Looks like favored whipping boy, Tim Geithner, got it right after all

[NJmaverick]

And yet—whisper it softly—there is good news about the financial system and the roundly loathed bank bailout, the seven-hundred-billion-dollar relief package that Congress approved in October, 2008. During the past ten months, U.S. banks have raised more than a hundred and forty billion dollars from investors and increased the reserves they hold to cover unforeseen losses. While many small banks are still in peril, their larger brethren, such as Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs, are more strongly capitalized than many of their international competitors, and they have repaid virtually all the money they received from taxpayers. Looking ahead, the Treasury Department estimates the ultimate cost of the financial-rescue package at just a hundred and seventeen billion dollars—and much of that related to propping up General Motors and Chrysler. Barring something unexpected, the bailout will end up costing taxpayers less than the savings-and-loan implosion of the early nineteen-nineties. The government could conceivably end up making money.

Wessel is right, of course, that the unemployment rate remains stubbornly high—the rise in long-term joblessness is particularly worrying—but other economic trends are pointing up. Although some businesses are struggling to get bank financing, municipalities, car buyers, and students again have access to credit. Consumption and exports are rising. Corporations are once more spending money on software and machinery. Meanwhile, it looks as though the Senate may be finally preparing to vote on an overhaul of financial regulation.
Economists are still debating what it was that ended the financial crisis and turned the economy around. It is inarguable, though, that Geithner’s stabilization plan has proved more effective than many observers expected, this one included. “The policy worked,” Brad Hintz, a top-rated financial analyst at the research firm Sanford C. Bernstein, said. “Now, did it raise the mob to come after the bankers and politicians and try and drag them off to the guillotine? Certainly it did. That’s part of the political price that is being paid for the policy having worked.”
A few weeks ago, during a blizzard that deposited several feet of snow on Washington, I met Geithner in his office. Dressed casually in bluejeans and snow boots, he seemed to have largely given up hope of convincing the public that the financial-rescue plan was well calibrated, but he insisted that it had been necessary. “My basic view is that we did a pretty successful job of putting out a severe financial crisis and avoiding a Great Depression or Great Deflation type of thing,” he said. “We saved the economy, but we kind of lost the public doing it.”

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/03/15/100315fa_fact_cassidy#ixzz0hbpQpPnN

[earthside]

1. Ha!

http://baselinescenario.com/2010/03/08/they-saved-the-big-banks-but-kind-of-lost-the-economy-doing-it/">They Saved the Big Banks But Kind Of Lost The Economy Doing It - Simon Johnson

It would be easy to take relatively cheap shots at the portrayal of Tim Geithner — “we saved the economy but kind of lost the public doing it” — in the New Yorker, out today.

1. Mr. Geithner is quoted as saying, “Some on the left have fallen into a trap set by the Republicans, allowing voters to mistakenly think that the biggest part of the bank bailout had come under Obama rather Bush.” Mr. Geithner should know – as he spearheaded the saving of banks and other financial institutions under both Bush and Obama. In fact, it’s the continuation of George Bush’s policies by other means that really has erstwhile Obama supporters upset.

2. “I think there are some in the Democratic Party that think Tim and Larry are too conservative for them and that the President is too receptive to our advice.” Probably this is linked to the fact that Tim Geithner is not a Democrat. ...

So on and so forth ...

[NJmaverick]

6. That's correct Tim is a registered independent

[Dawgs]

2. Mmmm... This should be interesting.

:popcorn:

[Raineyb]

3. You expect Geithner to go out and say he's a toady only interested in

propping up the banking system so he can go back to work for them when he's done playing at public servant?

Really you must be easily led by the nose.

[NJmaverick]

4. Yeah then there are all those inconvenient FACTS about showing he

actually did save the economy. Damn those pesky things!

[earthside]

11. Way, way too early ...

... to make any judgments that Timmy saved the economy.

36,000 jobs LOST last month -- that's bad news; and whether this house of cards of massive debt stands or falls remains to be seen. It is just as likely (many economists say more likely) that the economy will crash further down because of Geithner's policies.

Time will tell, but we're still in the thick of the Great Recession, so really no one can make any valid claims at this juncture.

[NJmaverick]

13. You are neglecting the banking industry that was on the verge of collapse

that is where he shines. The economy is not out of the woods but it's become pretty clear Tim prevented the banking meltdown that seemed inevitable.

