More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Joseph A. Palermo

GET UPDATES FROM Joseph A. Palermo
 

Billionaire Leon Cooperman Writes "Open Letter to President Obama"

Posted: 12/07/11 09:31 AM ET

The Wall Street "veteran" Leon Cooperman has written an "Open Letter to President Obama" that provides us with a glimpse into the mindset of our 21st century corporate overlords. He's upset not with President Obama's Treasury Department or his Securities and Exchange Commission, or even his Department of Justice or the IRS. No, what's put a bee in Mr. Cooperman's bonnet is the president's "tone" toward billionaires like himself. Apparently for the captains of industry and high finance it's not enough for Obama to be a faithful servant of their narrow class interests, they also want him to bend down and kiss their rings.

Leon Cooperman is but one citizen in our grand republic, yet by virtue of his station he automatically receives a wide airing of his elitist views of Obama's "tone" toward big business. Cooperman chose to pen the letter at this time, according to Andrew Ross Sorkin of the New York Times, because he believes Obama's rhetoric of late has been "villainizing success." And this he believes is a bad thing because: "We are supposed to admire success."

Cooperman conflates "wealth" with "success" and when he uses the term "we" it is revelatory. Does he include in the "we" the woman who changes the sheets in his 5-star hotel rooms? Or the guy who cleans the toilet of his private jet? In the midst of the most serious legitimation crisis facing American capitalism in 70 years, and at a time when the Occupy Wall Street movement has opened up the floodgates of questioning a system that is clearly slanted against ordinary people, Cooperman tells us "we" should be "admiring" the rich? His use of "we" reminds me of an observation Sonya O. Rose makes in Which People's War? (2003) where she writes: "all definitions of who 'we' are . . . once they move beyond the generality that 'we are all in this together,' once who the 'we' is, and what 'together' means are specified, the singularity of that identity is exposed as being false." (p. 285)

The President of the United States probably receives a half million letters every month from desperate low-wage workers, pink-slipped teachers and public employees, and people losing their homes to foreclosure or declaring bankruptcy after becoming sick. These types of letters won't likely make it onto the Times' business page.

It apparently wasn't enough for Cooperman and his friends on Wall Street to strip away an obscene share of the nation's wealth by sucking dry a once solid middle class; or make billions of dollars crashing the nation's housing market; or extort a fat federal bail-out (and $7.7 trillion from the Federal Reserve); or own both political parties in Washington and hundreds of state-level politicians; or control a large swathe of the corporate media. They don't even show gratitude for the "get-out-of-jail-free" card Obama gave them. No. They bitch and moan about the "tone" of a president they deem not "pro-business" enough.

I think I've seen everything now: Whiny billionaires (Cooperman and John Paulson); clueless billionaires (Michael Bloomberg); 19th century-style authoritarian billionaires (the Koch Brothers); and even billionaires whose "philanthropy" always ends up busting teachers' unions (Bill Gates).

Despite President Obama's nice sounding rhetoric in Osawatomie, Kansas where he tried to channel the "trust-busting" TR, his appointment of Timothy Geithner as Treasury Secretary and Larry Summers (for a time) to lead his economic team -- along with his toothless SEC, (which a federal judge recently slapped down), and his asleep-at-the-switch Justice Department that has apparently misplaced its prosecutorial tools to deal with securities fraud -- these moves and many others like it have already shown us which side he's on.

If President Obama is finally going to get serious and stand up for the middle class he needs to take concrete actions, not soothe us with meaningless words. At the very least he must fire Geithner and Mary Schapiro at the SEC and replace them with people who, unlike them, are not tools of Wall Street. That move alone might signal to the 99 percent that he's turning over a new leaf. He also needs a major confrontation with the Republicans on a substantive economic issue where HE DOES NOT CAVE IN. He might also do something he should have done during his first 100 days: form an Executive Branch task force comprised of prosecutors from the Department of Justice, investigators from the Internal Revenue Service, examiners from the FDIC and the SEC, and put a federal hammer down on those big banks. The federal machinery must be used to force them to write down the loans for residential mortgage owners who find themselves, through no fault of their own, hopelessly underwater. Anything short of moves like these is just rhetoric.

