The Obama administration is biting the hand that fed it for political gain, Republicans say, accusing the White House of going after Goldman Sachs and then using the fraud charges filed against the Wall Street heavyweight to build the case for financial regulatory overhaul.Considering the fact that the administration is pursuing Goldman Sachs, it would appear that the president is on the side of the people. I really don't understand the complaints from the conservatives. Why is it that they are the ones seemingly defending those who caused the economic crash while? Granted the president had accepted contributions from Wall Street during the campaign, but thinking of Boehner's question, and the fact that the SEC is challenging the Wall Street giant, then the argument cannot be made that Obama has been influenced by the corporation in a way that would negatively impact America.
Goldman Sachs was President Obama's top Wall Street contributor during the 2008 campaign, with employees donating nearly $1 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
A number of top Goldman executives gave the maximum contribution to Obama’s campaign during the presidential race. Among them were President and Chief Operating Officer Gary Cohn, Chief Financial Officer David Viniar and Global Head of Compliance Alan Cohen, each of whom gave $2,300.
"Just whose side is President Obama on?" House Republican Leader John Boehner said in a statement drawing attention to the donations and questioning the announcement from the Securities and Exchange Commission that it's going after the banking behemoth.
To me, it appears that conservatives are trying to drum up support for their opposition of financial reform, and it appears that they are the ones politicizing Goldman Sachs to advance their obstructionist agenda.
Is it any coincidence that the SEC filing occurred right when the Washington had shifted to the Wall Street regulation bill? Maybe. The president had made clear during the campaign that changes were coming, and the SEC's actions are no surprise. The charges filed are big and related to an extremely complicated matter, and were obviously not rushed. The right makes it sound as if Obama just invented this charge to pressure Republicans to vote in favor of the bill, but as Republicans indicated, they have no interest in helping Americans and preventing a future economic collapse. It appears that the GOP is continually for the status quo, and that doing nothing is the best solution. We have seen what nothing has done during the years Republicans held a majority, and I for one am tired of being pushed aside for corporate interests.
I think the SEC's decision is welcomed, and it appears that some conservatives agree.
While some questioned the timing of the announcement, others said it's nevertheless important for the SEC to remain vigilant in cases like this.Despite the supportive talk of the SEC, senators like Scott Brown are still against financial reform. Brown's comments are nothing more then lip service, giving him the appearance of being "for the people," but considering his comment, it would appear that Brown is against the very regulation that would keep banks from turning into "casinos."
"We want banks to be banks, we don't want them to be casinos. And I'm glad the SEC is doing their job," Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., said on CBS' "Face the Nation" Sunday. "And they should bring those charges because it's wrong and we should do something about it."