Let me be clear- I'm glad Barack Obama won. I think it was a good thing for the nation overall, am proud a majority of Americans voted for him (although it should have been a landslide, not just in electoral votes). However, living in NY I knew Obama didn't need my vote. That's why I voted for Ralph Nader, again.
I knew Obama would not be able to take on the plutocracy; the oligarchs that he has just bailed out with TARP. The Democratic party has too many ties to Wall St. and Obama's selection of Timothy Geitner, a protege of Robert Rueben (neoliberal economic policies under Clinton) who helped dig this economic hole we are in is evidence to the point.
To hear moderate economist Simon Johnson of MIT say: "There comes a time in every economic crisis, or more specifically, in every struggle to recover from a crisis, when someone steps up to the podium to promise the policies that - they say - will deliver you back to growth. The person has political support, a strong track record, and every incentive to enter the history books. But one nagging question remains. Can this person, your new economic strategist, really break with the vested elites that got you into this much trouble?" then to see the bailout without a dime going to help people stay in their homes it's apparent from the bailout that answer to Simon's question is "NO!".
An interesting conversation on Democracy Now! gives two damning perspectives of the TARP bailout from respected economists Robert Kuttner and Michael Hudson.
Nader's plan. outlined last fall, would fix the situation.
My only trepidation for a Ralph Nader or Dennis Kucinich presidency (as unlikely in our corrupt election system as that would be) that would actually stand up to the banksters would be that they wouldn't be long for this world. However, it's the kind of free thinking and dedicated service that we need now.