Besides, at this late date who really cares if Obama, facing re-election, now starts talking up legislation he knows full well will never pass the Republican Congress? He had several years to do something forceful for the 99 percent and (for whatever reason) he chose an utterly pusillanimous "wait-and-see" posture.

The money changers must be thrown out of Washington and the state houses; money must be rendered irrelevant in determining the outcome of political campaigns so that our elections cease being little more than auctions to the highest bidder; corporate personhood must be abolished, (as the Los Angeles City Council recently codified), and people must stand up to the banks and occupy homes in communities across the country when the foreclosure notices go up.

Kvetching about Obama's "anti-business tone" from people who have made out better in recent years than any elite since the days of Caligula tells us something about them and their astonishing sense of entitlement. These Emperors are not only content to walk naked among us; they're advertising their detachment from the rest of society as if it's something to be proud of.

The billionaires want the two political parties to be totally subservient free of any criticism whatsoever. They won't even allow their president to pander once in a while to the 99 percent. They want total capitulation, not just in policy prerogatives, but also in "tone." But the social movement that will challenge them is just getting off the ground. And their complaining only serves to remind us who "we" really are.

 
 
 

Follow Joseph A. Palermo on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JosephPalermo1

 
 
  • Comments
  • 267
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rontheking
Everyone is behaving splendidly! splendidly!
12:54 AM on 12/11/2011
I think the rich are getting nervous--as they should be. Many of these big banks wouldn't exist today--they would have been broken up and scattered to the winds without the taxpayers propping them up after their bad behavior to the tune of first 600 billion and then at least 7.7 trillion. That is money out of our economy that we couldn't afford to give them! To people who shouldn't need it! And they call it class warfare being waged on them? If they feel so bad about it, why don't they give it all back? They won't...and so that is their answer...we are supposed to admire them...good luck with that!
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Joseph Palermo
Huffington Post Blogger/Author/Professor
05:25 PM on 12/08/2011
I have no doubt in my mind at all that Obama will ratchet up the "populist" rhetoric all the way through the election and then if he wins he'll snap right back to screwing over his base proudly and "courageously." Until he does something real, I mean take a real chance, and show us something -- like go to Ohio and Wisconsin and join in with the activists from the unions there -- or something -- anything -- I no longer believe a word that comes out of his mouth (especially when I agree with him) the Beltway loves it when a "Democratic" president (i.e. Clinton and Obama) shows "courage" by screwing over the Democratic base -- but the Republican base, even the real crazies, are treated like very, very important people who always must get what they want. For example, I have no doubt that he told the Prime Minister of Canada yesterday: "Just wait until I get reelected then I'll fast track the XL pipeline." The only reason the soldiers are coming home from Iraq is because the Iraqis wanted US personnel to fall under Iraqi legal jurisdiction for crimes committed on Iraqi soil.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hipocampelofantocame
retired pediatrician
01:46 AM on 12/10/2011
Joe, I happen to agree with you. C'est la guerre!
01:13 PM on 12/08/2011
"But what I do find objectionable is the highly politicized idiom in which this debate is being conducted. Now, I am not naive. I understand that in today's America, this is how the business of governing typically gets done - a situation that, given the gravity of our problems, is as deplorable as it is seemingly ineluctable. But as President first and foremost and leader of your party second, you should endeavor to rise above the partisan fray and raise the level of discourse to one that is both more civil and more conciliatory, that seeks collaboration over confrontation. That is what "leading by example" means to most people.

Capitalism is not the source of our problems, as an economy or as a society, and capitalists are not the scourge that they are too often made out to be. As a group, we employ many millions of taxpaying people, pay their salaries, provide them with healthcare coverage, start new companies, found new industries, create new products, fill store shelves at Christmas, and keep the wheels of commerce and progress (and indeed of government, by generating the income whose taxation funds it) moving. To frame the debate as one of rich-and-entitled versus poor-and-dispossessed is to both miss the point and further inflame an already incendiary environment. It is also a naked, political pander to some of the basest human emotions - a strategy, as history teaches, that never ends well for anyone but totalitarians and anarchists."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rontheking
Everyone is behaving splendidly! splendidly!
12:57 AM on 12/11/2011
Nobody's blaming capitalism...we are blaming unfettered, lawless crony capitalism that doesn't even adhere to its own rules!
12:28 PM on 12/13/2011
Isn't "Wall Street," as a short phrase for fortune 500 corporations and investment banking, the very engine of capitalism? Obama is certainly not a fan of capitalism. Cooperman's point is that the finger-pointing and invective is dangerous and wrong. I agree. Obama is the most divisive president ever. He doesn't have the vision or skills to spur growth, so all he spurs is envy and resentment. He needs to channel a little Clinton, Bill not Hilary.
01:03 PM on 12/08/2011
The professor's use of "they" is every bit as defining as his castigation of Cooperman for using "we."

