Radley Balko | September 23, 2008
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chair of the House Banking Committee, on the bailout:
"I think we have to recognize the reality that we don't have a choice now of debating whether this is a good or a bad thing."
Who cares if it might makes us worse off. Just do something, dammit!
Hat tip: Caleb Brown.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
I clicked the link to find out what the context is, and there's
none provided in the article, either.
There is no way to tell what Frank's point was. There's no way to
tell what the word "this" is even supposed to refer to.
"We never intended to do this without oversight."
Hank Paulson is a lying sack of shit.
I'm willing to give Rep. Frank the benefit of some doubt, because he has sometimes shown a certain degree of intelligence and wisdom, to the extent his Democrap affiliation permits. I will wait until the final vote on these socialist bills to decide whether Rep. Frank is out of line or not.
P Brooks - Remember he was CO of Goldman, so he's a no-good thieving lying sack of shit.
This is gonna be interesting...
I bet that there will be a majority of Dems who vote for a bailout
plan, and then the GOP is going to campaign against the Dems for
voting for the bailout -- giving them a "socialist Dem" line of
attack and also allowing the GOP to distance themselves from
Bush.
The Dems are so fucking stupid having bought into Bush's "sky is
falling" attitude. And it's gonna cost them dearly.
Mad Max, right, like when he and other Democrats opposed any reforms to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac in the early 2000s.
and then the GOP is going to campaign against the Dems for
voting for the bailout
I don't know, Tom. The GOP seems pretty desperate to be "doing
something" here.
Jerry, I specifically said "to the extent his Democrap affiliation permits."
McCain's bill would have weakend, not strengthened, oversight.
Shifting responsility from the Fed to the the Treasury might or
might not have been a good idea on its own merits, but it's neither
here nor there.
Particularly given that the Treasury Department at the time was, as
an executive department (as opposed to the quasi-indepent Fed, that
is deliberately shielded from politics) being run by people with
significantly less interest in checking the excesses of the
financial markets than the green eyeshade-types at the Fed.
FP's "Passport" has several brief posts concerning today's hearings; perhaps the most notable, so far, is about Sen. Jim Bunning's statement.
http://www.telegram.com/article/20080923/NEWS/809230678/1116/NEWSREWIND
a little more context
Hank should take a few billion from his trillion dollar line of credit and have marble hammer-and-sickle megaliths erected atop the branches of the Federal Reserve Bank.
"I think we have to recognize the reality that we don't have
a choice now of debating whether this is a good or a bad
thing."
Sometomes I kinda like Barney Frank. Then he goes and say some
cosmically stupid shit like this.
Barney's absolutely right. There is no debate. It's BAD, BAD,
BAD...
Or did I take his statement out of context?
Nothing good happens between making a mistake and correcting it. The housing bubble was Greenspan's effort to postpone the correction of the tech bubble. But he just made things worse, and this bailout will make things worse still.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245