Financial Reform vs. Education Reform

Barry at The Big Picture asks the following:

Why is the White House allowing soon to be retired Senator Dodd to drive the entire financial reform discussion?

The Consumer Protection legislation and the derivative reforms are the sort of things that the President should be leading on — not following someone like Dodd. Why is the White House AWOL on these important issues?

Can someone please explain to me — in calm, non-biased, rational terms — just what is going on here?

I would add that Obama is clearly leading on education reform - sending a 41 page blueprint to the Hill today for Senators and Representatives to use to write No Child Left Behind Jr. for him.

So why is Obama letting Dodd drive financial reform while he himself is driving education reform?

The answer is simple: he doesn't give a shit about financial reform. He doesn't care whether a bill passes or not, he has no interest in holding the companies that brought the economy to near collapse accountable for the mess and he doesn't care that these same companies are taking on just as much risk now post-collapse with taxpayer funded TARP money or newly printed money the Federal Reserve is handing them at 0% interest.

Obama just doesn't give a shit about that stuff.

He doesn't care.

But education reform, closing schools, firing teachers, busting the teachers unions, opening public education funds to for-profit charters and turning the public education system over to the Gates and Broad Foundations - that he cares very much about.

Very much.