[Raineyb]

20. And that hasn't changed yet. The practices that got the banks into the position they were in

are still going on. Therefore it is only a matter of time until they end up exactly where they were again. If you give money to the banks and don't do anything to prevent a recurrence of the problems you were bailing them out from in the first place, you haven't fixed anything you've only postponed disaster. Averting disaster entails correcting what is wrong with the system in the first place. Apparently this is a concept that you are completely unfamiliar with which explains why you are so easily sold on snake oil. That's fine, but if you insist on keeping your head in the sand but don't expect the rest of us to buy your line of bull.

[laughingliberal]

67. "The practices that got the banks into the position they were in are still going on"

Exactly! And efforts to reform them and reregulate them are being opposed by that dynamic duo, Timmeh and The Lar. They are opposing Warren's proposal for consumer protections and Volcker's proposals for reining the financial institutions in. The next bubble is forming now. We need to get them under control before it's too late, again.

[AllentownJake]

81. The next bubble has already formed

and is ready to blow.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/spy-volume-back-2010-lows-equity-mutual-funds-run-out-cash

This is what I call, time to get the fuck out.

[MUAD_DIB]

5. Are you suggesting that he only saved the banks so he could get a job later?

Really?


That's :crazy:.

[NJmaverick]

7. Some positions don't hold up very well to critical analysis

[dmallind]

8. Yes - Former Treasury Secretaries always have a tough time getting hired.

He had to make sure he bribed the big banks so they would hire him, because of course his jobs previous to being in the position that allowed him to perform this bribery were in a completley unrelated industry where he failed to advance.

[Raineyb]

9. Actually I'm saying that what he did was re-inflate the bubble and that he's not likely

to say otherwise as he's a creature of the system that got the economy where it is in the first place. He's never been a regulator, he freely admits this and his policies have put the wants of the banks before the needs of the people. How else exactly would you expect such a person to spin what he's been doing? He worked for the bloody Fed when the shit hit the fan in the first place. How much of a permanent fix do you expect him to actually do? Oh he'll try to sell the hell out of it of course which explains this rather fawning article but then what else would you expect him to do.

Do you believe everything you're told? Because I've got a nice bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

[donco6]

10. +1

[MUAD_DIB]

16. Well he could have always ignored the fact that the banks were vulnerable.

That would have been fun. Right?

Doing too little too late always trumps getting involved when there is an emergency.
The outcome might not be everyone's solution, but it sure beats letting the house burn down around you.


Do I believe everything I am told. No. That's why I can digest what you write with a healthy dose of skepticism.

[NJmaverick]

17. Well said

[Raineyb]

18. And the banks are STILL vulnerable. Only now they're even bigger than they were when

they were too big to fail.

So when the shit hits the fan again (and it will because we've done NOTHING To fix the underlying problems in the first place) we'll be forced to bail them out once again, at the expense of everyone else of course, to the tune of even more money than we spent this last time and they STILL won't do a damn thing to actually FIX what is wrong with the system in order to make sure it doesn't happen again.

How exactly is that something to brag about?

[MUAD_DIB]

23. I never used the term "bragging."

Suppose you tell us all what would have been the better fix; seeing how you apparently are an expert. :eyes:

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MUAD_DIB]

34. I call it a rebuttal, not fawning. Those again are your words.

But keep getting flustered all you like, and if you don't feel like you should "bother" then don't. It's that simple.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MUAD_DIB]

42. Bye bye sweetheart. Good luck with your anger problem.

[MUAD_DIB]

47. Baseless insults like...

1) Do you believe everything you're told? Because I've got a nice bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

2) I see no reason why I should bother to explain anything to the willfully ignorant.

3) Clearly you don't have a damn thing to add other than sycophantic fawning over all things Geithner.

4) I'm done with you. Fuck off.

5) Since you have no idea what the hell you're talking...

6) Do you have ANYTHING besides right wing bullshit talking points to add or are you completely ignorant...

7) Listen, asshole, when you mindlessly repeat right winged talking points...

8) PUFFERY: As to what takes up my time, you wouldn't have a clue but then you don't seem to have much of a clue...

9) So kindly fuck off until you can actually make an argument...

10) Fuck you very much.


Oh, but all those things came from your hand, not mine. Need I go on?

[MUAD_DIB]

43. So you don't have a solution. Got it.

[NJmaverick]

33. So you are saying

your doom and gloom predictions are not wrong because you are making more gloom and doom predictions which I guess (unlike last time) will actually come true.

[Raineyb]

56. You seem to be under the impression that everything is fixed.

Nothing has been fixed. You can keep inflating a tire with a hole in it but eventually you have to stop pumping air into it and the fact that it's leaking will become really obvious.

