Life After Oprah: How Her Exit Changes Everything
Hot Topics: Galleries, Sarah Palin, Big Fat Story, Giving Beast, Hungry Beast, Art Beast
Enter your email address:
Enter the recipients' email addresses, separated by commas:
Message:
Gerald Herbert / AP Photo Tim Geithner hotly defended his job Thursday in front of angry Republican congressmen who asked him to step down. "What I can't take responsibility is for the legacy of crises you've bequeathed this country," he shot back.
It is not easy being the secretary of the Treasury in the midst of so much economic turmoil. But even under current conditions, Tim Geithnerâ??s credit is running exceptionally low. He is already in serious danger of being ranked with the most ineffectual Treasury secretaries in recent historyâ??along with David Kennedy under Nixon, Michael Blumenthal under Carter, Don Regan under Reagan and Paul Oâ??Neill under George W. Bush. This time, however, the stakes are much higher; a president in crisis will and should run out of patience with a floundering Treasury secretary. So far, Geithner shows few signs of recovering as unemployment continues to rise, ongoing defaults may still hamper the credit of the U.S., Wall Street pays itself huge bonuses, and China refuses to budge on its undervalued currency.
This week, Geithner was dealt a major personal blow when the special inspector general who was auditing the bank bailout plan known as TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Plan) announced that he â??caved in,â? to use The Wall Street Journalâ??s phrase, to demands from the financial community. Geithner was president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank when it saved AIG last fall; by all accounts, he was the principal decision maker. The huge insurance company wrote trillions of dollars worth of complex derivativesâ??credit default swapsâ??that were about to put it out of business without government aid. Geithner feared its counterpartiesâ??those it owed money on these tradesâ??would also go down with it. But he could have forced these creditors to take significantly less and did not. The government acquiesced to their demands and paid them off in full. These creditors included, most notably, Goldman Sachs, who also took government funds and recently paid them back, only to announce enormous bonuses for its traders.
â??Geithner now looks to many serious observers like a mug. But his personal history is consistent.â?
Geithner now looks to many serious observers like a mug. But his personal history is consistent. Doubts about Geithner were raised early in the nomination process, when it was discovered that he failed to report his taxes fully, not once but on several occasions. Democrats insisted it was a minor oversightâ??or two or three. More to the point, he presided over the greatest financial debacle of our time as the nationâ??s chief of open market operations and its main on-the-ground bank regulator. While he did warn about derivatives to some degree, he took no serious action to reign them in. To the contrary, in 2004, he assured the nation that the banks were strong. As late as 2007, when the Street was already on the brink, he made a speech in Atlanta championing the rise in derivatives trading as a healthy way to spread risk, a favorite theme of his boss, Alan Greenspan, the Fed chairman. According to The New York Times, he also favored a plan that same year to reduce capital requirements further for banks; thankfully, it was dropped. The New York Times reporters, Jo Becker and Gretchen Morgenson, also determined from his daily diaries that he often met alone with top financial executives like Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase, and even Sandy Weill, typically a practice that is avoided. In the past, the Fed president usually met with bankers in the presence of another Fed official to avoid any possibility of undue influence. Weill, former CEO of Citigroup, offered him the job as chairman, which he wisely turned down.
Now the bank bailouts are widely criticized for not requiring more of Wall Street â??at least a serious equity stakeâ??in a deal under George W. Bush to which Geithner had been a party. All of this might have been forgiven if he came out charging once he was on the job. But his first speech on financial re-regulation in February was overbilled by President Obama and turned out to be a remarkable dud, flagrantly lacking in details or much hard-thinking. The market tanked the next day. His plan to start a public-private partnership to buy the threatening toxic assets on the balance sheets of financial institutions was laughably rigged in favor of private investors and against taxpayers. The long-awaited white paper on financial reform issued in June, apparently co-authored by Larry Summers, the head of President Obamaâ??s National Economic Council, was a shallow work of conventional wisdom and deliberately light touch that could have been put together in two weeks by smart seniors at Dartmouth (where Geithner graduated). Reform, such as it is, is being carved up in Congress and any bill passed will surely be inadequate.
In the meantime, unemployment continues to riseâ??and is unlikely to fall anytime soon, according to most observers, including Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke, who said as much this week. Geithnerâ??s voice may be muffled by the ubiquitous Summers, but he has a megaphone, and he could use it. Only now has the Obama team begun talking about a jobs program.
