one of the stories this guy wrote was about alan greenspan. he told this story that a group of wall street executives build a little shrine to alan greenspan with his image and flowers and candles and they would meditate in front of him. what is more amazing that somebody would invent a story like that is nobody noticed that with a phony story. people thought that seems like a reasonable thing somebody might do. something is wrong here. this doesn't make sense in a free society. i want to puncture this bizarre aura around this man and the federal reserve he headed in general. let's talk about a nobel prize winner in economics who actually deserved the prize unlike certain people whose names we won't mentioned until later today. f. a. hayek won the prize for showing that central banks like the fed created by government and nothing without the government granted monopoly privileges destabilize the economy. forget this mythology about what wonderful stabilizing agents they are and since we had the fed, we compare the number of crises we had, has

you know, alan greenspan, in my view, made it a little bit too much like the vatican. he was the pope that he was invaluable, and those people did know anybody else's name. and bernanke came to washington determined he said at the time to follow greenspan's policy, but to be different and greenspan. i call him in the book to be the un-greenspan. to elevate over the character of the chairman. i think actually that was a bit naÏve. but it did help him build a consensus at the fed. so when the time came for him to exert a strong leadership, to push people to do things that they were not entirely comfortable with, he had acquired their trust. i think that in the beginning he seemed kind of awkward in public. >> host: i was with him recently when he gave a speech and i commented to him afterwards, you seem very relaxed compared to a couple of years ago. and he said i've been doing this a lot. >> guest: i think, so he grew into the job. i think we're kind of lucky that this crisis didn't hit in august 2006 when he had been in the job six months. he did have a year to get use

alan greenspan in my view made the fed a little bit too much like the vatican. she was the pope and he was infallible and most people didn't know anybody else man. bernanke came to washington determined, he said at the time, to follow greenspan's policy but to be different the greens entry i call and in the book to be the un-greenspan. i think actually a was a bit naive but it did help him build consensus at the fed so when the time came for him to exert strong leadership to push people to do think they were not entirely comfortable with he had acquired their trust. i think in the beginning he seemed kind of awkward in public like nervous. his hands would shake sometimes. >> host: yes i actually was with him recently when he gave a speech and i commented to him afterwards you seem very relaxed compared to a couple of years ago and he said life in doing this a lot. >> guest: right. i think the -- so he grew into the job. i think we are kind of lucky this crisis didn't hit in august 2006 when he'd been in the top six months. he did have a year to get used to the f

and yet the chairman of the federal reserve system from the late 80's up until a few years ago alan greenspan was treated like a god among men and our financial press and popular culture and television. he was called the maestro, "the new york times" in its typical totalitarian fashion referred to greenspan has the infallible maestro for the financial system. bob woodward, the reporter for "the washington post" supposedly anti-establishment reporter, bob woodward said in the wizard of oz, right away we are off to a creepy start. in the wizard of oz when the man behind the curtain is revealed we are disappointed. but in greenspan we find comfort. just creepy. totally creepy. this is beneath the dignity of a free people for heaven's sake or my favorite example is from the new republic magazine i hope none of you waste your time reading but the new republican a journalist who had a little bit of a problem. he used to make up his stories and other journalists would be wondering why didn't i get that story because it came out of his brain. it didn't actually occur and one of the story is this guy

and this idea comes from alan greenspan. in 1984, before he was fed chairman, he was on an economist panel after the continental illinois rescue. and he said that banks should hold against the losses depending on the type of liabilities that they have. >> do any of the regulators currently have the power to implement the kinds of solutions that you are abdicating? >> well, they -- in the '80s, paul volcker had the power in a convincing clout to convince the fed's to put the old borrowing limits on the junk markets. in the '90s, alan greenspan had so much clout in congress that they took his word for whether unregulated derivatives needed to be regulated or not. so in effect, the fed has been a systemic risk regulator for two decades. where they had a discussion, sometimes they use it properly and sometimes they didn't. where they didn't, they have plenty of gravitas to go to congress and asked for a. so it's not a matter of not enough power. it's a matter of failing to recognize that we need these consistent rules. >> imt in

