On 'Today': Obama Like A 'Scolding Parent' to Wall Street

Photo of Geoffrey Dickens.
  • Bookmark and Share

Continuing the trend of embracing Barack Obama's bashing of Wall Street bonuses from last night's evening news, NBC's "Today" show, on Friday, described Obama as "outraged!" "agitated," and claimed he "took the tone of a scolding parent." Opening the "Today" show Matt Lauer exclaimed: "Good morning, outraged! President Obama lashes out at Wall Street for doling out nearly $20 billion in bonuses despite the financial crisis." Then a little later Lauer threw it to Savannah Guthrie, who opened her story this way:

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: The President did not hold back. He gave a dressing down to Wall Street that went on uninterrupted for two-and-a-half minutes. This after he read in the newspaper about some big bonuses.

[On screen headline: "Outraged Obama Blasts Banks For Bailout Bonuses"]

BARACK OBAMA: That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful.

GUTHRIE: The President took the tone of a scolding parent, reacting to news Wall Street was still paying itself big bonuses. $18 billion last year, even as many banks' balance sheets crumbled, billions of taxpayer dollars spent to bail them out.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Lauer did bring on CNBC's Melissa Lee to give Wall Street's side of the story, as she noted: "That you need to pay out these bonuses in order to retain the top talent," but then sheepishly added, "We don't know how this is gonna go over with the public."

The following is are transcripts of Lauer's intro, followed by the Guthrie report and then analysis segments from David Gregory and Melissa Lee as they were aired on the January 30, "Today" show:

MATT LAUER: Good morning, outraged! President Obama lashes out at Wall Street for doling out nearly $20 billion in bonuses despite the financial crisis.

BARACK OBAMA: That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful.

LAUER: But can he really change Wall Street's ways?

...

LAUER: President Obama took Wall Street to task on Thursday after being told that corporations on Wall Street to task on Thursday after being told that corporations on Wall Street paid out more than $18 billion in bonuses in 2008. That's during the same year when many of the same companies asked for and received government money, just to stay in business. There's clearly a lot of fallout from this, this morning. We're gonna have more on it. But can the President do much about it?

...

LAUER: Let us begin this Friday morning with that tough talk from President Obama aimed directly at Wall Street. NBC's Savannah Guthrie is at the White House with more. Savannah, good morning.

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Good morning, Matt. The President did not hold back. He gave a dressing down to Wall Street that went on uninterrupted for two-and-a-half minutes. This after he read in the newspaper about some big bonuses.

[On screen headline: "Outraged Obama Blasts Banks For Bailout Bonuses"]

BARACK OBAMA: That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful.

GUTHRIE: The President took the tone of a scolding parent, reacting to news Wall Street was

still paying itself big bonuses. $18 billion last year, even as many banks' balance sheets crumbled, billions of taxpayer dollars spent to bail them out.

OBAMA: They have to start acting in a more responsible fashion if, if we are to together get this economy rolling again. There will be time for them to make profits and there will be time for them to get bonuses. Now is not that time.

GUTHRIE: But with the banks still on shaky ground, the President knows he'll likely have to ask Congress for more money to bail them out. Some banks have cut back. Bonuses actually dropped 44 percent last year. But still, the news about nearly $20 billion in bonuses is making a hard sell even harder.

OBAMA: You know, the American people understand that we've got a big hole that we've got to dig ourselves out of, but they don't like the idea that people are digging a bigger hole even as they're being asked to fill it up.

GUTHRIE: Beyond bailout bonuses, there are reports of a former Merrill Lynch executive spending more than $1 million redecorate his offices after his firm failed. And Citibank's near purchase of a new $50 million corporate jet as it was getting a government bailout.

OBAMA: Secretary Geithner already had to pull back one institution that had gone forward with a multimillion dollar jet plane purchase at the same time as they're receiving TARP money. We shouldn't have to do that, because they should know better.

GUTHRIE: Vice President Joe Biden talking exclusively to CNBC didn't miss the opportunity to whack Wall Street.

VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: I mean, it just offends the sensibilities. I mean, I'd like to throw these guys in the brig.

GUTHRIE: Well, all that presidential outrage kind of eclipsed the other news item of the day, the President signing his first law. It's an Equal Pay law that makes it easier for women to sue for pay discrimination and it brought out Michelle Obama for her first public remarks as First Lady, Matt.