How did Geithner get so far so fast? He was 42 years old when he was named the bank president. The consensus answer is that one of his chief qualities for rising has been respect for his superiors. He was an international affairs graduate student at Johns Hopkins who later worked under Robert Rubin and Summers at the Treasury; he rose rapidly, some say by loyally and competently doing their bidding. He spent several years at a handsome job at the International Monetary Fund, where he forgot to pay his U.S. taxes. Rubin and the Blackstone Groupâ??s Pete Peterson backed him for the top slot at the New York Fed. He is called bright, but no one accuses him of gravitas. As a habit he does not run against the conventional wisdom.
View as Single Page 12 Back to Top November 18, 2009 | 2:24pm Facebook | Twitter | Digg | | Emails | print Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary, Economics, Larry Summers. Wall Street. Tarp. David Kennedy. Michael Blumenthal. Don Regan. Paul O'neil. James Baker. Robert Rubin. Lloyd Bentsen. Paul Volcker. John B. Connally. (â??) Show Replies Collapse Replies Sort Up Sort Down sort by date: katiewon
Alexander Hamilton is turning in his grave.
Isn't this the guy they told us was the only one smart enough to handle the crisis? Even if he couldn't quite master Turbo Tax? Then dithered and dallied, then gave the store away to the tune of 50 billion or so? Money that could have easliy been negotiated in the favor of US taxpayers? Sure would be a shame if he lost his job. But you know Obama will make the right decison for the country, not one based on politics or on saving face. Right?
I am a candidate for president. My choice for Secretary of State is Thomas L. Friedman. he will be the best Secretary of State we could ever possibly have. Together we will set the stage for world peace, the performance of my "spoken poem for all mankind," beginning with Adman and Even in the Gar Den ov Edum, on all channels for all the worlds' peoples at once. My choice for Secretary of Treasury is "know" choice - to leave that position open and fill the key under secretary positions from inside the agency. Those civil servants chosen will be people deeply honored for the opportunity to serve at the very top. Their civil servant telephones won't be accepting calls from the likes of Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. Every morning when the cabinet meets informally in the Oval Office we will sit in a circle and we will all be Secretaries of the Treasury, reviewing the overnights and chewing on the economic events of the day. But someone has to sign the money. I will, at my first press conference, put the "official" position of Secretary of Treasury open to bid, the position going to the 52 highest bidders, an offer certainly appealing to many ego inflated multi-millionaires; people of the self-imagined Bill Gates Warren Buffet caliber. Monday 9 a.m., with much White House hoopla, lights, cameras and action, the highest bidder, with his or her family in attendance, are sworn in as Treasurer. From Tuesday through Friday, all the paper money printed has their signature. The Secretary is expected to attend and participate in cabinet meetings during the week. The "Treasurers for the Week" are encouraged to purchase as many uncut sheets of hundred and fifty dollar bills as their hearts desire, as these uncut wall paper sheets make great birthday presents or holiday gifts. The Secretary of the Treasury is encouraged to secure as many lots of uncut sheets as he or she can afford, as taking money out of circulation is a great way to fight inflation. Friday afternoon the Secretary's pre-signed letter of resignation is accepted by the president and the Secretary goes back where they came from. The following Monday, the new Secretary is sworn into office. I expect five million dollars will be the low bid for one week as Treasurer, so the Treasury Secretary for the Week program will bring in at least 250 million dollars the first year, earmarked for the President's discretionary fund. michaelslevinson.com
Try shortening this up a bit. Then shorten that, then delete it before posting.