They never fixed the reasons why the banks were about to collapse in the first place. How the hell do you expect me to think that the problem won't happen again if they leave everything in place for it to happen again? You'd have to be a damn fool to think that without fixing what went wrong throwing money at the problem will solve anything.

Well I guess I answered my own question. Never mind.

[AllentownJake]

83. I pretty much think most doom and gloom predictions have come true

I wonder if I asked Tim in January of 2009, if he thought that a 17% U6 number and a 1.4 trillion dollar budget deficit in 2010 would be an acceptable result of his policy prescriptions.

It's kind of hard, you guys move the goal post about once an hour to decide what is not doom and gloom.

The US is still a sovereign nation! Success!

[laughingliberal]

69. +1 nt

[Name removed]

19. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[laughingliberal]

68. Spot on!! nt

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Subdivisions]

14. Check out what Elizabeth Warren has to say about it. It is worth

every minute of the 21:00 length of this video, and much more honesty than you're likely to get outta Hank, Al, Timmeh, or Larry.

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10895

[NJmaverick]

15. I find RESULTS speak louder than words

[Sebastian Doyle]

21. And so far the "results"

haven't gone any further than Wall $treet.

Let me know when there's improvement in the REAL world, for someone other than criminal billionaires.

[NJmaverick]

26. The banks have gone from the verge of collapse to solid footing

[laughingliberal]

70. Yes, they are doing great with our money and inflating their next bubble with it

Isn't this exciting?

[Subdivisions]

22. Did you even watch the video? n/t

[walldude]

29. He won't. She's too smart, and knows too much. Had he watched

he'd have to admit he was wrong. And frankly right wingers never admit when they are wrong.


Warren is one of the few on our side. I'd love to see her get some actual power to do something.

[JackRiddler]

25. Some WORDS speak greater truths than the cooked NUMBERS of the banksters.

Hit the streets and ask the people how they're doing.

[walldude]

32. Really? Then why did you use the "Taxpayers might make money"

meme on me a couple posts down? Hypocritical much? If you were so about the results then why use those "words" to defend your position?

[NJmaverick]

36. nice deceptive parsing

the full context paints a stunningly different picture where I point to the RESULT (which is this bail out costs less than the Savings and Loan bail out) and is trending downward and could result in making of money. Still I guess deceptive parsing is better than admitting you were wrong (at least to you anyway).

[girl gone mad]

62. You should really stop while you're only a few hundred miles behind.

Less than the S&L bailout?

You, sir, are either insane or a pathological liar.

[TheWatcher]

72. It's like arguing with a pre-recorded tape.

No matter what anyone posts that completely contradict all of his platitudes and proclamations, he just ignores everything and keeps repeating them.

This has happened to a lot of people I know, so I am familiar with the M.O.

People are so desperate to get "back to the way things were" that they literally have taken leave of their senses and cocooned themselves in a false reality that is quite impenetrable.

But yes, anyone who is championing Geithner and Bernanke as some sort of "saviors" at this point is pretty much disconnected from any kind of reality.

It's kind of frightening to watch the progression.

[Oilwellian]

60. A couple of "results"

CHARLIE ROSE: Interesting -- we are now looking at the situation in
Greece where there is risk of default on debt. And what’s come into play
are private equity firms looking how they get engaged and also betting on
Euro, and credit default swaps have risen their presence again.

And the whole notion of bookkeeping, in effect.

CHARLIE ROSE: Whether certain firms -- the charge is certain firms
help them cover up the amount of debt they had.

ELIZABETH WARREN: Enron taught us a few years back, you remember, in
fact that the books are dirty, that there is one set of books put out in
front for everyone to see, but there are effectively off the book
transactions that nobody can see that reflect the real risks that your
enterprise has taken.

And we’ve gone straight from Enron to Greece, with lots of stops in
between for large financial institutions.

And guess who helped Greece hide their debt? Why, it was Goldman Sachs. One of the very
companies Geitner was supposed to be regulating when this crime was occurring.

Let's read on:

CHARLIE ROSE: I know you have to go, so let me make this one. Joe
Stiglitz, who you know who was here last night, basically says he fears
we’ll see a double dip recession, so the economy has to do with inventory
and the end of the stimulus and a whole range of issues, unemployment
staying where it is.

Do you have that kind of, even though you’re a lawyer and not an
economist, fear about this economy?