alan greenspan himself testified.ies of the current crisis or disgraceful aspects of the current crisis is that the congress won't do anything about what was the initiating cause of the crisis. under various administrations, a democrat as well as republican, they have tried to increase housing, and so after a while they were giving no down payment loans to people who didn't have any credit ratings. if that is in an invitation to difficulty it is hard to think of what would be. alan greenspan among other people testified about that. mic cully get the entered prius institutes who had one time was a chief counselor and the white house and the former chief counselor of the treasury, there for a knowledgeable person about this, has spoken over and over again about the dangers coming from fannie mae and freddie mac and how buying these bad mortgages-- the government owns half the bad mortgages produce thunder bad prime loans under sub-prime loans. you know we are going to lose hundreds of billions of dollars and what does t

but before this hostility turned on the federal reserve, when alan greenspan was heading up the federalreserve, there seemed to be admiration or reverence for what mr. greenspan would say. how can this institution be both revered by some people and have distain for mothers? guest: that is easy. when times are good and things are going well, they were great and people like them. when times are bad, as i have been, people say, look, why is the public angry about the puppet of reserve is doing -- they don't like the bailout. they don't like the fact that they are advancing number, the example, ford general motors acceptance corp., they did not like that we advance money to general motors and chrysler and hundreds of billion dollars to aig. they say, why of giving all this money to the bankers and the people who made the problem and nothing to us? host: professor, there seems to be distrust of the federal reserve. can you explain how the board is set up, who serves on the board and how the regional banks are set up? some of you this institution as a secret society. guest: hardly. it is a lo

one was alan greenspan. i contacted him multiple times with multiple sterling recommendations from friends of his. and each time i was told he was too busy to talk with the. once, the secretary told me he would get right back to me. and a day and a half later i got an e-mail saying that he was very busy right now. and he couldn't talk to me that the other one was leonard. >> okay. up there in a purple shirt. hi. will wilkinson of the cato institute. jennifer burns, you had mentioned at one point in your talk that nathaniel branden was responsible for part of the system of the systematization of rand is explicit philosophy. and i've always wondered to what extent objectivism as a system, new, delivered as a complete coherent whole, how much that was a product of nathaniel branden and how much of it was a product of ayn rand? is branden the paul to ayn rand's jesus? [laughter] >> my understanding is that rand had her system pretty much set, even before she met brandon. i mean, there's a lot of people who matte

>> there were two people wanted to interview and could not, one was alan greenspan. i contacted him multiple times with multiple mr. lang recommendations from friends of his, and each time i was told he was too busy to talk with me. once the secretary told me he would get right back to me in a day and a half later i got an e-mail saying that he was very busy right now and he couldn't talk to me. the other one was leonard. >> okay. up there in the purple shirt. >> will wilkinson of the cato institute. jennifer burns, you had mentioned at one point in your talk that nathaniel brandon was responsible for part of the systemization of the randian philosophy. i wonder what system delivered as a complete coherent whole, how much of that was a product of nathaniel brandon and how much of it was a product of >> is brandon the paul two ayn rand's jesus? [laughter] >> good. [laughter] >> mike understanding is that ayn rand had her system pretty much set even be before she met brandon. there is a lot of people who met her in california, young college students. she was already tr

but before this hostility turned on the federal reserve, when alan greenspan was heading up the federaleserve, there seemed to be admiration or reverence for what mr. greenspan would say. how can this institution be both revered by some people and have distain for mothers? guest: that is easy. when times are good and things are going well, they were great and people like them. when times are bad, as i have been, people say, look, why is the public angry about the puppet of reserve is doing -- they don't like the bailout. they don't like the fact that they are advancing number, the example, ford general motors acceptance corp., they did not like that we advance money to general motors and chrysler and hundreds of billion dollars to aig. they say, why of giving all this money to the bankers and the people who made the problem and nothing to us? host: professor, there seems to be distrust of the federal reserve. can you explain how the board is set up, who serves on the board and how the regional banks are set up? some of you this institution as a secret society. guest: hardly. it is a lot