LAUER: Alright Savannah Guthrie at the White House. Savannah thank you very much. NBC's David Gregory is moderator of "Meet the Press." David, good morning to you.

DAVID GREGORY: Good morning, Matt.

LAUER: The President was agitated. He was blunt in dealing with these bonuses in 2008 on Wall Street. He's in a tough spot, isn't he? He's gonna have to come to the taxpayers again and say, "I need more money, billions of dollars to bail out the economy," some of these specific firms. Now he hears about these bonuses. He's looking at these companies, saying, "You guys are killing me."

GREGORY: Yeah. Well that's, that's exactly what I was gonna say. That was the message here, which I think was exaggerated in some respect to say, "You are not helping me when I have to go back to Congress and ask for a lot more money." And let, let's be clear about what this is. The President has asked for more bailout money to the tune of $350 billion. But on paper, at least, the losses from these bad mortgages for these banks is over $1 trillion. And all this talk about recapitalizing the banks because they don't have enough capital to keep lending, it's gonna be very expensive. And most people who are following this closely think it's inevitable that the taxpayer is gonna have to pony up more money and that's why the President was none to happy. It doesn't make his job politically any easier.

LAUER: The Senate is gonna to up the stimulus package in the early part of the week. We already know what happened in the House, it passed but with not one Republican vote. The dynamic of power is different in the Senate, David, but what's, what's the likelihood of a little more compromise?

GREGORY: Well, I think it's certainly possible, and you're already hearing some tax measures that are being discussed. More tax cuts, particular business breaks, an effort to reduce the alternative minimum tax that hits middle class taxpayers. So, you'll see that kind of give. Primarily, though, the parameters of the package will remain largely the same. There is that different power dynamic in Senate, more moderate Republicans, more opportunity to pick up more Republican votes. But there is at least some shared sentiment among some Republicans who say no way, "This is a bad idea on stimulus. It's not gonna work and we're gonna hold our ground as Republicans."

...

LAUER: For more on the bonus fallout, let's bring in CNBC's Melissa Lee. She's at the New York Stock Exchange. Melissa, good morning. How is this tongue lashing from the President gonna go over on Wall Street? I'm not talking about in the stocks, I'm talking about at the companies that are getting the tongue lashing?

MELISSA LEE: Well, you know, Matt, it is very hard to make a defense case when you're paying the sixth biggest pool of bonuses out there, and it was far from the sixth biggest year on record in terms of profits. But here is the defense that Wall Street is making today. First of all, the bonuses, as Savannah Guthrie had mentioned are, in fact, down. Yes, it is a huge pool of bonuses, but bonuses are down by about 44 percent compared to last year. And the second argument that Wall Street is making today is that you need to pay out these bonuses in order to retain the top talent. These firms are already struggling, and do you want to see your top performers walk out the door to another firm? So, you know, we don't know how this is gonna go over with the public, but right now, that's how Wall Street is defending itself.

LAUER: Alright, Melissa Lee. Thank you very much for your input this morning, appreciate that.

—Geoffrey Dickens is the senior news analyst at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I am so sick and tired of

I am so sick and tired of this idiot!! and the Obamabots! 

If Obama truly cared about CEO bonuses and people getting over paid, why hasn't he led by example and given up his Presidential salary?  While it is $400,000 a year and won't do much to put a dent in fixing our economy, it would be TRUE leadership. Leading by example.

Obama is a millionare, so is his wife. Neither one of them needs this money. Same thing with the majority of Democrats and Republicans in Congress.

Thus I say that we start a campaign demanding that President Obama (yuck...I gag every time I say it) lead by example and give up his Presidential salary.

Liberals, do as they say not as they do. 

 

Liberal=hypocrite

All of our IRA's/401K's did

All of our IRA's/401K's did quite well in 2007. Did anyone consider the fact that the bonus's paid in 2008, were awarded because of the success of 2007?

Well, that proves it

Obama believes everything he reads in a newspaper.

That's scary, of course ... if this media report is to be believed. (I don't trust the media ever, even when they report something that reflects poorly on them.) But let's hypothesize that this report is accurate.

  • Did Obama ask an aide if this was true, or if there were mitigating circumstances?
  • Before the president of the United States took two seconds to fact check, he vented moral outrage ... not at individuals, but at a fictional enemy.
  • How brave, as usual, to attack people when they're in no position to defend themselves.
  • Based on a newspaper report.

Let's hope the newspaper doesn't publish speculations about the Russians before Obama mouths off again. The Russians are nastier than CEOs.