ELIZABETH WARREN: I am afraid. I’m afraid because of what I see in
the real economy. I’m afraid because I don’t see books that are clean,
balance sheets that have been cleaned up. I’m afraid because in October of
2008, Secretary Paulson came to the American people and he said the problem
is toxic assets on the books of the banks, and they’re still there.

Transcript: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10895#frame_top

Those are the real results of this nation if not the entire world. I'm hardly
impressed with Cassidy's article.

[JackRiddler]

24. "larger brethren, such as Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs, are more strongly...

capitalized..."

Talk about blind-ass spin. That's one of the biggest reasons of why the bailouts were so bad. (The bailouts that are more than 10 times the TARP total, by the way.)

The primary perpetrators of the biggest global financial fraud in history to date survived to maim and kill again, while "many smaller banks" are "in peril." Which was also the point: they go under, "too big to fail" eats them, gets bigger.

See you at the next crash.

[walldude]

27. LMFAO yeah he saved the country!!!

Or at least Wall Street, and he only had to STEAL OUR MONEY to do it. Woo Hoo the guy is a fucking hero!!

You know there are million of unemployed who will probably take issue with your praise of the Mighty Geithner, there are also millions who lost their pensions, their 401k's their portfolio's, their homes, who are right now watching those hero's on Wall Street use their BONUSES to buy new gold fixtures for their yacht while they decide whether to buy food or medication this week.

Yeah Geithner, man thank god for him, without him we may never find out how people take positions in the government so they can manipulate the system and then take jobs in the private sector where they reap the benefits of the manipulations they made in the back room while geniuses like you praise them for their amazing work in saving this nation from disaster.

[NJmaverick]

28. If you read the article you will know this bail out cost less than the Savings and Loan bail out

and could even make the taxpayers money

[walldude]

31. I have read much more than the article you have posted

Your knowledge is limited and you show no signs of wanting to understand any opposing point of view. So I will not waste my time.

I will say that saying "taxpayers could make money" means nothing till it happens. Aren't you the person who just berated someone upthread for "words not results". You might want to watch the hypocrisy, it makes you look... well... like a hypocrite.

[NJmaverick]

35. My knowledge on the subject is more than you wish it were

your position only can be sold to those that don't know any better. Oh and please consider that the CURRENT situation is the bank bail out has cost less than what it cost to fix Reagan's Savings and Loan mess. With the amount trending downward there is no reason to think that the best case scenario is not achievable.

[walldude]

37. LMAO.. My position? Yeah and your "position" can only be sold as

Well it wasn't as bad as Reagan". Maybe you ought to raise your fucking standards. And spend some time on the unemployment lines, you might get a taste of reality.

[Raineyb]

39. What you know about the subject matter couldn't fill a contact lens.

You haven't bothered to refute anything. But you do toss out the usual mindless insults.

[walldude]

40. You'd think he'd get tired of it...

Every damn thread he writes turns out just like this. Him railing against the stupidity of the 90% of Du that doesn't agree with him.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MUAD_DIB]

44. Nobody has recruited me, sweetheart. At least I don't get flustered,

pat myself on the back for being soooooo right, then tell others to fuck off and run away.


So again, what are you doing about it besides complaining? Anything? Do you have a solution or just a lot of chest thumpery?

[NJmaverick]

45. So you claim, but the facts speak otherwise

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[girl gone mad]

63. Then tell us, oh knowledgeable one..

how much of this nation's wealth has been surreptitiously poured into Wall Street's coffers since 2008?

I await your full accounting, though I certainly won't hold my breath.

[AllentownJake]

79. Want to have a debate with me on this subject?

I'll be more than happy to kick your apologist propoganda all over the site.

[Raineyb]

87. I was hoping you'd chime in.

I would really like to hear your opinions on the matter.

[laughingliberal]

71. Yes, we're all touched the world is safe for the billionaire's again.

Kind of brings a tear to your eye, doesn't it?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

46. Yep. He successfully picked our pockets to bail out the crooks.

And, for some, he's successfully telling the suckers that it was for their own good.

[NJmaverick]

49. If he "picked our pockets" he is in the process of putting all the $$ back

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

51. Get back to me when I get my check from AIG.

[NJmaverick]

52. Funny you should mention AIG. They just sold off another asset to

repay billions more to the government.

[AllentownJake]

78. Only 150 billion to go

:rofl:

and AIG is still losing money, lots of money.

Do you think people are dumb or do you actually believe this shit?