those responsibilities, first by alan greenspan at the fed -- and, by the way, while alan greenspan was at the fed, mr. bernanke was at the fed at the same time during that period of time. the responsibilities are to supervise the banks, to deal with predatory lending, to address some of the scandalous behavior of some of the brokers in the subprime market, and yet they did nothing. all of this went on under their noses. the question for me in dealing with mr. bernanke and other oth, how many times do we have to learn the same lesson? i've been here at a time when the savings and loans collapsed in this country. it wasn't surprising why they collapsed because we had a bunch of folks who used the savings and loans as a big piggy bank. the savings and loans were actually gathering deposits from around the country and they were like roman candles, just taking a small little savings and loan and turning it into a big institution with lots of deposits overnight and then guys like mr. milken were parking junk bonds ensured by the american taxpayers and things collapsed and it cost hundreds an

i think what is antibusiness is this notion of alan greenspan, and let me put up mr. greenspan's quote -- alan greenspan who came to congress after the fact, after the collapse. and heed said, well, i made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their own equity in the firms. his point was, we don't need to regulate. we don't need to oversee anything. self-regulation will work best. they'll be just fine. leave them alone and they'll come home. well, what an unbelievable tragic mistake by the chairman of the federal reserve board. i made a mistake in presuming that self-interest -- self-interest were best capable. it's a suggestion that somehow, you know, capitalism works and count need any regulatory oversight at all because the free market is best left to its own devices. the free market is the best allocator of goods and i'm a big supporter of the free market. i also understand like any other area of competition, you need a referee, someone with a stripe

because guys like dean baker wrote about this a few years ago, and so it is going to happen, alan greenspan and people like that hushed it up were covered it up. if you could comment on that i would appreciate it. >> of the question of besides ignorance and arrogance there's also some greed and corruption and the answer is yes. this crisis is also no different in that regard. and preparing this study, i must have read at least 60 case studies of individual banking crises. and the word corruption motivated by greed comes of time and time again, fraudulent practices connected lending, created a third institution so that institutions -- you can circumvent regulation. regulators that don't regulate, those are not new features to this crisis. i'm very glad you asked this question because i view those as amplifiers. they may not be the root cause of the crisis because the root cause is having a lot of liquidity around and borrowing from the rest of the world in the process. but those practices amplified, make the film much more pronounced and make the crash much more painful, and again we are not

the way i frame it in the book, i start off with alan greenspan, who -- appearing before congress this time last year, and admitting he did have an ideology and it was free market ideology, anybody who has read any of my stuff would know that i make links to ayn rand. he said, this was my ideology, and in this instance it failed. i relied on the bankers and other people in the financial community to not get us in this mess. and the financial market is self-regulating because it's in the interests of bankers to avoid this blowup we have had. it ultimately failed. so, my book is an attempt to explain why it failed, and i -- the way i do this, seeing it as ultimate lay failure of ideas, i trace the free market ideology, where did it come from and how can we explain the crisis through it. so the first part of the book is a history of free market thought, goal -- going all the way back to adam smith. people who studied economics in college and made it through graduate school and graduate school without reading "the wealth of nations. "although everybody claims to have read it but it's 1200

you know, when the former fed chairman was in, alan greenspan was in, there was a saying back in those days called the greenspan put. any time the fed chairman said something, the market saw that as good news and took off. we have just the opposite with this administration. any time this administration comes out and says something about what they plan to do in the future, the market tanks. and it tanks not only for wall street but for the rest of america as well. i think that's very telling as to whether wherethis administration is going to bring us with wall street and well. >> woodruff: what do you think the tanking of the market represents? who do you think is talking? >> i think it's responding to what the administration is propose. the secretary said he wants stability, and youd i and youd p with a great question, saying the market looks for stability in the marketplace, and will this do this? and he missed the answer-- or he didn't give an answer. the market would want stability if they know what the game plan is, they know what the rules are today, and they can live with them an

so the way i frame it in the book is, i start off in alan greenspan who came to be the sort of apotheosis of this free-market ideology. start off with him appearing before congress at this time last year remitting that he did have an ideology and that was a free market ideology at least in one would know that because i've written extensively about this link to ayn rand etc. said everybody has an ideology. this was my ideology and in this instance it failed. relied on the self-interest of the bankers and other people in the financial community to not get into this sort of mess. the argument was financial markets are self regulating because it is in the etesse of bank its to avoid the blow up we have had. greenspan said i believe that was certainly well for 30 years but it ultimately failed so my book is an attempt to explain why it failed hand-- my apologies-- bayway i do this is it is seen as essentially a failure of ideas. i try and trace this free-market ideology, where does a come from, what is the miss out and where can they explain the crisis through so the first of the book is taken

