Sat, 04/04/2009 - 5:09pm — lambert
This is the great truth that cannot be spoken: what we're seeing here is massive elite criminality. And it, of course, the natural result of 30+ years of virtualy unfettered elite rule. This is what the Democrats ought to be standing militantly against. If they were, the GOP would dissolve within a few election cycles, as the Federalists did during the Monroe Presidency. But, of course, the Democrats are almost as deeply aligned with the criminals are the Republicans are--and Giethner, Summers and Rubin are the proof of the pudding. This is not a question of right vs. left. It's a question of left vs. wrong.
Haw.
»
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[encrypted]+#b94+
Printer-friendly version
Front page
Comments
I read this stuff disparingly.
All I can really think about when I read it is the Democratic primary. The Clintons, no doubt, are tied to the same people but the hostility to her candidacy suggests that the bond was different. No wonder that candidate had so much money.
"Someone needs to point out that elephants produce infinitely more shit than donkeys." Brad Mays
What Rosenberg said
More and more Obama resembles Gorbachev.
I just read BTD's comment about Glass Steagall.
This mistaken critique is also seen when folks discuss the wisdom of the repeal fo Glass Steagall.
the idea is that Glass Steagall somehow was the cause of weakened regulation. This is false. The regulatory authority was in fact shared over different parts of financial institutions.
For example, Merrill Lynch, now owned by the BOA holding company (though still a separate corporation), is regulated by the SEC.
BOA, the bank is regulated by the FDIC and the Fed.
that regulators failed to do their job is not the same thing as arguing the repeal of Steagall caused the failure.
On the other hand, the Gramm Amendment on commodity futures deregulation was clearly a terrible idea.