aren't outraged at every Trump move, but there are certainly things he is doing that are outrageous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rachel Maddow MSNBC @maddow 22m22 minutes ago

The word "hope" is doing a lot of work there.
 

Quote

Yamiche Alcindor @Yamiche 1h1 hour ago

Sean Spicer just now:

I can only hope that if Coretta Scott King was still with us,

that she would support Senator Sessions's nomination.

 

Edited by squistion
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.