Dear Jeff Madrick, This is all very fascinating, and maybe you're one of the good guys and all that, but... "He is already in serious danger of being ranked with the most ineffectual Treasury secretaries in recent history" Name who's ranking him. You? The Muppet handlers at Sesame Street? Name names. "So far, Geithner shows few signs of recovering as unemployment continues to rise, ongoing defaults may still hamper the credit of the U.S., Wall Street pays itself huge bonuses, and China refuses to budge on its undervalued currency." 1) I think the problems that the United States are a lot deeper than the Secretary of the Treasury has the powers to fix. A lot deeper. 2) If we don't own them and they're making money, then what business is it of yours? Do they need to be regulated better? I missed that in your article. 3) Why would China budge on its undervalued currency? They are milking the cow for all it's worth. How much Chinese currency do you yourself own? "Geithner was president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank when it saved AIG last fall; by all accounts, he was the principal decision maker." It's amazing what one will agree to in order to stave off what is perceived to be another Great Depression? Wasn't that the real reason that Bush and his Congress signed off on TARP? Because they thought the financial apocalypse was on America's doorstep? "Geithner now looks to many serious observers like a mug. " Name names. Don't be bashful. "Now the bank bailouts are widely criticized for not requiring more of Wall Street -at least a serious equity stake-in a deal under George W. Bush to which Geithner had been a party." Yes, NOW they are. "If the economy does not bounce back, Obama will have to consider a change. " That's pretty funny. If the economy doesn't bounce it will be Obama that's looking for a new job in 2012. Filling Little Timmy's current will be the least of his problems. "Obama is a patient man. And if the economy muddles through, and there is a small chance it will, Geithner will survive the president's first term." If the economy continues the way it is right now into early 2012, the voters are not as patient as Obama. Hmmm... What really irritates me about this article is that you aren't naming names, particularly those of people that you believe would deliver the United States and its people from the current mess. Yours truly, Whipmawhopma
Let's try getting at least a few facts straight...Bush may have "signed off"..but it wasn't his Congress..the Congress had a clear Democrate majority...and...before the 2008 election McCain and Obama were both called to Washington...in the middle of the debates..to be briefed...All aboard...every one of these people bought into it.... EVERY web site that supported Ron Paul..and certainly Paul himself..was ADAMANTLY opposed to this bailout giveaway... Let's get down to some facts...Warren Buffett did a deal that should have been a templte for the CIT giveaway..h gave, and demanded, senior status as a bond holder for loans made to nearly insolvent companies. Geithner was criticized at the time..and even more so now..for not demanding a first in line position for billions of taxpayer monies... Bottom line...Paulson and Geithner have been pimping for Wall Street financial firms (specifically Goldman Sachs) for years....only a handful stood up to them..and Bush AND Obama weren't men enough...
Georealist - Bush and his Congress refers to George Bush and whoever was holding power in the Congress at the time the deal was done. I am quite aware that it was controlled by the Democrats as of 2006, and would assume everyone else interested in an article like this would know that as well. Both the President and the Congress, including McCain, signed off on this deal. Bush did not have to sign it if he thought it the wrong thing to do. It's not a Republican versus Democrat thing for me, as the first seems to borrow and spend while correctly accusing the latter of tax and spend. Both seem less than optimal to me. As for Warren Buffett and the rest, I don't really know if TARP was a good thing or not, other than as a psychological sedative for the financial markets and the public in general in the midst of a grand panic attack, regardless of what Ron Paul thought and regardless whether or not Ron Paul was right. The only way we're going to know for sure is to develop the technology that would allow us to visit parallel universes and find one where TARP was rejected and see what happened there. Geithner was criticized by whom? Name names, so I can look them up. Otherwise your comment is like Madrick's article where he says a bunch of interesting things without pointing the reader in some specific direction, except for his making it clear that Geithner sucks at his current job and sucked at his previous one as well, and then not recommending people that would not suck. As for Paulson and Geithner pimping for Wall Street, I have come to the conclusion that pimping taxpayers for Wall Street, big business and big banking is the business of government and has been this way going back maybe 40 years regardless of who holds the White House and regardless of who holds the Congress.
whipawhatever...Let's not dilute this by saying it has been going on for 40 years...we're talking about the last 3 years...Congress was controlled by Democrats..hardly Bush's Congress..that is simply obfuscating the issue. Barney Frank and Dems on the most influential committees lobbied big time for Banks to lend to people who couldn't pay...Fannie and Freddie bought the garbage...Wall Street bought the packaged stuff and sold it off...Bush said nothing..they were ALL in this. They bought Paulson's and Geithner's line because it suited their political interests..Don't you dar leave Obama out of this..he was right along side McCain in telling us during the campaign we "needed" this bailout.. The bailout was unnecessary and will end up prolonging what will be..into 2010..a horrendous depression....The article this discussion is based on is criticism of Geithner...but it could well include his handler..Paulson. You don't know if TARP was a good thing or not??? Then why are you commenting. You need to do a little due diligence and discover how YOU and ME and the AMERICAN TAXPAYER have been had.