[girl gone mad]

64. You and tiny Tim are lying.

Sell bullshit somewhere else. Everybody here knows full well that we're on the hook for far more than TARP funds. We're also well aware that TARP was paid back through backdoor bailouts and scammy tax forgiveness schemes.

You must think the average DUer has the IQ of Sarah Palin.

Stop insulting our intelligence, you foolish little propaganda catapulter.

[Mike 03]

48. It is regrettable, the amount of ignorance about what actually transpired between Bear Stearns

and the actualization of what Bernanke refers to as Quantitative Easing.

This debate will never end, but I am totally on the side of Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke and Paulson. They bloody well saved our asses, IMO.

[NJmaverick]

50. Agreed

[AllentownJake]

80. They extended and pretended

Nothing has been saved, no problem has been solved, no debt has been disapeared.

Transfering private debts onto public balance sheets or hiding them using accounting gimicks isn't saving anyone's ass.

[ipaint]

53. William K Black interview

Goes into detail on the massive amount of criminal fraud committed by those we just bailed out including Tim Geithner's role in facilitating and committing the crimes that caused this mass.

For anyone who might be inclined to think he and his criminal ilk are now our saviors I suggest googling William Black and listening to his interviews, reading his reports and his blog.

A good place to start is the interview with Moyers.

"WILLIAM K. BLACK: Geithner is charging, is covering up. Just like Paulson did before him. Geithner is publicly saying that it's going to take $2 trillion — a trillion is a thousand billion — $2 trillion taxpayer dollars to deal with this problem. But they're allowing all the banks to report that they're not only solvent, but fully capitalized. Both statements can't be true. It can't be that they need $2 trillion, because they have masses losses, and that they're fine.

These are all people who have failed. Paulson failed, Geithner failed. They were all promoted because they failed, not because...

BILL MOYERS: What do you mean?

WILLIAM K. BLACK: Well, Geithner has, was one of our nation's top regulators, during the entire subprime scandal, that I just described. He took absolutely no effective action. He gave no warning. He did nothing in response to the FBI warning that there was an epidemic of fraud. All this pig in the poke stuff happened under him. So, in his phrase about legacy assets. Well he's a failed legacy regulator.

BILL MOYERS: But he denies that he was a regulator.
Let me show you some of his testimony before Congress. Take a look at this.
TIMOTHY GEITHNER: I've never been a regulator, for better or worse. And I think you're right to say that we have to be very skeptical that regulation can solve all of these problems. We have parts of our system that are overwhelmed by regulation.

Overwhelmed by regulation! It wasn't the absence of regulation that was the problem, it was despite the presence of regulation you've got huge risks that build up.

WILLIAM K. BLACK: Well, he may be right that he never regulated, but his job was to regulate. That was his mission statement.

BILL MOYERS: As?

WILLIAM K. BLACK: As president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which is responsible for regulating most of the largest bank holding companies in America. And he's completely wrong that we had too much regulation in some of these areas. I mean, he gives no details, obviously. But that's just plain wrong."

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04032009/watch.html



And don't miss this one with Simon Johnson-

"SIMON JOHNSON: Well, the final end of the last vestige of Glass-Steagall came in just now in August. Unnoted, but I think very significant. Goldman Sachs, you remember, was an investment bank, a securities company. Not allowed to be a commercial bank; didn't have access to the Federal Reserve and this ability to tap into the money supply of the country. Until September of last year, when the crisis broke, they were allowed a very short notice to convert to being a bank holding company. This was what saved Goldman Sachs in my opinion. Also Morgan Stanley. Which meant they could stay in the securities business. And they could also have access to the Federal Reserve. In August, just now, they converted to what's called a financial holding company. That may seem like a technical detail to you, but this means they can borrow from the Fed, at essentially zero interest rate now.

They can invest in, I mean, as far as we can see, from the outside, looking at their portfolio, anything they want, including, you're going to love this one, they just bought some stock, big chunk of stock in a Chinese automotive company. Okay? So, that's your money, that's your Federal Reserve, financing a highly speculative investment. And if it goes well, they get the upside. And if it goes badly, that's another one for us.

BILL MOYERS: Well, and this is what we were talking about earlier, the system. I mean, President Clinton's Secretary of Treasury, Robert Rubin helps eliminate Glass-Steagall. And then leaves the government and goes to work for? Citicorp?

