Incompétent! Incompétent! Incompétent!

Is the thought, frequently expressed, that the current crisis is so far-ranging and complicated, only those who botched the management the first go-round have anything close to the expertise required to clean up the mess.

Glenn, do you ever get that "canary in the coal mine" feeling?

As, I recall, they generally didn't come to a good end.

I once had a friend tell me I was the most skeptical person she had ever met. I responded, "I doubt that."

So, I guess, what I'm asking in a roundabout way... Are the good journalists the ones who think they might NOT be writing the truth? It goes both ways of course. As you write something, you wonder if the reverse is the actual truth. Praise someone => degrade someone? Which is closer to being true? Well, that's based on context of course. But, does that not mean that the author would look to make sure he or she has defined that context well enough?

Looking forward to the revisionism to come, in which Cheney is again seen to be as cool as a cucumber and as prescient as a Greek oracle. I think someone else posted a link to a Rumsfeld op-ed in the NYT a few days ago, where he basically took credit for the surge, but none of his failures (which were caused by bad humours or something).

What I also find ironic is how little attention is payed to the Clinton era's role in all this mess, and especially the dot com bubble that preceeded and fed it. No wonder we go round so much.

Would be the one who doesn't necessarily believe (or need to believe) any of the parties or perspectives involved.

Thank god for Dean Baker.

I fear that we may not return to the quasi-adversarial relationship between business and regulation that has marked the most prosperous periods in this country's history until we dismantle this Cult of Competence whose high priests insist that the best bureaucrats aren't really bureaucrats at all but former executives in--or at least people extremely knowledgeable about and sympathetic to the needs of--the very industries they seek to "regulate."

On simple conflict of interest grounds, no one could be less suitable for a regulatory post. And most of these people are so blinkered by the parochial needs, feuds and individual careers of the colleagues in their respective industries that they are, in addition, hopelessly incompetent. Henry Paulson is the quintessence of a Cult of Competence bureaucrat.

But between too much trust and reverence on the one hand, and too much skepticism on the other, the last eight years should have taught -- but don't seem to have -- that the former is far more dangerous than the latter.

what many are too willing to give to Obama. Tell him what he needs to do.

I find it more than puzzling in the normal course, but it's especially disappointing, after the past eight years, to find so many so willing to invest so much trust in a politician (let alone a politician's politician, as Mr. Obama presents).

The U.S. should be a nation of doubting Thomases and every state should be a "Show Me" state...

Major oversight on the part of Newsweek, which Roubini pointed out on his blog:

http://www.rgemonitor.com/roubini-monitor/254560/newsweek_interview_even_dr_doom_likes_them_and_a_cnbc_interview

Roubini worked for Summers and with Geithner at the back-end of the Clinton years. A point Roubini apparently made clear to Newsweek but they in turn failed to mention.

But yeah, even with this caveatm, of all the experts worth opining on this team, Roubini is arguably the most relevant.

1. "Glenn, why don't you give Obama a chance before ripping him a new butthole?!?!??"

2. "Glenn, why did you support Obama since he's clearly a tool of the money elite?!??!!?"

There, that should pre-empt a hundred posts at least...

Dear Mr. Greenwald:

How in God's name can you write an article like this one after responding the way you did to my request for more information about Eric Holder?

Once again, if you are not willing to explain further why you consider your evaluation to be superior to Lardner's, then at least tell me where I can find my own evidence to decide which of you is in the right.

Sincerely,

Michael English

Anglia123@comcast.net

Who in their right mind could state that the corporate media is worth a damn.

We could use lessons from the old-time Solviets who knew how to parse the utterances of Pravda and TASS to decode the doublespeak.

ALso, I seem to recall Richard Cheney appointing himself as veep - his looking around and ended up in front of a mirror.

the dim son had nothing to do with it.

This is just like waterboarding, isn't it? The water comes down and all you can think about is stopping the water and getting a breath, return me, please, please, to my stinking, dark, tomblike cell.

Oh, yeah, we're gonna end wars, stop torture, end illegal detention, stop keeping files on each other, and build the new Jerusalem.

But first, let's fix the economy, it's priority number one. It is absolutely priority one to restart the economy, to return it to the state it was in before the meltdown. Never mind that that state was killing children from too much consumption of factory created bad food. Never mind that it was top heavy with greed and inequity, that there was more debt than real money world wide, that the consumption was causing a permanent form of killing pollution damage to the planet, that the pervasiveness of advertisement and propaganda has crippled judgment and turned people into consumption machines, willing early gravers that smiled as they turned over all of the money they'd earned to interest on a home equity loan or "rent" on a TV satellite dish, that the rampant natalism was populating the planet unto death, that the species were being fished clean from the oceans to feed people way more calories than they could stand, that everything was based on a constant growth that was unsustainable, but necessary for health care costs and billionaire's salaries.

We'll fix all that once we get it running again.