McCain & Shelby: “Let Insolvent Banks Fail”
“Close them down, get them out of business. If they’re dead, they ought to be buried.”
-Richard C. Shelby, the senior Republican on the Banking Committee, on ABC’s “This Week”
>
Thus, the strangely inverted world of bank bailouts continues. Republicans who started the entire lurch towards Socialism under George W. Bush at least understand what a a mistake it is to prop up the zombie banks.
The newly elected Democrats haven’t quite found their footing on this issue. The Treasury Secretary remains a creature of the banks, and has yet to figure out that there can be no sacred cows in this environment.
John McCain made his own news on Fox, suggesting that AIG, GM and Citi should be allowed to fail:
“I don’t think they’ve made the hard decision, and that is to let these banks fail. I think the best thing that could probably happen to General Motors (GM) in my view is they go into Chapter 11, they reorganize…and come out of it a stronger, better, leaner, and more competitive automotive industry.”
I agree.
The really odd thing is that the corporate bailouts we are now dealing with — AIG, Bank of America, Bear, Citigroup, Fannie/Freddie, GM, Tarp — and the massive tax bill that comes with them were were all GOP creations.
This change of heart is encouraging. Better late than never . . .
>
Sources:
Transcript: This Week with George Stephanopoulous
ABC, March 8, 2009
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/story?id=7032608&page=1
McCain: Stop propping up AIG, GM, banks
Jordy Yager
The Hill, 03/08/09 08:03 PM [ET]
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/mccain-stop-propping-up-aig-gm-banks-2009-03-08.html
G.O.P. Senators Say Some Big Banks Can Be Allowed to Fail
J. DAVID GOODMAN and BRIAN KNOWLTON
NYT, March 8, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/09/us/politics/09talkshows.html
March 8th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
And then of course they’ll turn around and blame O and the Dems for the ensuing mess if/when they do nationalize/pre-privatize the big banks. Ahh, politics. Gotta love it.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
I guess what still bothers me is that here we have Shelby, a ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee, who doesn’t seem to understand how banks and banking regulation work and I can’t escape this sinking feeling that, at least on the legislative side, we may be expecting genuinely stupid and/or venal people to fix one of the most complex screw-ups in the history of economics and …well, I guess I just can’t see how anything but an act of God is going to get us through this, that’s all.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Fannie/Freddie were hardly GOP creations & they deserve some credit for having earlier made some effort to rein in those 2 slush funds masquerading as lenders.
Blame the 2 inarticulate idiots Bush & his Goldman Sachs henchman Paulson. But most Republicans were unenthusiastic about these bailouts. They lacked the courage of conviction in the face of Democrats & the media encouragement….as usual.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
I am sorry Barry, please remind me of all the Democrats who were against this??????? This larceny is non-partisan.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
I trust President Obama a helluvalot more than I do any Republican on this issue. I find the whole “zombie bank” argument absolutely unconvincing. Barry was right several weeks ago when he said that Wall Street’s “disappointment” with Geithner’s plan had more to do with the fact that the President didn’t sail a superfreighter full of cash right up to Wall and Broad and say “free lunch, enjoy it boys!”
Wall Street traitors and their Republican allies hope that if they throw a big enough tantrum we’ll have no choice but to flood them with money. Well, I got news for ya…and you too, Barry (but as I say, I like you so it’s not personal!):
You all created this mess. You all have zero credibility on this issue. What you all want is last on the list. For the first time in nearly 30 years, the interests of the American people come before those of Wall Street bloodsuckers.
It takes some getting used to, but eventually you’ll find it’s not so bad just being an ordinary citizen just like the rest of us.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Regarding RW comment: “we may be expecting genuinely stupid and/or venal people to fix one of the most complex screw-ups in the history of economics”
Luckily, however, politicians throught the history of humans have been the most stupid venal people of the society. So, at least we’re no worse off than in the past. My own opinion is that NOTHING can be fixed until the peasants are SO disgusted with the insiders (meaning both political parties) that – in order to save their posteriors – the insiders reform the system. But, right now, the insiders are benefitting from the system as it’s currenly configured and have absolutily NO desire to change anything. And, why should they, it’s been working fine for THEM for 50+ years now. If I were an insider, I’d be doing EXACTLY what they’re doing.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Never read or heard of this guy before, but here’s an interesting take on why the (R) camp is now doing what they’re doing:
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/dl-hughley-frank-schaeffer-author-crazy-for-god
March 8th, 2009 at 8:23 pm
Barry
I think you are being a little too generous to Sen. Shelby. He seems to lack any understanding of the problem. He doesn’t want to nationalize the banks, he wants to let them fail and not intervene in any way. As I understand it, that would probably lead to a complete collapse and almost certain Great Depression II. I don’t think he really understands what we do with small banks when they fail either (which is essentially nationalization).
