Backlash against the backlash
Debate rages in the US over whether the president and his administration have been brought into line by high-level bankers concerned about planned financial reforms.
Yesterday I blogged about Rolling Stone magazine's critique of President Obama, in particular of his financial team.
Matt Taibbi argued that a cabal of bankers, all inextricably linked to Robert Rubin, have forced Obama to fall into line behind a financial policy designed to maintain Wall Street in its current form.
Today, The American Prospect has hit back with "The Errors of Matt Taibbi", in which they accuse him of:
a nightmare of a story [...] a factual mess, a conspiracy theorist's dream [that] doesn't even indict Obama for his real failures
It's still very early in this administration, and its supporters are certainly keen to stress that it's not business as usual.
After the passage of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act on Friday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared:
We are sending a clear message to Wall Street: The party is over.
But this theme of an Obama capitulation to entrenched interests will continue to be the subject of intense debate.
My personal feeling is that there's a lot more to be revealed about the role of Goldman Sachs - and it's employees past and present - in the whole bailout story.