Liberals

Would some liberal please explain to me why these huge bonuses are so heinous?  Don't they get taxed?  Don't the Democrats like huge taxes?  What's the problem?  I think it's nothing but class envy.

Where was the MSM when CEO's were really hitting it big?

Oh cheesy days.. just where was the MSM when CEO's were really hitting it big?

Or - I really love it when a activist anti-capitalist socialist reminds me, with pride, that the stock market (it happens to be a bit capitalist, by the way) always does better during Democratic administrations. (there are beginning and end points, folks.)

Ah, the Clinton era of the 90's.

http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/pay/images/2006_trend_chart.gif

That  really says it all. Yes, the Democrats with the MSM in full support mode not only convinced the public that it was during the Bush years (not during the wonder days of Clinton's fair and balanced pay scale) that Corporate CEO's made the big strides. The left hates Bush for those numbers - they just don't know how to  read the dates on the X-axis. For the record, as the chart ends in 2005 - here is the continuing re-balancing for the Bush years: 2006 - 364:1  / 2007 - 344:1. One would assume that the ratio will drop significantly in 2008.

And one more interesting stat that Joe Biden, grossly misrepresented and blamed on Bush during the fall run up to the election. Biden said that,

..they [Bush] have devastated the middle class. We, for the first time since the 1920's - 1 % of the American people make 21% of all the income in America. That wasn't the way before George Bush became president."

The truth of the matter is that the number ran up from 14% in 1993 to 20% in 2000. Then, that bubble economy crashed.  During the depressive period which followed, it fell to 16-17% (mid - 1990 levels), and finally worked it's way back up to 21, perhaps 22%.

Clinton was very good for the CEO's and the very rich. Bush did not fare so well. No wonder the left and the MSM blame Bush. (;~/ gary

The Oster has

The Oster has Spoken...

Everybody had better bow, listen and obey.

Govt. is the problem...has been the problem from the beginning of all of this fiasco.

So much for free enterprise.

Nationalism here we come...full speed ahead.

Remain silent, smile, be happy. 

 

When can we expect to see

When can we expect to see political activists like the execrable Savannah Guthrie, Matt Lauer and David Gregory at political advocacy groups like NBC denounce Michelle "For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country" Obama and the University of Chicago for paying Michelle Obama $300,000 per year for a sham, bogus, so-called "job" that the University of Chicago has conveniently eliminated now that Michelle Obama lives in Washington, D.C.?

Envious Neighbors

Obammy and Congress are more like envious neighbors than a scolding parent. Though most of them are incapable of doing any honest work, they see themselves as worth at least as much as any CEO. Our Constitution should have outlawed career politicians.

Wall Street Bonuses Decline 44%

Per TheStreet.com 01-29-09: "New York state alone will lose nearly $1 billion in revenue because of the 44% drop, and the economic effects are rippling nationwide. "

Also, "Wall Street bonuses totaled $18.4 billion in 2008, down from almost $33 billion in 2007. The drop will hit the state and New York City the hardest, costing the city $275 million in tax revenue..."

Do we want to play class envy over outrageous bonuses, or factually report the drop in bonuses and what it means in tax revenues to government. Government is a greedy partner in bonuses.

And the answer is: play CLASS ENVY. 

 

I suppose his $150 million+ on a flubbed

and wasted inaugeration was okay in his and the MSM standards. I believe that he took the tone of a tantrum as he is wont to do thus the title of man-child for the one.

while you're at it

hey barry, while you're in the scolding mood, why don't you turn your attention to your own party, namely pelosi, reid, barney frank, chris dodd, etc.... they are the reason we're in this mess.  as smart as you are portraide, i'm surprised you didn't already know that, or do you?

A good scolding...yeah,

A good scolding...yeah, that'll fix things!  Why not a good scolding for Iran and North Korea?

He might be more believable if the guys he's 'scolding' weren't his and his cronies biggest financial backers. They knew that any conservative, and maybe even McCain (LOL) would sit back and let the market correct itself, in the meantime themselves losing millions.

One of the 24% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 89% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.

Mayor Bloomberg and NYC to

Mayor Bloomberg and NYC to fire back in 3..2...1

 

 

Oh, and, where is the

Oh, and, where is the tongue-lashing for Obama for appointing Tax Cheaters at Treasury and HHS? For appointing Richardson to Commerence Sec?

"Words mean Something"- BH Obama, 2008

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.