Here is what he said
SHELBY: I don’t want to nationalize them. I think we need to close them…
(CROSSTALK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: So when you say “close,” what do you mean by them?
SHELBY: Close — close them down, get them out of business. If they’re dead, they ought to be buried. We bury the small banks; we’ve got to bury some big ones and send a strong message to the market. And I believe that people will start investing in banks. People aren’t…
STEPHANOPOULOS: So you’re talking Citigroup?
SHELBY: Well, whatever. Citi’s always been a problem child.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
BR: omg Barry you’re aligning with Shelby who is, pardon the French, an utter fu%$# fathead, and McCain who suspended his campaign to fix the financial crisis and clearly couldn’t balance his checkbook……As my father always told me …..You are known by the company you keep…..Amazing.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
franklin,
for the 411 on campaign contribs, maybe you’d be interested in:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?id=N00009638&cycle2=2008&goButt2.x=7&goButt2.y=10
from there, it’s easy to compare to J. Mc.’s list..
w/that, see if you can, still, substantiate: “Wall Street traitors and their Republican allies …”
past that, understand that the ‘partisan’ divide is, actually, a lever used against you..
March 8th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
One reason letting the banks fail would have helped is that it would’ve put an end to these CDS shenanigans, that have continued to grow unabated (since the banks were not forced to shut-down risky CDS trading due to the continued bailouts. For instance, how much deeper-in-the-hole are we from all the CDS thats been underwritten by BofA, etc. in the last three months alone? Virtually all of the AIG money has been paid to CDS counterparties that shouldve bourne the counterparty loss. We need CDS regulations (ban naked purchases, impose margin restrictions). I think meaningful CDS restrictions would open up credit markets significantly and lead to some meaningful turn in the credit/equity markets. I wrote extensively on this on my blog today and would like to share it with you guys/get your feedback.
http://petersoncleaning.blogspot.com
PS-It is a complete joke that congressmen would seek to impose taxes on equity trading, when we are in the midst of a credit crisis, partly created by limitless CDS contracts that have no corresponding tax or margin restrictions.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
and, speaking of the Bill Maher show, this Man:
http://clusty.com/search?input-form=clusty-simple&v%3Asources=webplus&query=Mayor+of+Newark
Cory Booker, was on, w/ Erin Burnett, and some Princeton Prof. trying to sell the ‘less is more’ -Std. of Living- tripe trope..
to the point, Booker, is excellent–describes the Tyrrany of ‘or’, as opposed to the “Liberation of ‘and’”
I was wondering, I know I’m naive, where’s the MSM been on this guy? how could have we not heard of him b4?
LSS: good ideas, good men, good women, come from all over the poli-spectrum–it’s past time– to grow-up, and put down the ‘my team’ pom-poms
March 8th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
Barry –
when you say you want to stop ‘propping up the zombie banks’, what exactly do you mean? – bankruptcy? – splitting them up? – does it include wiping out preferreds? – wiping out sr. debtholders? – if so, do you think that would lead to Lehman fallout, pt. II? – or are you arguing for something else?
(I apologize in advance if you’ve already clarified this on this site somewhere else – I’m a relatively new reader)
~~~
BR: Try this link: NATIONALIZE
March 8th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
It isn’t a change of heart Barry, it’s cynical calculation and opportunism. When these companies do fail, and I expect them to, you will see McCain and his pals moaning how Obama and the Democratic Party have “let this happen” It’s as predictable as the sunrise.
