Wednesday, February 11, 2009

The administration's hypocrisy on "bold, quick action"

For regulars here, you know that for a few months now, I've repeatedly tried to demonstrate that Taxman Tim Geithner is opposed to transparency. He's a typical Washington politician... he thinks he's smarter than you and me. For examples of his opposition to transparency, see here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

But now I see Geither proving himself to be a hypocrite... and he's making his boss look bad too.

On September 21, 2008, John Harwood interviewed Presidential-candidate Obama:

HARWOOD: You've been briefed on this plan the Treasury is putting forward, working out with Congress. How confident are you that this is going to work?

Sen. OBAMA: Regardless of how we got there, we now have a situation where people's jobs, people's savings, people's retirement accounts, their job security, all that is at risk. And so we've got to take some firm and decisive steps. I think that it has to be bold, and I am supportive of the need for quick action

Obama voted for Bush's Bailout. So I conclude he felt there would be "bold, quick action" taken. And remember... Obama ran on judgment.

Fast forward to February 10, 2009 and Tim Geithner announced his plan to save the world:

Mindful of previous financial crises at home and abroad that became protracted because governments moved too slowly, Mr. Geithner pointedly criticized the Bush administration for not acting boldly and quickly enough. (NYTimes, By EDMUND L. ANDREWS and STEPHEN LABATON)

So just prior to Taxman Tim's first big announcement, he blamed Bush for not acting "boldly and quickly enough." Of course, that means that Obama must've shown poor judgment in supporting Bush's bailout... but that's a different story.

And now on February 11, 2009... one day after Taxman Tim started circling the wagons because he forgot to mention where he was going to find $1 trillion in private investments... we hear the backpeddling begin:

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told Congress he needs time to work out the details of his strategy to shore up the financial industry, a day after stock traders punished the initial outline.

“I completely understand the desire for details and commitments,” Geithner told lawmakers today at the Senate Budget Committee in Washington. “But we’re going to do this carefully, consult carefully, so we don’t put ourselves in the position again” where there are “quick departures and changes in strategy,” he said. (Bloomberg News, by Rebecca Christie and Rich Miller)

So maybe Paulson and Bush weren't such screwups?

Ummm... nope. On economic policy, Paulson and Bush were catastrophes... just as history will show Obama and Geithner to be catastrophes.

All four of them continue to refuse admit the failure of fiat money. For Obama and Geithner to succeed, they need to first acknowledge the failure of fiat money. Then they must stop the printing presses and begin to restore confidence to the US dollar.

And for anyone who doubts the ability of The Fed to print money at the behest of President Obama... see the above NYTimes piece for this quote:

Administration officials committed to flood the financial system with as much as $2.5 trillion — $350 billion of that coming from the bailout fund and the rest from private investors and the Federal Reserve, making use of its ability to print money.

Yup. Even the NYTimes openly acknowledges that The Fed prints money at will.

If I did that, I'd be in jail. It's called counterfeiting.

Tim White

Btw, although I want Geithner gone asap... I still like Obama on foreign policy, such as talking with Iran. I just hope Obama stops drinking the kool-aid being given him by Geithner. It's a total mistake.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Tim, Tim ,Tim:

You can't finance a socialist regime on sound money. Stop thinking Obama would ever think your way on this