Posted on 11/18/2008 9:39:09 PM PST by Kukai
This is not change we can believe in. Not if Robert Rubin or his protégé, Lawrence Summers, get to call the shots on the economy in President-elect Barack Obama's incoming administration. Both Clinton-era treasury secretaries deserve a great deal of the blame for the radical deregulation of the financial industry that has derailed the world economy. They both should, along with former Federal Reserve chief Alan Greenspan, perform rites of contrition and be kept at a safe distance from the leadership of our nation.
Yet Rubin and Summers are highly visible in the Obama transition team, with Summers widely touted as Obama's pick for secretary of the treasury. New York Federal Reserve President Timothy Geithner, who also worked in the treasury department under Rubin and Summers, is the other leading candidate. But it was Summers who most vehemently pushed for congressional passage of that drastic deregulation measure, the Financial Services Modernization Act, which eliminated the New Deal barriers against mergers of commercial and investment banks as well as insurance companies and stock brokers. Standing at his side as President Bill Clinton signed the legislation, Summers heralded it as "a major step forward to the 21st century" - and what a wonderful century it's proving to be.
It was also Summers who worked in cahoots with Enron and banking lobbyists, and who backed Republican Sen. Phil Gramm's Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which banned any effective government regulation of the newly unleashed derivatives market. The result was not only a temporary boon to Enron, which soon collapsed under its unbridled greed, but also to the entire Wall Street financial community.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I heard he might appoint Volcker.
Brinker should certainly know better.
never mind Spitzer’s crusades. never mind Sarbanes Oxley. never mind freddie mac and fannie mae. never mind all that easy money created by the fed.
the problem with volcker (or Rubin) is that he’d probably cause another deflation and kill the economy that way.
Brinker, twice I've heard him blame the crisis on the Gramm, Leach, Bliley Act, Republicans or RINO's, first vetoed by Clinton then signed.
Not that Fannie and Freddie and the CRA have nothing to do with anything, and probably more. Yes, he should know better and spread the blame around a little more.
Robert Scheer is the Leftist crackpot that used to write for L.A. Times. “Used to write” as in was FIRED.
I see his name on an article and automatically head for the next article down the line. Of course if the next one is by Helen Thomas then I know it’s a bad day and go to bed.
Volcker would be better than Bernanke.
Raise rates and the such; it might appear bad. But it would save some problems in the LONG run.
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/18/the-obahillary-morph-recycling-you-can-believe-in/
“Back in March, The New Republic lamented that Democrats could only choose one: Clinton or Obama. How wrong they were.
...”
Or Murine Dowdy, David Korn, and that crew...
no, we’d probably have a deflationary depression followed by hyperinflation.
Popular opinion here on FR was that B Hussein Obama would be Jimmy Carter’s second term. On the contrary he seems to be re-establishing the Clinton Administration. What’s next, Madeline Not-So-Bright back as Secretary of State?
Lol. I'm not talking about Bernanke.
And yet, President Bush, who didn't do ANY deregulating at all, has gotten all the blame!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.