Mark,
Wall Street has corrupted all parties and branches of government. Their heavy investment in certain Democratic party members is directly tied to NY State being a Democratic party stronghold. They have to buy the man. But never delude yourself that what happened wasn’t intimately tied with the ideas that came out of the Reagan revolution and when applied to financial companies and their regulators turned out to be wrong, dead wrong.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
Mark,
It is easy to compare it to McCain–as a percentage of funds raised, Obama did about as well as McCain. Considering how poorly run the McCain campaign was, and how well run the Obama campaign was, any thinking person would have to question why Wall Street was so eager to back McCain. An intelligent person would therefore conclude that Wall Street favored a McCain victory and only gave to Obama grudgingly.
One additional point of comparison is worth noting: Colleges and universities were among the Obama campaign’s top funding sources. Yet not a single college or university appears on the McCain list. Therefore, the only possible interpretation is that bright, educated people favored Obama.
Thanks for that wonderful link!
March 8th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
The prime example of dithering. Have you ever seen someone who nails the sole of one shoe to the floor and tries to run? They revolve in a never ending circle. Quoting what a politician says is like trying to follow smoke on a windy day. These brain-dead, supposed representatives of the people, are never held to account for their positions. Can anyone imagine where we would be if McCain were elected President????? The head of the conservative’s, alzeheimer’s segment of the Republican party has demonstrated again why he wasn’t elected.
March 8th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
RW:
“Shelby, a ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee, … doesn’t seem to understand how banks and banking regulation work…”
ohhhh, thats just speculation and mudslinging – if only we had some evidence…
Raindog:
“STEPHANOPOULOS: So when you say “close,” what do you mean by them?
SHELBY: Close — close them down, get them out of business. If they’re dead, they ought to be buried. We bury the small banks; we’ve got to bury some big ones and send a strong message to the market. And I believe that people will start investing in banks. People aren’t…
STEPHANOPOULOS: So you’re talking Citigroup?
SHELBY: Well, whatever. Citi’s always been a problem child.”
check!
right on RW!
yes Sen. Shelby, we should ‘bury some big ones’ just like we buried Lehman – that showed them! – and the x MILLION of NON-WALL STREET/BANKERS that have been put out of work since and the 12% of GDP that we’ve lost since then – ooops!!
… this would be comical if it weren’t so frightening
p.s. – the reason why people aren’t investing in banks isn’t because there are zombies around… its because no bank can feel it has adequate capital given no end in sight to the economic downturn and the inadequate stimulus and bailout policies that have been announced to this point – why would killing off a Citi or a BofA suddenly make other investors feel that other banks are safer and its now time to buy their stocks/securities? – it won’t – they’re effectively unrelated – it won’t fix the other banks’ balance sheets (am I missing something? – if the comeback is that the stronger banks will be able to pick off the good parts of the carcass of the failed banks, thats fine for 1 or 2 of these bottom feeders – but the other 8,298 other U.S. banks won’t get a piece of it, so it had no impact on them)
March 8th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Senator Richard Shelby was adamantly opposed to the TARP I bailout last fall.
The only criticism of him I see in your comments is partisan ad hominem.
March 8th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
Northern Observer,
just like Hoover preceded FDR w/ “Federal intervention”/”Stimulus”, Carter preceded Reagan on the deregulation front..
LSS: is all ‘intervention’ good? all ‘deregulation’ good? not at all.. though, worse, to me, at least, is the over-arching political apathy, and the, nearly, extinguished spirit of inquiry, still, on wholesale display, throughout the American polity..
not much of any of this bodes well, though, the sooner We catch a clue, the better, and more quickly so, things will get..
~~
franklin,
re: link, de nada..
March 8th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Senator Shelby must be referring to Regions Financial, the large regional bank head quartered in Birmingham. A brave position for a politician, but then he must defend the principal of free markets now that a Democrat is in the White House.
March 8th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
@Ducky62: Shelby’s hands/motives (like most in our monied/political establishment) are far from clean. Seems to me he made out quite nicely from the recent real estate bubble…..
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/09/washington/09shelby.html?hp
March 8th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
“The really odd thing is that the corporate bailouts we are now dealing with — AIG, Bank of America, Bear, Citigroup, Fannie/Freddie, GM, Tarp — and the massive tax bill that comes with them were were all GOP creations.”
So, the Republicans are changing their mind. Which is a good thing.