Here is the meat of the letter:

But what I can justifiably hold you accountable for is your and your minions' role in setting the tenor of the rancorous debate now roiling us that smacks of what so many have characterized as "class warfare". Whether this reflects your principled belief that the eternal divide between the haves and have-nots is at the root of all the evils that afflict our society or just a cynical, populist appeal to his base by a president struggling in the polls is of little importance. What does matter is that the divisive, polarizing tone of your rhetoric is cleaving a widening gulf, at this point as much visceral as philosophical, between the downtrodden and those best positioned to help them. It is a gulf that is at once counterproductive and freighted with dangerous historical precedents. And it is an approach to governing that owes more to desperate demagoguery than your Administration should feel comfortable with.

Cooperman is absolutley right. Obama is divisive.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Joseph Palermo
Huffington Post Blogger/Author/Professor
05:20 PM on 12/08/2011
"Divisive"? Obama's the best thing that ever happened to billionaires -- he kept them safe from the pitchforks -- where are all those Tea Party types who were up in arms against the Fed? Now, apparently they love the big banks (after they won the 2010 elections)
07:08 PM on 12/08/2011
Yes divisive. I don't mean billionaires or the one half of one percent who are truly wealthy. I am talking about divisive politics. It is all divide and conqeur with him, the politics of envy and resentment. He doesn't know the first thing about how to get the economy going, so he just tries to stir the people who are economically disenfranchised up against people who have more. He is to turn Clinton's phrase around, "a divider not a uniter."
maruski
Liberal Lutheran; lean left, save America!
11:56 AM on 12/08/2011
If President Obama is finally going to get serious and stand up for the middle class he needs to take concrete actions, not soothe us with meaningless words. At the very least he must fire Geithner and Mary Schapiro at the SEC and replace them with people who, unlike them,"

this is so right on in my mind--it is the exact heart of it. Either he gets the 1% campaign $$ and kisses their tushies again or he goes for the 99%...... with all their nickle and dime donations and more that they can give.

he'll win with the 99% as long as he frames it right . Run a continuous loop of GOPers saying that the 2010 meant that "we" want SS cut, or medicare cut, or that we never ever ever want millionaires to pay more in taxes.......... and make it clear that D is the opposite.
11:55 AM on 12/08/2011
I think by "We" Mr. Cooperman implies the "royal we." The problem Mr. Cooperman fails to address is that "wealth" and "success" have increasingly become unhitched. In a world where CEO's reward themselves outsized bonuses while laying off significant portions of their workforce, TV personalities are paid hefty sums for the most trivial accomplishments, heirs make money in their sleep, and bankers are propped up at taxpayer expense while fleecing the economy, most Americans are changing their opinion regarding the age-old equivalencies between money and success. No one, I think, would dispute that Steve Jobs is a "success," but mere wealth was not the primary measure of his achievements. Furthermore, it is not "class warfare" to point out the appalling, and widening, income inequality in this country. Such disparities in wealth contribute to slow economic growth, as well as social, political, and economic instability, as we have seen. The issue is one that the wealthy should be concerned about, too, not just the so-called "have-nots." Pitchforks aren't burning outside of Mr. Cooperman's mansion, after all; no one wants to "seize" his assets. Pointing out an obvious problem in our country--which ranks among third world countries in terms of financial inequality--is not tantamount to class warfare.
photo
BBackSoon
Hello, I must be going.
11:06 AM on 12/08/2011
There are crimes associated with every fortune. So what were this guys crimes?
Linda from Deerfield
Paying attention
11:03 AM on 12/08/2011
QED. We did not need President Obama's words to recoil at what often appears to lie behind extreme wealth and success today -- behavior and attitudes that most decent human beings would find unpalatable. I would be absolutely certain of this universality if not for the irksome habit of conservatives of attacking the character of any person who has achieved wealth and is identified as a Democrat.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Martha Fair
09:35 AM on 12/08/2011
You just don't get it do you Mr. Cooperman?

