I found this piece — which was published at Salon while I was on vacay — to be amusing:

“Meet the Cassandras, 14 economists, bloggers, politicians and businesspeople of all political stripes who have become the most strident critics of President Obama’s stewardship of the economy . . .

I find this terribly ironic. All I heard during W’s reign of error was what a partisan basher I was. Mind you, I was not an objective critic of bad policies, nor a skeptical observer of a cynical, media manipulating outright bullshitter — it was I who was partisan.

Funny, none of those same accusers seem to mind when I critique Team Obama. (Projection is a funny thing).

Back to Salon:

“Here’s a guide to the prophets of doom. We’ve identified them, attempted to ascertain the moment when they first turned against the White House, and summarized the basic points of their critique. We’ve included economists, members of the business community, bloggers and, just for fun, two of the most anti-Obama Republicans we could dig up.

I find this sort of stuff terribly amusing . . .


The prophets of doom
Andrew Leonard
Salon, Apr. 16, 2009


Category: Economy, Media, Politics

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

24 Responses to “The 14 Most Strident Critics of Obama”

  1. CNBC Sucks says:

    The joke’s on you, Republican Ritholtz. The monetary anesthesia is in full force and bearish contrarians with funny accents like Roubini, Faber, and you are on the run.

    Too bad, you don’t control money supply.

  2. You made the cut. I’d be proud, ‘t’were it me…

  3. Transor Z says:

    Here’s one right up Mark’s alley: “Thought-terminating cliche”

    Includes false associations of someone’s ideas with a larger group/ideology.


    I also really like “Godwin’s Law”

  4. Onlooker from Troy says:

    “monetary anesthesia” That’s a great term! And so appropriate. Some day we’ll run out and have to actually deal with all our problems. Or maybe a future generation will. Oh well, that’s their problem. (TIC)

  5. Mannwich says:

    The day that we’re allowed (encouraged even) to objectively critique our leaders without some blatant politically ideological tilt or backlash to it will be a major victory for this country. It likely means that day will never come. Keep up the good work, Barry.

  6. Transor said it all. That article was hurting my mind.

    BR, it’s curious that you’d, even, link to that. There might be children about..afterall.

    simply, that flippin’ dude is a serious hack. he probably mentioned you to up the SER-value of his article.

  7. Transor Z says:

    I’d say Jim Cramer is worth about .004 and Michele Bachman .0002.

    So maybe it should be retitled “The 13.0042 Most Strident Critics of Obama”?

  8. Transor Z says:

    Strike that.


  9. dss says:

    Cramer’s photo looks to be retouched or from 1988. This moronic article about “Profits of Doom” forgets that many cited were early to warm about the coming meltdown, and the end of this story has not yet been written. Lumping Cramer, Bachman and Barry together is a particularly ingenious trick. This rates a great big “Duh”.

  10. wally says:

    So, refused to drink the Kool Aid, did you? Well, they have ways of dealing with you people.

  11. VennData says:

    The boys who held out on the creditor plan for Chrysler are going to get enough pay back from the interested parties to make these gripes seem like a suburban teen age girl’s complaints about having to “clean the cat box.”

    GM bondholders… any questions?

  12. CNBC Sucks says:

    And oh by the way, Ritholtz, you and I are hypocrites. As registered Republicans (at least, I am still registered as a Republican), both of us can bellyache about Obama all we want, but at the end of the day, we both damned well know that the alternative of voting for a Republican* over Obama in 2012 is equivalent to ordering a transfusion of formaldehyde into America’s bloodstream. This lack of viable alternatives demonstrates the dismal political state of affairs in America.

    * Ron Paul will never get nominated by the GOP.

  13. Pat G. says:

    Interesting group sans Cramer. He’s more like the “weakest link”.

  14. franklin411 says:

    Slightly off topic, but perhaps you’ll consider the Senate’s rejection of the mortgage cramdown bill today in formulating your assessment of what policies the administration could reasonably have been expected to enact. The way the law works presently is that a bankruptcy judge can reduce a person’s mortgage on their vacation or investment home, but he cannot do so on a person’s primary residence. It seems absolutely ludicrous, but a judge currently has the authority to help people who lived extravagantly with multiple homes and speculative investments, but he cannot help ordinary homeowners!

    Well, the bill failed by a vote of 45 to 51, with many of the Democratic Party’s most conservative members voting against it. Naturally, the bill was heavily opposed by the financial industry. Now I ask you, Mr. Ritholtz…bearing this in mind, how on Earth do you think nationalization would ever have gotten through the Senate?