and you should play the archive of alan greenspan when people call in to say how we got here.don't understand why you don't play that. caller: -- 9 host: about the current fed chairman ben bernanke, gathers more support according to a headline in "the wall street journal." majority leader harry reid scheduled a vote thursday to overcome a potential filibuster committing the support of 60 senators to pass. final vote would only require a majority for mr. bernanke to be confirmed again. the dow jones newswires survey showed 52 members supporting the nomination while 19 opposed. the others who have not said how they would vote. on tuesday, senator tom harkin, democrat of iowa, and john ensign of nevada, said it would vote against the nomination and nearly a dozen others made known their support. in new poll found the public split. about 18% said they were positive about mr. bernanke and the same share said the negative. of the rest, 19% call themselves neutral and 45% were unsure. cape cod, massachusetts, bill on the republican line. what did she do you want to hear the president

ben bernanke, alan greenspan, the bankers that control our economy, they have very little interest ine american people. they are about using large sums of money to wield little influence. and the apathy and the lethargy that the american people are attacking this issue with, they seem more concerned with football scores an irrelevancy that the mass media puts in front of them to distract them. front of them to distract them. the only boat out of office every one of these fakes

i think what is antibusiness is this notion of alan greenspan, and let me put up mr. greenspan's quote. alan greenspan who came to congress after the fact, after the collapse and he said well i made a mistake in presuming that the self interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms. his point was we don't need to regulate. we don't need to oversee anything. self regulation will work best. they will be fine. leave them alone and they will come home. what an unbelievable, tragic mistake by the chairman of the federal reserve board. i made a mistake in presuming self-interest, self-interest for this cable. it is a suggestion somehow that capitalism works and you don't need any regulatory oversight adel because the free market is left best left to its own devices. the free market is the best allocator of goods and services i know of by far behind a big supporter of the market. i also understand like any other area of competition you need a referee. somebody with a striped shir

if you don't have enforcement and you have heard some like bernanke and alan greenspan say we reallye should have. it isn't just having the regulation. you have to have a sheriff that is willing to impose that law for it to be affective. we'll continueñr the debate. >> we will. >> i have one question. for the american anti-trust institute which may give a hints what i'm going to ask. you started off talking about privatization and there would be many companies permitted to fail. ok. would they really be permegr to fail? especially if the many companies becomes a few large, countrywide, and a couple of friends. won't we be back in the too big to fail problem or does your solution include some sort of cap on size of the lenders that would be permitted? if not, then aren't you back into the same probable? >> yeah, i think we would be in trouble if we had one or two such institutions that were doing this. once you get to a point where the failure of one or two out of a group of 10 occurs there would be no effect on what is really important and that is the ability to people to finance hom

losing their life savings while wall street fat-cats get their bonuses and even this side of alan greenspan apologizing to a congressional committee for keeping the reins to lose. then came the response from washington which was the least as disconcerting it partially excusable by a pervading sense of panic. by the middle class to the government essentially owns the nation's largest bank, largest insurance company and largest automaker manages substantial part of the financial sector and was declaring winners and losers in massive corporate deals more less ad hoc. meanwhile government spending exploded and lawmakers are busy building new entitlement programs even as our existing ones fall into bankruptcy for. for a moment it seemed as though all this would cause the american people to lose faith in the american economy. last apr scott rasmussen found 53% of americans agreed with the proposition that capitalism was better than socialism. but that moment passed and has been replaced by way of a populist discontent directed as much as government as the market. the defenders of free enterprise

ben bernanke, alan greenspan, the bankers that control our economy, they have very little interest in pursuing a policy that is advantageous to the american people. they are about using large sums of money to wield little influence. and the apathy and the lethargy that the american people are attacking this issue with, they seem more concerned with football scores an irrelevancy that the mass media puts in front of them to distract them. the only way that we are going to get this country back from hardened criminals is to vote out of office every one of these fake people that sit in the house and senate, controlling the interests of the 2% that handle 90% of our wealth her. most of your calls up to 7:45 eastern or so of -- host: your calls up to 7:45 eastern or so. ben bernanke passed to the banking committee late in december and will face a vote in the full senate later this month. "the financial times" writes about which direction the fed is going this year. open-" this year -- "this year the fed will see fighting for its vision of regulation reform, closely allied to that of the ob