See, it's not about Obama, or you or any politician, party, etc. What it IS all about is monetary fascism which knows no allegiance, religious morals, patriotism or otherwise. Monetary fascism exists solely for one purpose and one purpose only and that is the pursuit of the almighty ever consuming ever increasing profit. This profit will be realized at the expense of hunger, human need, security, and health. In fact, the condition of humanity is at the breaking point globally already and that is why we are witnessing these tumultuous events.

I have a question for you Mr. Cooperman. It's a very simple question. What do you do when your quest for power and money implodes because you have eroded every drop of your so-called "human resources?" Who will be left to buy your product and satisfy your ever-increasing hunger for profits?
maruski
Liberal Lutheran; lean left, save America!
12:00 PM on 12/08/2011
and when this country devolves into a place with crumbling bridges and pot-holed highways, and uneducated populace scrabbling for any job they can find and crime goes up...

the moneyed people will leave and retire in places like France or the Italian countryside
Wib
Liberal former Marine who loves fly fishing and is
09:28 AM on 12/08/2011
Wow! Thanks, you wrote what I have been feeling for a long time. Right now, the worst thing about Obama is that he is the least bad of the available choices. I voted for him and so hoped for something more than what he has done. As for his "caving in" on the tone thing, if he doesn't it will be the only thing on which he hasn't capitulated.
photo
Leon Gamble
Job outsourced to India
08:07 AM on 12/08/2011
Cooperman's success? "accused of stripping Czech companies of hundreds of millions of dollars and cheating hundreds of thousands of small investors in the early 1990s" Denver Post. That's not success, that's criminal!
maruski
Liberal Lutheran; lean left, save America!
12:01 PM on 12/08/2011
we never prosecute these people and make them cool their heels in jail do we?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jaxstl
I may disagree with you but I will defend your rig
07:28 AM on 12/08/2011
Maybe we the people should redefine what "success" is? For those of us not lucky enough to be as wealthy as Mr. Copperman( and yes most of it is luck, luck of birth, luck of race, luck of gender, luck of geography) Maybe we should as a nation decide having that much money is a value we do not value. Maybe we should value kindness, ethics, respect for each other and hard work. If we take the value away from what they have we all will be better off( emotionally and financially)
05:43 AM on 12/08/2011
It's really amazing how foolish billionaires can be when making public statements. It's as if they don't understand that not everyone else is a billionaire who sympathizes with the billionaire cause.
caveman06
Citizens Against Virtually Everything
05:36 AM on 12/08/2011
I think the reason no one in the banking industry has been charged with any crimes related the housing market crash is because they have some damaging emails that lead right to the upper echelons of the democRAT party. The democRATS don't want the news to get out that they ordered banks to make bad loans. Then Fannie and Freddie covered the loans and the banks turned around and did something with those loans.

It all ends in disaster when enough people aren't paying back their loans. That is the best bet as to why NO ONE, not a single person has been the subject of a prosecution.
07:26 AM on 12/08/2011
Republicans were in charge of the country with Newt over at freddie giving history lessons. He made over a million giving history lessons. Those loans were set up for failure
maruski
Liberal Lutheran; lean left, save America!
12:10 PM on 12/08/2011
"Ordered banks to make bad loans"

with brilliant talking points like that who can argue?
photo
TheSojourner
My blog is up and running.
05:14 AM on 12/08/2011
This is why the 99% are protesting. This is what we've come to. The stench of greed permeating some of the ultra wealthy is overwhelming. Cooperman and his cronies are why we are slowly sliding into the mire. Our once grand and glorious country is way down the world list on education, health, infant mortality and many other attributes we once had. We are no longer the shining example to the world.

The untrammeled greed of some of the 1% has robbed us of financial security and needed funding. Two lengthy wars didn't help us either. Thank you George Bush et al and your misbegotten economic and other policies.This is in large part why we got to this level.There was no pony in the pile of manure Obama got from the GOP when he became president. He has to stop digging in it and toss it out like the useless rubbish it is. A fresh start is needed to fix this miserable result.

More on "Greed" here:

http://wp.me/p1FCGk-7E