Georealist: Let's not stop with the last 3 years. Lets go back to the first 6 years of the Bush administration, during which Bush passed grotesque tax cuts for the wealthy, started two wars, passed an unfunded Medicare Part D, and decided that private companies didn't need any regulation. I suspect Bush's $5 trillion addition to our national debt had a lot to do with our current financial mess. And we could even go back to 1999, when the Republican Congress repealed the Glass-Segal Act, which had prevented banks from getting in financial trouble for almost 60 years. I guess the banks proved they are just as greedy today as they were in the 1920s prior to the Great Depression. So don't try your revisionist history on us, please. Republicans bear the bulk of responsibility despite the Democratic Congress during Bush's final two years, as Bush could veto anything he didn't like.
AlanD2...so this was all Bush's fault? The subprime debacle had its genesis back in the 1990's under Clinton and the tax cuts had nothing to do with this and neither did Medicare- part D. De-regulation- maybe just a little bit, but what a lot of these guys were doing , they had been doing for the previous 10 years prior- MBS and CDO's, etc were not things dreamt up by John Snow and the boys at Skull and Bones. This problem was started because the private debt in the US is at an unsustainable level. On the non governmental level, we as a nation were leveraged to the hilt ad we had an insatiable appetite for it. Unfortunately to "unclog " the mess the private sector went hat in hand to Uncle Sam. As it applies to Glass Steagall, it occurs to me the legisaltion overturning it was signed into law by a Democratic President at the urging of his Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and others like Summers and to a lesser extent Roger Altman. Unwise vetting by ratings agencies and foolish issuance of CDS's in the private sector precipitated this and Bush's tax cuts had nada to do with it. You can use that whipping boy only so long- by the way , everybody's taxes went down during the Bush years not just the rich- try me on this, I'll blast you with the facts.The busters on all of this was the taking on of the Fannie/Freddie stuff and the TARP...after that, the floodgates were open. I'll agree two wars did not help. Also, please blame the consumer in all of this, they bought homes with no money down and then financed it on 2/28's for the most part with indices that fluctuated by as much as 6.5 percentage points- by the way it was disclosed to them, they must sign an adjustable rate rider at closing. I'll throw Bush half the blame, if you'll also therow the sainted middle class the other half for running their own little private hedgefunds( no money down and betting that property values would continue to go up .....forever).
You don't want to see names! You were given Ron Paul..You could also try Rockwell.com Mises.org... almost any free market site! Do a little due diligence dude! Their point is that the United States didn't need to be "delivered." Only 5th graders and the adult needy think they "need" to be delivered. The financial institutions that billions were thrown at have used that money to speculate. My god man..look at the most recent Vanity Fair article on the Bear Sterns garbage..or Rolling Stone... Paulson and others made million..hundreds of millions on either buying Citi stock options or Bear Sterns puts. You really need to try reading something before you come on here with your pathetic hand out for information!
He's Wall Street's butt boy. He was complicit in weakening the financial system which made the meltdown inevitable. He should be in jail just like Rubin, Paulson, Summers, etc. Making him Secretary of the Treasury was a huge mistake, unfortunately not the only one President Obama has made. George Patton
I'm going to keep posting this until the end of the first quarter of 2010. The direction we are going will throw us into a deeper recession than we have seen, even guessed. When the retail sales reports hits the market for the holiday receipts all hell is gonna break loose. If this administration doesn't begin to follow sound advice on the market you are going to see entire malls closing down. The evidence is there and there's nothing but bull headedness keeping the economy in this job slump. Nobody is going to listen to the GOP so you dems had better get on your congressmen and women and make them move.
crypto - As far as I can tell the only difference between the Democratic pols and the Republican pols is the color of the bunting at their parties and dry champagne versus sweet champagne. One taxes and spends, the other borrows and spends.
No argument here.
Too true. Time for Mr. G. to step down.
Well said. Hopefully the Repubs also saved some of their loathing for themselves. They are all complicit in this debockle. They have a single duty to watch out for the people they represent so they need to go sit with Geithner and take their meds.