And the Democrat’s answer is . . . . . . . more of the same, which is bad!!
March 8th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
Look up the quote “Let them fail” by a certain Roy Young of the Federal Reserve in 1929. One could be forgiven for not agreeing with Milton Friedman’s defining work on the Great Depression, but it is clear that McCain and Shelby skipped out on math class when they taught ratios and equations. Letting Citi go under by itself is not necessarily bad…it is practically dead already. What is monumentally stupid is not having any back up plan to fill the monetary hole that will be created by such a liquidation. Laws of creative destruction don’t work in fractional reserve banking.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Shelby has consistently opposed the socialism of bailouts.He hasn’t flip-flopped on principle based on who is in the White House. That is not entirely clear in the post or subsequent comments. He has had no “change of heart”.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
DMR: Some would suggest that our money system here is not a fractional reserve banking system at all. If money supply and growth were dictated by the theories of a fractional reserve banking system we would NEVER have had the amount of credit created. We seem to have a system of money creation controlled by the “credit creators,” i.e. financial institutions we trusted. We’re in a credit bubble deflation that is outside the control of the Federal Reserve. The credit bubble is being destroyed. Letting C and BAC and AIG go won’t be as bad as feared because the Credit Destruction is happening with or without them. The sooner we can raze the burned down homes, the sooner we can rebuild the neighborhood.
Alas, the razing will only hurt one group of people at this point: Bondholders. And the U.S. government seems scared of confronting the big bondholder crowd, with Pimco being the leader of that Mob.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
McCain has absolutely zero knowledge about economics. Why even listen to him? It’s utterly rediculous to suggest that GM should go into chapter 11. Everybody knows that chapter 11 will quickly lead to chapter 7 and the loss of 2-3 million jobs. If however you have a very structured chapter 11 with the involvement of government support, yes that would be something. Same goes for the banks, let’s see what happens if we just let Citibank “fail”. You need to be responsible, a structural wind down of their business. As for AIG, please split it in 2 before failing the whole company.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
I agree with th many others who see that it’s all just a Republican ploy to blame Obama for everything. Even Bloomberg is parroting the Republican party line that this is the “Obama Bear Market.” See, e.g.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aHMl05QDH75Y
My email to the author went like this:
___________________________
I find it amazing that the MSM seems to have blindly accepted the Republican assertion that this is the Obama Bear market. I keep seeing guest after guest assert that somehow his budget is the cause of the declines when almost all of the bad news coming out, e.g. unemployment, gdp, manufacturing, housing, was generated before he was even sworn in.
When was he inaugurated? Less than 60 days ago.
When did the decline start? Almost 18 months ago.
I didn’t vote for the guy and think Geithner is ludicrous, but this is ridiculous. I would hope that I still have one financial network to watch and read. Finally gave up on CNBC after getting really tired of Kudlow and his mustard seeds and “class warfare.”
March 8th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
James Baker weighs in:
“we should divide the banks into three groups: the healthy, the hopeless and the needy. Leave the healthy alone and quickly close the hopeless. The needy should be reorganised and recapitalised, preferably through private investment or debt-to-equity swaps but, if necessary, through public funds. It is time for triage”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b3f299a6-0697-11de-ab0f-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
March 8th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
Turnabout is fair play, isn’t it? Listen to the partisans complain about Republican tactics when the Democrats employed them well against W and McCain. Quit whining. Your hypocrisy is, well, hilarious.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
“This change of heart is encouraging.”
Change of heart? Please. Bank bailouts were all the rage when the Republicans controlled the White House. Now that there is a Democratic President, well… we should let them fail. This is hypocrisy at the same old game; political theatre and quite frankly, I’m sick of it. Hopefully h
March 8th, 2009 at 11:19 pm
I say we let the GOP try thier solution in thier states. In the meantime, lets try real solutions in the real world.
In the meantime, I’d like to see someone smarter that Shelby and his ilk – and wiser than Geitner and Summers – start to solve this problem. The lot ( or would that be the Lott?) of them are thinking inside the box, which is where our economy is going to be if we don’t quit pissing away our future on solutions that don’t have any chance of working.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:19 pm
Post 2:
Sorry, I hit the wrong button. The Republicans change of heart is hypocrisy at best and partisan politics at worst. Obviously, they learned nothing from the last Presidential election. Hopefully, most American citizens are getting tired of this same old song and dance. Don’t get me wrong, Democrats do it too. That and catering to special interest groups are the two major reasons why both parties suck.
