THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A QUO EVEN WITHOUT THE QUID

From Charles Gasparino's New York Post story about President Obama's meeting with top bank CEOs:

...Yes, White House spinmeisters advertised the gathering as a chance for Obama to channel the public's disgust over Wall Street's celebrating while Main Street still suffers 10 percent unemployment, thanks largely to Wall Street's bungling. But that's not what he did.

... Said one CEO who attended: "I expected to be taken to the woodshed, but the tone was quite the opposite."

Said another senior exec with knowledge of the meeting: "The whole thing was so telegraphed that not much was accomplished, other than giving Obama a PR stunt ... He might have sounded mean on '60 Minutes,' but during the meeting he was a hell of a lot nicer."

Maybe Obama's softened tone was recognition of Wall Street's election help. Campaign-finance filings show that firms like Goldman ... favored Obama over John McCain by a fairly wide margin. Nearly all the major Wall Street CEOs -- including Dimon, Blankfein and Mack -- have told people that they voted for Obama....

Yeah, I'm sure he's grateful for the money and the votes. But he would have been like that even if he weren't grateful.

Do Republicans ever do anything for Obama? Does Joe Lieberman ever do anything for Obama? No and no -- and yet he's always nice to them when he meets them face to face. He always compromises when they demand it. No quid pro quo there.

It would at least be understandable if Obama held his fire whenever someone who deserved to be taken to the woodshed did something in Obama's self-interest. But Obama doesn't bother with self-interest. He just doesn't take people to the woodshed for the sake of not taking people to the woodshed.

Bankers, next time, save your money -- don't give it to Obama. Give him nothing, and give a lot to his opponent. And tell the world you're not voting for him.

He'll probably be even nicer to you.