Everyone makes mistakes, we were told. But Tim Geithner’s abysmal roll-out of the bank bailout suggests there might be a larger problem than one awful policy unveiling. Larry Kudlow writes:
Geithner would have been better off not giving a speech until he could put real meat on the bones. What he pulled Tuesday was a classic rookie move that will further erode the public’s trust in his capabilities. Following the controversy over his late payment of taxes, this bank-plan blunder could be another nail in his coffin. Apparently, Tim Geithner is not yet ready for prime time.
Uh-oh. What if Geithner’s the wrong guy for the job? Maybe he’s a technician, not a financial leader. He might lack gravitas after all. Could it be that the indispensable man needs to be dispensed with?
But, of course, it would look horrible to dump him so soon, especially after the president and all those Senators insisted he was literally the only man in the country to do this job. So he’ll have to tough it out — as will the rest of us.
But the next time the Senate insists an ethically-challenged nominee is the only person in the nation for a key role, they better make sure he’s really exemplary. Here’s the thing: maybe his tax problems were a clue. Maybe we should have been concerned that someone that sloppy and evasive about his own finances might lack the skill set to steer the economy out of a ditch. Ah well, live and learn.
Socialists have learned to use other names for political advantage. They are socialists today regardless of their movement’s failures over time. Their dream lives on as our nightmare.
Here’s a mystery . . . .
So, we are to understand that deficits are “stimulating” as indicated by Stimulus + Omnibus Spending and Obama’s explanation that these are needed to restart the economy.
Well then how come Obama complains about the $1Trillion deficit that he has “inherited.” Gee, wouldn’t it seems that absent the current deficit, today’s recession would be that much worse!?
Just wondering . . . .
#1,
Quasi Socialism will be short lived,however, until there’s some accurate diagnosis-prescription and agreement as to what damaged our free market,people will vote for who provides the jobs.
Problem: the political system is in charge of fixing the Financial system;the political system ruined the financial system;until that’s straightened out,those printing presses will be working full time.
I think moderates and others opposed to Obama’s radicalism need to find a better term of opposition thatn “socialism.” the word is simply not resonant or even meaningful to most America ears–it just sounds strange, liek we are say Obama is a jabberwocky. Worse, it sounds like a silly scare word. Socialism as an enity or as an idea has almost no meaning to most voters, young or old. It is a term of ideological art, not suited to American political discourse.
Terms that are more resonant may be similar to those that Reagan used–phrases like “big government,” “tax and spend,” “expanding government control of our lives,” “keeping government out of our pocketbooks,” “keeping more [less] of what you earn,” “expanding the welfare state,” etc.
The term “socialist” tars those who use it, evan against someone else, as an ideological extremist.
Where is that 500 upsurge? If you follow your dear leader 2 days ago to buy stock while its low, you already good money by now.
Where is that 500 upsurge? If you follow your dear leader 2 days ago to buy stock while its low, you already LOST good money by now.
Mission Accomplished!
H/T: The Anchoress
Call it “Socialism”, call it “European style far left radicalism”…No matter..Obama is on a fast track to becoming the North American “CHAVEZ” ,and the country is rapidly on the road to poverty and soft glove dictatorship.
#8,”—and the country is rapidly on the road to poverty and soft glove dictatorship.”
The perception is that we are on the road to poverty because of a Free Market faiure,not a failure of Socialism. When that changes,and the perception becomes that Capitalism will save us from poverty,Capitalism will come roaring back. The question for conservatives is how to change the perception,how to take the blame off of Capitalism for the current turmoil. That’s a hard proposition.
#4 – ahem…
Stop that dang jabberwocky, consarn it! American can not afford jabberwockism!
Works for me.
(is “jabberwocky” racist?)
If anyone out there is still thinking about how we get Capitalism to work again,check out what Mr. Forbes says,in the WSJ today.
“Obama Repeats Bush’s Worst Market Mistakes”
By Steve Forbes
“Bad accounting rules are the cause of the banking crisis.”
However, if we get rid of the “Mark to Market” rules,what is to prevent a bank from loading up its balance sheet with c–p and then leveraging the c–p to borrow more to lend more. That in part is what happened with our current system. We still need some rule to keep the assets honest,but Forbes may be correct.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123630304198047321.html
#2 Stephen Goldstein: Brilliant point! But of course there is an answer: Only Democrat deficits stimulate. Republican deficits are always wasteful give aways to the rich or “wrong” wars. Did you know that?
#10 & #11
LOL. Well of course “jabberwocky” is racist!!. But so is “socialist.” In fact, anythiung you say that is critical of Obama is racist because he is–you know–ahem, cough, cough, omigoodness, ssshhhhh, let me say this quietly–black!!!
Well said, finally a good report on this stuff