March 9th, 2009 at 12:03 am
RW: “…Shelby, a ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee, who doesn’t seem to understand how banks and banking regulation work…”
He doesn’t have to understand. His employers, the banks, do understand. They most likely wrote the text of laws to be passed and handed them off to him and/or his staff–along with a note indicating how he should vote.
March 9th, 2009 at 12:07 am
@ Franklin411 – I’m sure I speak for others here when I say your posts are getting might tedious. I don’t see a connection with the topic on this thread, towit: “McCain & Shelby” calling for nationalization and bankruptcy for banks and GM.
Haven’t you learned yet that most of us agree that this is a bipartisan f&*$%up? Blaming one side is a waste of bandwidth.
My two cents on the topic: my first thought was that Bailout I was a Paulson proposal, that morphed into the “Bush administration” plan, which I thought was pretty hilarious, which morphed into “why are the House and Senate Republicans backing this Bush Administration idea? Some eventually did, of course, but the financial press appeared to be blaming Republicans for the slowing or possible failure of the bailout plan, when Dems had a clear majority. Said Dem majority just became larger after the election, but Republicans still were blamed by the press for the possible failure of what was now the Obama multibillion $ bailout/stimulus/whatever.
An earlier post you had by one of your other authors, Risk Analytics???, noted that there were a few huge, zombie banks, some larger number of shaky banks, and more than 2,000 sound banks in the U.S. after administering theoretical shock tests. So, what would be the problem with letting the bad banks and auto companies fail or stop operating until they got rid of their bad debts?
March 9th, 2009 at 12:08 am
Sorry – “mighty” tedious.
To repeat with fewer words: the partisan blame game gets us nowhere -
March 9th, 2009 at 12:18 am
The Republicans change of heart is hypocrisy at best and partisan politics at worst.
Senator Shelby has not changed his position one bit. Apparently that fact is not welcome here as it doesn’t “fit” the meme.
March 9th, 2009 at 12:57 am
When the wrong man uses the right means,
The right means work in the wrong way.
March 9th, 2009 at 5:04 am
As I understand it this whole crisis came as something of a surprise to those who had to deal with it. As distasteful as TARP is, they were trying to prevent a complete collapse of the banking system. Going straight from business as usual to nationalization in a few weeks would not have been an easy sell – and I am not sure that many thought it was necessary at the time. As time has passed and the problem has grown worse it has become clear that temporary receivership or nationalization is the way to go but Obama’s people have been slow to recognize this. I think it will haunt them unless they change their approach pretty soon.
I understand Sen Shelby’s basic instinct to let insolvent banks fail – the shareholders invested in failing or failed businesses and they should get wiped out. That is how capitalism works. What Shelby doesn’t seem to get is that you can’t just close the banks – they need to be taken into receivership or nationalized by the government, cleaned up and have their assets that still have value sold back to the private sector. That is what the FDIC does when it takes over smaller banks. He shows an alarming level of ignorance on this matter for a guy who is the ranking minority member of the banking committee.
And Ducky 62 – you have to stop crying partisanship and really look at what your friend Sen Shelby said – he is ignorant to the real problems here.
March 9th, 2009 at 5:50 am
I doubt that anyone would agree that the lurch towards socialism began with Bush.
That tilt began with FDR and has continued unabated under every administration since. Even Reagan couldn’t get a democratically controlled congress to cut spending to match the tax cuts.
Once we admit that we haven’t truly lived under an authentic Capitalist economy for 90 years it might be possible to dismiss criticism of the other blatantly socialist tendencies offered up by the new administration.
What was new about Bush’s administration and continuing apparently under Geithner, their hand-picked stooge, is that Socialism for the masses was extended to the wealthiest among us in Greenwich, Scarsdale, and Palm Beach.