instruments, derivatives and -- and collateralized debt obligations instruments and like, even alan greenspan, whether it is -- it is the sanders bill and i'll take a look at that or other approaches, i want us to draw a line in the sand now, and say, we believe in markets. we believe in competition. and we believe in giving people incentives, everybody, a chance to get ahead but we don't buy the idea that if you're big and powerful in the united states. you get to privatize your gains but your losses will be socialized by the taxpayers of the united states. and my watch i'm going to fight that. [applause] i'll have another at some point to do it. i'm going to introduce major tax reform legislation to try to get rid of a lot of the -- the breaks that have gotten into -- interest the tax code. use that to hold down rates and keep progressive. my hope is we could make that bipartisan as well. we started the program with a -- e a little discussion about health. i wanted that to be bipartisan. i'm going to push hard for tax reform around the principles we're talking about today. and stay at it un

i oppose them because they knew he would continue the legacy of alan greenspan and no sway. but i did not know how right i would be and i could not imagine how wrong he would be in the following four years. from monetary policy to regulation, consumer protection, transparency and independence, chairman bernanke's time as fed chairman has been a failure. we must put an end to his and the fed's failure and there is no better time than now. the greenspan legacy on monetary policy was breaking from the taylor rule or -- world to provide easy money and that inflate bubbles. not only did chairman bernanke continue that policy when he took control of the fed, but he supported every greenspan rate decision when he was a fed governor before he came chairman. sometimes even wanted to go further and provide more easy money and chairman greenspan. even to this day, chairman bernanke continues to deny that fed actions played any role in inflating the housing bubble despite overwhelming evidence and the consensus of economists to the contrary. and in his efforts to keep filling the punch

financial collapse and retirees losing life savings while wall street back cats get bonuses even alan greenspan apologizing to the congressional committee for keeping their brains to lose. that washington was just as disconcerting if partially excusable by the panic. the middle of last year the federal government owned the largest bay, insurance company and auto maker and managed a substantial portion of the financial sector and was the clearing winners and losers ad hoc. government spending has exploded a and lawbreakers big -- no the entitlement programs even as the fall into bankruptcy. it seemed this would cause the american people to lose its faith in the economy. rassman said all they found only 30 percent down capitalism was better than of socialism but that past. and has been replaced by populist discontent as much fat the government and as that the market. they should not take too much heart from this because it's just people aren't an easy today but it is not into an argument of capital this them or even a coherent case about the emerging contention in washington. we will need to expl

fought this crisis should help the narrative because i hope this crisis will have discredited the alan greenspan market fundamentalism. i hope this crisis will have set look at the end of the day all you can fall back on his government, that t.a.r.p. and the fiscal package were absolutely essential if the debt negative comes out that this is what -- this society needs that can pave the way for the social consensus that says yes entitlement needs to be controlled, but equally taxes like dat or consumption tax need also to be part of the discourse, and i don't see that to the same extent as i see the emphasis on entitlement. >> you don't see public support for higher taxes? when would you? >> owls i was telling you what struck me about the panel, the medicare panel was that watts of elderly people in this country don't think of medicare as a government program and that is a problem here that needs to be addressed. >> if i could respond briefly, 160 million americans get their health insurance not through medicare and medicaid in this country the tax issue because i agree totally with i believe it

seems to me that a person could be able to stay in the best position for two decades as alan greenspan was. his name was barely mentiond because of his wife being andrea mitchell, which i'm confused about how she can have a political show on a network program but you can't really discuss what happened to this country, and he's a great deal why what happened, happened. i think who should be replaced is just people like rahm emanuel. i think it would be great to have david to replace him as chief of staff, and geithner to be replaced. they have a bad decision. mr. bernanke deserves a chance. he hasn't been in there long enough to make a bad decision. so i think he just needs to have a chance to see what he can do. host: david has an op-ed in "the washington post" tomorrow, but we have an early advancer of it, and the headline says november doesn't need to be a nightmare for democrats. this is stemming from the oonts of this week. this is some of the recommendations that he has. he says, we still have much to do before november and time is running short. every race has unique characterist