Way to tell it concisely, whipmawhopma. If only we could re-animate Theodore or Franklin Roosevelt and get their opinion on how the President should behave, vis-a-vis Wall Street's selfish-cretins, during a merely-postponed economic-crisis of this magnitude. I'd bet that the threat of legal-action would be the first thing out of Teddy's mouth if he called the heads of J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs onto the carpet in the Oval Office. "You don't give orders to me, I give them to you." That might put them in their places and stop the spending of $70 million for lobbying against needed reforms (from a government that bailed out their butts and looked the other way on their many crimes, inside-trading and secret derivative insurance-markets). That's how Teddy handled the trusts of his time and that's how Obama needs to act today. Start with bringing in more than just a fall-guy like Geithner and let Paul Volcker have some real power to make decisions that can't be so easily dismissed as radical anti-market ravings by big business. Volcker's got guts and Street-cred and everybody involved knows it and fears him (especially the power-hungry Lawrence Summers). The fact that Obama isn't even considering this tells me all that I need to know about his true agenda. Its simply to give the Street whatever it wants and hope that time and spin will rescue us until 2012. Some strategy, Mr. President. What's more amazing is that being tougher is a political win-win for him (and he's too smart not to know it). It would get him votes from Democrats, Independents and maybe even some disaffected Republicans (who are too clued-in not to know who started rolling up such unsustainable deficits). Instead he'll blame inaction on Congress or Geithner in the long-run. Which leads me to wonder, "what do they have on him, anyway?"
Geithner is one of those highly adept fanny sniffers who looks much smarter than he really is....and Obama bought it. Bush bought Paulson'e line of oversized BS so I suppose that makes it a wash..Make anyone whose a taxpayer feel better that both Bush and Obama are selling you out???? I disagree quite often with people who post here..but I mean this in the most magnanimous spirit a very cynical man such as myself can muster..the next bubble is the TAX bubble. YOU are going to have to pay for these con artists snow jobs and (in Paulson's case) fear mongering. Cover yourselves and be VERY skeptical..whatever you thing the Administration is giving you will be out of someone else's hide..probably yours! We are headed for some extremely challenging times..and it's going to be a wake up call for many that those who they thought were allies and friends aren't.
Georealist - There won't be a tax bubble because the upcoming hyperinflation and resultant devaluation of the dollar will wipe out our debts, along with our savings. I understand what you're saying, but I think it's going to be worse, and if I actually manage to win at PowerBall I'll be converting my winnings from dollars to Euros, Norwegian crowns, and maybe Australian dollars as soon as possible.
You couldn't be more mistaken...again NO due diligence. Hyperinflation won't take place because it depends on Fed reserves being translated into credit and then pyramided upon..That's not happening. It's FAR worse than than hyperinflation..it is the tip of an enormous deflationary implosion. People..ordinary people..State governments..the Feds..can't pay their bills..that means debt default and far more taxes from the Fed...It will include excise taxes on imports...very likely a National sales tax and/or a European style Value Added Tax (VAT). Pay attention..these are the FACTS..the real estate market is 4 times larger than the stock market (both nationally and world wide)..the bond market is 4 times large than the real estate market..IT is the basis for all credit and the existence of governments...No bonds..chaos. As soon as any hint of inflation..let alone hyperinflation... takes place rates will go significantly higher..and markets and money supply will implode. Why is deflation the soup of the day?? Because hyperinflation breeds uncontrollable black markets and takes power out of governmental hands..deflation simply depresses and subdues the populace and allows them to be bought off piecemeal by handouts..kind of a "food and shelter for clunkers" plan.
Please do keep writing about the cabal of Bankers who have destroyed the US Economy on the Mars-Uranus Opposition at 46 degrees....whatever that is supposed to mean. A Banking signal written in the stars? A traditional moment of mugging? When you get a chance don't forget to ask our Nation's Great Lawyers where the Class Action suit is against these Banker's for the crimes they have committed against The People. It would be my guess that the Bankers, when added together, have nearly earned 1% of the grand total that they have cost the rest of us collectively. If you are uncertain as the the full extent of the damage these Bankster's have caused the Nation, just ask the students at Berkley who are 'rumbling' over the 32% increase they have been handed in their Education costs as a result of Goldman Sach's run on the US Treasury and the fallout which has occurred under concentric contraction, which has now spread to the student's at Berkley. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34044243/ns/us_news-education I do so love it when the media and Bankster's play dumb, not knowing suddenly what concentric contraction is, it's effects on The Poeple, and their absolution of responsibility simply because they have been paying everyone off for a lot of years. Goldman Sach's is clearly the dumbest guy in the room using that argument.
While Obama, Barney & Dodd left their own marks on the failed banking system, Geithner and his stimulus package really didn't produce much of nothing except the wrong numbers on jobs created. Now my kids have to pay for this one. Words of wisdom to Geithner, pay your taxes, don't listen to Obama (political) and do the right thing to help us out.