March 9th, 2009 at 5:58 am
Mr Richard C. Shelby’s suicide note: “Close them down, get them out of business. If they’re dead, they ought to be buried,” is not particularly helpful. We have seen billions of dollars being loaned to financial institutions over the past year but the real bad news for the crunch has been that the banks are unwillingly nervous about loaning money to business and individuals, where it is needed.
So instead of taking the scythe to the banking system, as proposed by Mr Shelby, it would be a far wiser approach to completely nationalize them temporarily, get the money and the economy flowing again and think about their privatization later.
If the government fails to deal sufficiently with this and quickly, and bearing in mind that the bailouts have not worked anywhere in the world as taxpayers’ money and future indebtedness has gone down a black hole, unemployment in the US will be unprecedented with no room to clamber back.
March 9th, 2009 at 6:02 am
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a72q7hFPu5Cs&refer=us
AIG Told U.S. Failure Would Cripple World’s Banks, Money Funds
…..Irony…..
March 9th, 2009 at 7:23 am
Good idea. Let them fail, watch the FDIC run out of money, and see bank panics everywhere. If McCain had won, this would be looked back on as the dead century and not just a depression.
You know the real problem here? It’s the media. I’m serious. Media prostitutes allow politicians to stay on talking points in order to get guests to fill air time. Or they work as propaganda outlets for their party. Just as CNBC treats (I think, I haven’t watched in a while) personal finance as a competitive sport and network airheads allow thieves and con men to sell their wares while CNBC heads fawn over them, the news channels rarely ask their guests to explain themselves in a coherent manner. It’s time for CNBC to shut itself down or make itself over in the shape of CNBC Asia or Bloomberg. It’s time for news channels to stop acting like captives of the guests.
Of topic, but the Democrats are missing the opportunity of the decade. Rush Limbaugh, the media opportunist, is portraying himself as the head of the Republican Party by slamming those who disagree with him. Since only the dumbest of the dumb, and those who live in terror of him, follow Rush, it should be priority 1 for Everyone to support Rush in his new job as the soul of the Republican Party. If successful, the next election will see many more Republicans replaced by people of intelligence and ideas. Rush is in position, at this time, to be the Democrats and reformist Republican (if such creatures exist) best weapon for change. All they have to do is support Rush’s vanity and control the message.
March 9th, 2009 at 7:38 am
I got $5 that sayz McCain is being lobbied hard by Ford, Travelers, and Wells Fargo.
Just sayin….
March 9th, 2009 at 8:03 am
Fannie/Freddie a GOP creation?
Oh please….
March 9th, 2009 at 8:29 am
Shelby and McCain are playing partisan politics. They don’t have core convictions about this mess. If McCain were potus, he would most probably be following Obama’s misguided policies and Shelby would be silently looking at his own navel.
March 9th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Shelby and Doss Aviation. ‘Nuff said.
March 9th, 2009 at 8:38 am
What has Obama changed???… Absolutely nothing…
Really what’s the worse thing that could happen if GM when into chap 11. It’s not like the alternative of pumping billions into looks any much better.
Pump now… and pay later… or pay now and hope for better tomorrow.
March 9th, 2009 at 9:18 am
Please tell us what the votes were for those bailout bills before you make such stupid comments
March 9th, 2009 at 9:38 am
@SaneinSF: Gee, that’s funny but I seem to recall over 90% of the country (including myself and most, if not all, Dems) backing W during our last real crisis (after 9/11).
March 9th, 2009 at 10:12 am
WTF is Geithner still employed, and why isn’t Volcker Treasury Secretary?
I thought we were going to get grownups in charge this time?!
March 9th, 2009 at 11:09 am
SaneInSF:
“Listen to the partisans complain about Republican tactics when the Democrats employed them well against W and McCain.”
W as a victim? McCain as a victim?
W was a “victim” of his own (insert here). And now we are too.
McCain’s was a “victim” of W’s tactics in 2000 and once again when he adopted W’s crew in 2008. Ironic.
I smell a W apologist. What could be more “partisan” than that? It’s downright extremist if you ask me.
If you stay on that path with your posts you should move the In in front of the Sane.
On subject, I would take any advice from the GOP ranks with a grain of salt. They’re on the hook for this disaster. I’m sure some of them want what’s best for all of us, but the situation getting worse while O and the Dems are in charge benefits them politically. Their new and uncharacteristic embrace of nationalization is one thing but this is another. What happened to systemic risk? The only example we have of “letting them fail” is Lehman. How’d that turn out?
