OK, so it’s been awhile since I posted. While that shouldn’t represent a dearth of material about Goldfinger (for those of who don’t recall, Goldfinger was one of the many ultra-rich, “bent on ruling the world” megalomaniacs that 007 was always fighting), but an article in the NY Post requires that I set aside a few minutes – and a few paragraphs – to remind those who think this is still a free country what fools they are.
The article, by John Crudele, http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/the_secret_to_goldman_sachs_good_WBlKYEyLfH7GP4zT0vNrEP opens with the question “Is this how Goldman Sachs does it?”
My short answer, John, is…duh!
“Goldman Sachs knows lots of important people.” Really? And tell me, is rain wet? Ice cold? Government corrupt?
Mentioned are “unparalleled access to Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson”, whose immediately prior position was CEO of Goldman, and a series of early morning telephone calls between Paulson and Lloyd Blankfein, his Goldman replacement; Paulson and SEC Chair Chris Cox; Paulson and (his replacement at Treasury) Tim Geithner of the New York Fed. And don't think that by "Goldfinger", I'm referring solely to Goldman Sachs; there are calls involving other companies, serving only to illustrate, rather than refute, “unparalleled access”. Goldman is merely the top of the bottom-feeder foodchain.
In true “corporate-owned media” form, Crudele writes as if this was a new phenomenon, thankfully behind us. He overlooks (as if that even comes close to being the right word) that Geithner’s Chief of Staff came straight from Goldman; that Goldman’s Richard Rubin running Treasury when the whole “subprime” (GOD, I love euphemisms!) fiasco got its start; that Goldman has people in State, and, no doubt, other “departments” of the United States. Anybody care to hazard a guess as to how many other Goldfinger people, i.e., (dare I say it) "competitors", are holding government offices?
And, true to form, Crudele doesn't actually say the "problem" has been solved by the "turn of the party coin" in "legislative" and "executive" offices; he just conveniently overlooks that the single, largest contributor to Barack Obama was…(do I really have to say it?)
- ► 2012 (28)
- ► 2010 (84)