In an Unusual Moment of Clarity – Michele Bachmann Gets it Right Once

They say the even crazy people can be right at lease once and this time it has been our darling crazy,  Michele Bachmann.

Ms. Bachmann voted against the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) “both times,” she boasts, and she has no regrets since Congress “just gave the Treasury a $700 billion blank check.” She complains that no one bothered to ask about the constitutionality of these extraordinary interventions into the financial markets. “During a recent hearing I asked Secretary [Timothy] Geithner three times where the constitution authorized the Treasury’s actions, and his response was, ‘Well, Congress passed the law.'”

Insufficient focus on constitutional limits to federal power is a Bachmann pet peeve. “It’s like when you come up to a stop sign and you’re driving. Some people have it in their mind that the stop sign is optional. The Constitution is government’s stop sign. It says, you–the three branches of government–can go so far and no farther. With TARP, the government blew through the Constitutional stop sign and decided ‘Whatever it takes, that’s what we’re going to do.'”

Does this mean she would have favored allowing the banks to fail? “I would have. People think when you have a, quote, ‘bank failure,’ that that is the end of the bank. And it isn’t necessarily. A normal way that the American free market system has worked is that we have a process of unwinding. It’s called bankruptcy. It doesn’t mean, necessarily, that the industry is eclipsed or that it’s gone. Often times, the phoenix rises out of the ashes.”

It became apparent that the main reason for TARP was NOT to save our banks, per se’ but to save those of Europe or more specifically the European Union.

A congressional watchdog criticized, Thursday, the US government’s handling of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), which was set up as a $700 billion rescue fund for ailing local financial firms in 2008, saying it aided banks in foreign countries more than rescue programs of other countries helped US businesses.

The Congressional Oversight Panel accused, Thursday, the US Treasury of mishandling TARP money, saying that foreign banks received far more help from the US rescue effort than local financial firms did.

The panel cited, for instance, the rescue case of troubled insurer American International Group (AIG). Even as the US government “bore the entire $70 billion risk of the AIG capital injection program,” banks in France and Germany turned out to be the biggest beneficiaries, the panel said.

But this will not succeed any more than it did here as we watch EU member states fold under weight of the debt incurred by their own financial follies and the greed and opportunism of the self same banks. TARP did not then save the economy but rather postponed the consequences of the  laissezfaire economics of the last 3 decades.  I do not agree with anything else that either Bachmann or any of there other Teabagging right wing comes up with. In this one case though, her assessment is pretty much spot one.  But then it is also said that an infinite number on monkeys will eventually come up with a script to Desperate Housewives.


5 thoughts on “In an Unusual Moment of Clarity – Michele Bachmann Gets it Right Once

  1. This entire episode is global in scope. However, it is largely a product of U.S. financial entities. Specifically, Wall Street banks and investment houses.

    Remember first that the entire thing is a corrupt enterprise. Investment banks changed their charters to being commercial banks at the drop of a hat when all this happened so they all of a sudden fell under a completely different regulatory category and thus became eligible for TARP funds. And Washington and our regulators allowed it without even blinking. What a sham.

    The real issue is congress has yet to enact any legislation that prevents this happening again. Worse still is almost all the persons who were party to having made the mess are still there, both in government and in the private sector. And as a final stick in the eye banks and mortgage lenders etc have run rough shod over borrowers. This is unbelieveable. There are people who needed to be in jail but instead have been allowed to continue their criminal operations.

    The main reason for any of this is Washington and Wall Street understand beyond a shadow of doubt there is no way to actually bring in new people to examine and unravel this. They know that there would be some serious charges laid if this were to happen.

    1. cmaukonen

      Oh we cannot take all the credit for this. Deutsche Bank, the Swiss and the London Bankers/Swindlers had a lot to do with it.

      1. They sure did. They were perfectly fine with buying all the crap mortgage securities their US banking counterparts were selling. They were essentially followers who knew they were buying crap.

        But they weren’t worried. They understood full well that U.S. banking regulators and congress would never let a banking bet go sour if events went that way. No matter how big the cost to U.S taxpayers.

        And they also knew it made not one bit of difference who was in the WH. They understood beyond a shadow of doubt the occupant of the oval office is bought and paid for by Wall Street. Obama got the biggest single portion of his campaign money from Wall Street. Which has been the precise pattern in the last eight general elections. Ever since Reagan we have had this ‘coincidence’. Citizens United hasn’t changed the outcome of things one bit. It did modify things though. Now our European friends and anybody else can donate to the cause.

        1. My only issue concerns OUR corporations, OUR banks….

          WE do not have anything, these are world corporations. so in the end WE bailed out world companies; not American companies.

          I think we have to change our corporate charters. You cannot operate a corporation without a charter! We could set rules right in the charters.

          What do I know?

          1. I agree 100% Dick. Our corporations are nation state neutral. We need very much to examine and change accordingly our relationship with them.

            There is a problem though. We need them. They don’t need us. They can take their show anywhere they want. Corporations have been playing political entities off of one another for a long time. Many political entities haven’t figured this out. Companies in the U.S. moved factories to southern states and got attractive tax subsidies. Then they moved to Mexico and then to China.

            Corps (including banks) have too much power. Politicians are terminally stupid. Start there.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s