They’re swingin’ for the fences, but if they connect, don’t they care that hell will be waiting for them at home plate?
March 9th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
‘The really odd thing is that the corporate bailouts we are now dealing with — AIG, Bank of America, Bear, Citigroup, Fannie/Freddie, GM, Tarp — and the massive tax bill that comes with them were were all GOP creations.”
They were Bush/Paulson creations. That was Reid/Pelosi/Frank I saw on the television flanking King Henry with the passage of TARP 1.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Barry, you always lose me when you make the following kind of statements:
“The really odd thing is that the corporate bailouts we are now dealing with — AIG, Bank of America, Bear, Citigroup, Fannie/Freddie, GM, Tarp — and the massive tax bill that comes with them were were all GOP creations.”
Who controlled the purse strings when these “creations” were created?? I believe it was the Democratically controlled House of Representatives. Was the Democratic vote higher than the Republican vote for their creation? Absolutely.
Who yelled and screamed that we had to loan money to GM and Chrysler. I believe the far loudest voices were Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid. Mr. Bush simply accomodated them on his way out (wrongly!!!).
The kind of comment you make here is blindly political and gives the Democrats further cover for the mistakes they are currently making.
It’s the SOS – the Democrats voted overwhelmininly for the war in Iraq and then fell all over themselves trying to avoid responsibility for their mistakes in voting for the war.
There is more than enough blame to go around for this current economic mess. Blindly blaming Bush and the Republicans for this mess only leads to faulty thinking. EVERYONE NEEDS TO LOOK AT THEIR OWN RESPONSIBILITY IN CREATING THIS MESS AND EVERYONE NEEDS TO CHANGE.
Obama, Geithner and Summers are just tripling down on what Bush and the Democratically controlled House cooked up. Hardly a recipe for solving our problems. Oh, quick look the other way, it’s our lack of national healthcare, lack of national alternative energy plans and lack of decent education that really created this mess.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
The vote to release the TARP funding was pretty much along party lines, with most Democrats voting to release the funding. Below a list of the exceptions.
Nine Democrats voted NOT to relesee the funds: Bayh (IN), Cantwell (WA), Dorgan (ND), Feingold (WI), Lincoln (AR), Ben Nelson (NE), Shaheen (NH), Sanders (VT), Wyden (OR).
Six Republicans voted to release the money: Alexander (TN), Gregg (NH), Kyl (AZ), Lugar (IN), Snowe (ME), Voinovich (OH).
March 9th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Google the roll call votes of both the House and Senate from last fall. This was so not a GOP creation.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
“Google the roll call votes of both the House and Senate from last fall.”
Looking at how few voted against TARP, it was a stampede after the meeting with the Congreesonal leadership in which the imminent end of the world was foretold if Congress did not give Paulson a blank check with a get-of-jail free card.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
“Congressional leadership in which the imminent end of the world was foretold if Congress did not give Paulson a blank check with a get-out-of-jail free card.”
March 9th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Who cares who voted for the damn TARP?!
The TARP is a measure that most informed people agree was necessary at the time and prevented a larger, swifter and more severe meltdown.
What matters is how it was applied, what the consequences of that application are going forward, and how those consequences affect the way we utilize the remainder of the TARP and other resources from this moment on.
Go Google that.
All of this defending of the GOP while criticizing the current administration is from the realm of the remarkably lost. Take it back there if you can find your way.
March 9th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
This guy, Barry, is a total shill for the Obama administration and democratic legislature. Interesting revisionist history. No objective perspectives here.
March 9th, 2009 at 7:56 pm
With regard to the the opensecrets link listing the top contributions to the 2008 presidential candidates, I think it’s important to note the bold text at the top of the page:
“The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization’s PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals’ immediate families”.
Unless one has a finer breakdown of those donation totals, I think it is of limited value to conclude that those institutions themselves somehow have bought influence with the recipient.
March 10th, 2009 at 10:55 am
“Who cares who voted for the damn TARP?!”
Ummm, it’s sort of relevant if you are dealing with the issue of whether or not it was a GOP creation. Which it plainly was not.