While everyone seems to be panicking about the future and the demise of the U.S> economy, as we have known it, one man, who has been through downturns before and made himself one of the richest men in the world by recognizing and anticipating future trends, he remains confident in the resilience of America and Americans, and he is putting his huge cash reserves to work at this very moment in as he says, " an all in wager on the U.S. economy". I believe as he does the tide is turning. In my own business which depends on the manufacturing and industrial sector for 70% 0f our sales, we are experiencing a surge in volume over the last 2 months and in fact this past week we saw the most sales in a single week in over a year, something is happening large companies are beginning to spend and invest with more confidence. I think a trend is developing and once again Warren is beating the curve.
Obama is the one who should be answering for this - he's the one who nominated Geithner and appointed Summers - his two biggest mistakes as far as I'm concerned. What else would we expect these two multi-millionaire insiders to do but protect their crooked-ass banker cronies?!? And the Republicans have a lot of gaul to say a word considering ole what's his name (Bush's Treasury Sec) did the same darned thing. In fact, what Treasury Secretary isn't in bed with Wall Street - how would you get the job otherwise?!
Interesting comments. So, to sum up then... VOLCKER FOR TREASURY and 3RD PARTY CANDIDATE (MAYBE RON PAUL) IN 2012 Let's hope it's not too late.
Any bets that Sarah Palin is a third-party candidate in 2012, altlic?
For all of the knowledge floating around on this site, no one seems to focus on the obvious. The American Empire has been built by international bankers and will continue to be directed by international bankers. As for blaming Geithner or President Obama, it's easy to pass blame after a catastrophe has been averted. Does anyone recall economist of EVERY political persuasion (with the exception of the liberatarians) saying that the federal government had to act and act quickly? And those who thought the "bailouts" were a bad idea, it is impossible for you to take credit seeing as how the Dow and other major markets have been consistently growing stronger. As far as FDR and his heroics, might I remind you that the depression got worse before massive spending by the government in the form of WAR created jobs. Ron Paul advocates should read about Hubert Humphrey and his inaction. And Republicans have such short memory. Remember your great President Reagan? Now there was a pretty bad recession.
i am really tired of hearing the line "we [democrats] inherited the crises you [republicans] bequeathed this country". i say shut up and do the job you were elected to do. but no, the dem's keep running up the deficit with more bank support, bleeding heart entitlement programs and imperialist undertakings in other lands. (at their peak, the soviets had 150K troops in afghanistan and figured they would need 650K to win, even when they used the cheaper, indiscriminant and more savage "scorch the earth" tactics. now we are going to do the job with our more humanitarian "protect the innocent civilians" tatics using our current 55K troops plus several 10K more added by obama. i hope the mullahs kick our pompous, pontificating, ponderous asses.)
Obama and the far left House democratic leadership feel it is their moral duty to spread the wealth - even if that means crushing wealth creation (everyones wealth creation except their own of course). The 800 billion stimulus would have already started stabilizing unemployment numbers and bringing back jobs if congress had spent the bulk of it on a tax holiday for small businesses - the major source of jobs in this country. Instead, they went on a spending spree for every nut bag far-left pork barrel project imaginable, with a little bit towards long term infrastructure and a lot to prop up mismanaged state budget sink-holes all around the country. Now that the (never let a good crisis go to waste) farce of a "stimulus" has predictably failed to do what it was advertised to do, there is increasing talk of another stimulus focused on helping small businesses and REAL job creation. Good thing they took their sweet time jumping on that job creation thing. After all, its much better having increasing numbers of people on the government dole (sucking tax money) - rather than PUTTING THEM BACK TO WORK (and paying taxes to help balance the budget). The year 2010 is going to be a real screamer for congressional democrats.
Good for Geithner. It is about time someone stood up and faced the pompous elected representatives down who are immune from any repercussions whatsoever speaking from behind a legal shield. Geithner has worked wonders for the US economy and has gained the respect of other countries around the world. This is called credibility, something the Bush administration never had.
Thank you. As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
Sarah Drops the Act
Tina Brown is the founder and editor-in-chief of The Daily Beast. She is the author of the 2007 New York Times best seller The Diana Chronicles. Brown is the former editor of Tatler, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and Talk magazines and host of CNBC's Topic A with Tina Brown.
Congress vs. Obama
Read Full Article »