SIMON JOHNSON: Well Rubin's a fascinating character. He ran Goldman Sachs, he went into the Clinton White House, then he became Secretary of the Treasury, and it was on his watch that, first of all, Glass-Steagall began to really seriously crumble, and then it was completely swept away- replaced, abolished, really. And then, of course, Rubin goes on after he leaves Treasury, to be the senior guru type figure at Citigroup. And Citigroup is absolutely epicenter of everything that's gone wrong with our financial system.

BILL MOYERS: And wasn't it Robert Rubin the mentor, the guru to both Tim Geithner and Larry Summers?

SIMON JOHNSON: Absolutely. Both Geithner and Summers advanced to senior positions in the Treasury under Rubin was instrumental in bringing Larry Summers to be President of Harvard, after the Clinton Administration. And according to published new report, he was absolutely key person in making sure that Tim Geithner first went to a senior job at the IMF, and then became President of the New York Fed. And there are unconfirmed reports that Robert Rubin was an essential advisor to then candidate Obama in fall of last year, with regard to who he should bring on board as the leadership team on the economic side."

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10092009/transcript1.html



Interesting the criminal trash and scum that passes for hero status these days. Reminds me of the irrationality of a abusive cult religion.

[Grand Taurean]

58. And we are not seeing strong regulations coming either.

[laughingliberal]

73. Thank you! Very good post! nt

[Mike 03]

54. Kick again. This is one of those important and true posts that people like to

ignore. It is a shame.

Kickomatic!

[sendero]

57. LOL...

... if the big banks had to mark to market today they would ALL BE INSOLVENT.

The only thing that will save them is to reinflate the housing bubble and the CRE bubble, and neither of those is going to happen.

I don't know if this is propaganda or the writings of a moron. Doesn't matter.

Geithner didn't save shit.

[w4rma]

59. Yup. Which is why Obama's Goldman Sachs economic team killed off "Mark to Market". (nt)

[laughingliberal]

75. +1 nt

[laughingliberal]

74. Goldman Sachs was on track to use Cap and Trade to inflate their next bubble but it's been stalled

out, somewhat. It will be interesting to see where they go now.

[Confusious]

61. It don't take a frikin' genius to shovel money at a bank

It doesn't take a frikin' genius to see the options in " give them all your money, or else the entire economy goes with them"

So we get all the money back from the banks. So the fuck what.

When do I get my job back that these fuckers cost me??


When do I get to see these frikin' geniuses put regulations in so this doesn't happen again?

Until then, you're just blowing smoke up my ass, and I am not amused.

[girl gone mad]

65. We got nothing back from the banks.

This one either has no clue or he's a flat out liar.

The banks simply found backdoor methods to paper over losses, transfer their private debts onto our national balance sheet and funnel taxpayer dollars into their vaults so they could magically repay TARP (because it was standing between them and their giant bonuses), despite the fact they many are still fundamentally insolvent.

[slipslidingaway]

66. Head of the NY Federal Reserve Bank since 2003, his job was to oversee

and regulate the big banks in NY - heck of a job.

[laughingliberal]

76. Some people are so picky

Just because the whole thing happened on his watch is no reason for us to get testy, now. :sarcasm:

[slipslidingaway]

77. LOL... I needed the laugh and he'll help us with our debt to China no

doubt, maybe they'll take $.50 on the dollar.

His father, Paul? Geithner, and Kissinger on the China trade committee, forget what it is called but the head of the Carlyle Group was there ... Kissinger spoke favorably on the NYSE floor of Obama's cabinet picks.

It's all good.

:)

[laughingliberal]

82. Glad I could help and nice to know Obama's cabinet picks have Kissinger's blessing

How much more reassurance do we need? $.50 on the dollar, huh? That can't be good.

Hmmm. Not sure which group that would be. USCBC, perhaps? The US China Business Council? That's all I can think of for now.

[slipslidingaway]

84. Here it is - National Committee on US - China Relations

http://www.ncuscr.org/who-we-are/board-directors

Kissinger / Obama "New World Order" 1/5/09
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzMZ0v-BYXI

Standing next to Kissinger on the NYSE floor is Stephen A. Orlins, President of National Committee on United States-China Relations.


http://www.ncuscr.org/stephen-orlins-president

"Stephen A. Orlins, President

Steve Orlins has been President of the National Committee since May 1, 2005. Prior to becoming president, Mr. Orlins was the managing director of Carlyle Asia"

[Scurrilous]

85. Kick

:kick:

[JackRiddler]

86. Kick - For "one of those threads" exposing the depths to which sophistry can descend.

Although not as entertaining as the classic in the genre:

"THANK GOD IT PASSED!!!"