  15. zot23 says:


    I thought that as part of the FDIC agreement between a bank and the govt was that in exchange for deposit insurance, the federal govt has the right, at any time it deems it necessary, to seize the institution and put it into receivership for the good of the overall economy. Congress doesn’t have to approve a thing, it’s already a done deal.

    Now the will to do it, that’s another ballgame.

  16. Gene says:

    Salon’s list doesn’t carry a lot of weight, but it’s good to be in the press. Traffic is what it is all about.

  17. franklin,

    you’ve yet to get it, yes? try understanding that the phrase: “The Big Picture” is, both, highly contextual, and highly subjective, at the same Time.

    To be clear, I am, in no way, speaking for BR.

    Context? Is there a larger Megaphone on the face of the Earth than the one available at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?

    Did we see 44, on the hustings, over the airwaves, or otherwise, Campaign for “the mortgage cramdown bill”? hmm? No?

    But, Campaign he did for ERRA, yes? What was the result of that? Passage?

    LSS: you’re, certainly, Free to Pick n’ Choose, but, remember, if you’re not in an Orchard in Michigan, leave the cherry-picking out of the point you’re trying to make.

    in other words, why don’t you grow-up, 4 a Change? try asking a question that displays some semblance of Intellectual maturity.

    I’ll, even, give you an example: BR, how do you surmise Obama being successful in promulgating, and achieving, the Idea of “Bank Nationalization” as the proper course to navigate through these shoals?

    411, here’s betting you can be better that that..

  18. jc says:

    Left, right and center there seems to be a consensus that the current plan of transfusing the zombie banks with taxpayer dollars is a huge mistake and Tim Geithner is the worst Treasury appointment in memory and both are basic continuation of the the Bush era (pronounced error).

    Some disagreement about the stimuli but with the funds leeched off by the big banks with immortal lives then bigger stimuli are unimaginable and current stimuli are insufficient, kind of the worst of both worlds.

    The stress tests are also the worst of both worlds, most banks will pass but even those that pass will need more extraordinary funding from US.

  19. WaveCatcher says:

    BR, Glad to see you are on board the anti – Obama band wagon. It’s good that you are an equal opportunity critic.

    BTW, I now hold all politicians, bankers, lawyers, CEOs, regulators in low regard, until proven wrong. There are very few true statesmen left. And too many “interested men” running the show. Now that the curtain has been pulled back exposing the mechanism, I find nobody left to trust.

  20. usphoenix says:

    @franklin; thanks for the Senate info. Yes, the current law is ludicrous.

    But I would not blame it on the conservative democrats in the senate. I would say that either implicitly or explicitly Obama let them kill it. Because he’s in the bankers back pocket.

    He simply pulled another Slick Willie. Say what people want to hear, and do what the business buddies want.

    How many senate votes have had democrats vote against Obama’s agenda?

  21. james hogan says:

    Well, hell. I generally like Salon, but I think they’ve let their Obama worship outpace their common sense on this one. How in the world that BR can be put into the same category as Michelle Bachmann and that clown from CNBC is beyond me. Methinks the broadbrush is a wee bit too wide hereabouts.

    Back when GWB was the preznint, there were several economic issues which were obviously deserving of further scrutiny, the housing debacle chief among them. So when BHO ran on the platform of “change you can believe in” some us took that to mean than he meant to change the way things were done in Washington–and in New York. I bought into that “change” thing–it was a very clever marketing strategy–and here we are, 100 days into his adminstration, and things are looking like the Clinton administration all over again.

    Is that a good thing? No, it is not, because the bubble got inflated to near maximum during the Clinton Administration (and continued until 2006 in the GWB era) by some of the same people that BHO has invited back into his administration.

    One of the greatest goofs in all of economic history was the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. It was enacted after the excesses of the Depression of the 1930′s. It was there for a very good reason.

    So in the late 1990′s along comes super-doofus PhD (economics) Sen. Phil Gramm , wrestler Rep. Jim Leach, and smokestack Rep. Jim Bliley–all Republicans– with a package that permits the banks and other commercial lending institutions to do everything that the banking establishment had lobbied for for half a century, in the form of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Clinton is initially reluctant to sign the bill, but is pursuaded to do so by his economic advisors, including Larry Summers, whom BHO has now installed as his chief economic advisor.

    If BHO is intent on trying to recreate the Clinton years, he is in for a severe shock. I fear that that is the advice he is getting from his economic team. Now his economic team advises him with such vacuous phrases like “the crisis will pass” (a patient will eventually die, too).

    I think the media should look at the track record of the members of BHO’s administration before they take another swipe at his critics. His critics–at least the most of those cited in this article have been right.

  22. [...] The 14 Most Strident Critics of Obama (April 30th, 2009) [...]

  23. [...] The 14 Most Strident Critics of Obama (April 30th, 2009) [...]