crisis actually should help that narrative because i hope this crisis will have discredited the alan greenspanmarket fundamentalism said at the end of the wicked fall back on government, the t.a.r.p. and fiscal package were necessary. and if that comes up that this is what this society needs, that can pave the way for the social consensus that says entitlements need to be controlled, but equally borrowing taxes like vat or consumption tax need to be part of the discourse. and i don't see that to the same extent i see the emphasis on entitlements. >> you don't see public support for higher taxes? when would you? >> as i was telling you what is struck about the panel, the medicare panel is lots of elderly people in this country don't think of medicare as a government program and there is a problem that's gotten into this that needs to be addressed. >> let me respond briefly. 160 million americans get their health insurance not through medicare and medicaid in this country and i want to tie the tax issue because i agree totally with i believe it was the commissioner. we have a tax discussion and

losing their life savings while wall street fat-cats get their bonuses and even this side of alan greenspan apologizing to a congressional committee for keeping the reins to lose. then came the response from washington which was the least as disconcerting it partially excusable by a pervading sense of panic. by the middle class to the government essentially owns the nation's largest bank, largest insurance company and largest automaker manages substantial part of the financial sector and was declaring winners and losers in massive corporate deals more less ad hoc. meanwhile government spending exploded and lawmakers are busy building new entitlement programs even as our existing ones fall into bankruptcy for. for a moment it seemed as though all this would cause the american people to lose faith in the american economy. last apr scott rasmussen found 53% of americans agreed with the proposition that capitalism was better than socialism. but that moment passed and has been replaced by way of a populist discontent directed as much as government as the market. the defenders of free enterprise

alan greensp greenspan, chairman of the federal reserve board. now, he was involved in all of this. now, you know he wrote a book a little later suggesting or implying that he was exploring the surface of the moon or something while all this was going on. but he wasn't. he was actually chairman of the federal reserve board and he had responsibility to provide oversight and to rein in these excesses and he didn't. and here's what he said in the aftermath.in testimony before the congress. he says -- quote -- "i made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms." that notion, that people will behave in their own self-interest and thereby protect the shareholders and protect our country, was pretty unbelievable. because this occurred at the same time that the chairman of the federal reserve board and the federa federal reserve boarf had responsibilities to provide a regulatory oversight to what was going on in our financial system, at the same time th

another former fed chair, my dear friend, alan greenspan, said, if they're too big to fail they're too. similarly, marvin king, governor of the bank of england, in some banks are thought to be too big to fail, then in the words of a distinguished economist, they're too big. i urge my colleagues to help me cut down these scound rells to proper -- scound rales to proper size -- scoundrells to proper size. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. wilson: anonymous, where are the jobs? this is the question i continue to ask the liberal majority since they persist pushing legislation killing jobs. familiar lesion are hurting. particularly in south carolina where the unemployment rate recently jumped to a gruesome 12.6%. the stimulus bill isn't living up to its name and americans realize it. according to a cnn poll released yesterday, americans believe that half of the money spent in the federal spending plan has be

as former federal reserve chairman, alan greenspan, said about our debt in december -- he said this -uote - quote, thig statement, the challenge to contain this threat is more urgent than at any time in our history. our nation has never before had to confront so formidable a fiscal crisis as is now visible just over the horizon. the policies adopted by congress and the president has set the nation on a dangerous course on spending now and borrowing. the budget crisis we face is so severe, the mountain of debt so high, that it threatens to undermine the foundation, as mr. greenspan said of our economic strength and our prosperity. this is reality. for the first time in our nation's history, our generation stands to bequeath to our children a nation that is less economically sound, less fundamentally strong, and less secure than that which we inherited. and it's not necessary. we can do better if we act today. that would be an unthinkable tragedy for us to pass on a less strong country. and, really, a moral failure. because we have responsibilities not just to our own people today, bu

i opposed him because i knew he would continue the legacy of alan greenspan, and i was right.olicy to regulation, consumer protection, transparency, and independence, chairman bernanke's time as fed chairman has been a failure. we must put an end to his and the fed's failure, and there is no better time than now. the greenspan legacy on monetary policy was breaking from the tailor rule to provide easy money and, thus, inflate bubbles. not only did chairman bernanke continue that policy when he took control of the fed, but he supported every greenspan rate decision when he was a fed governor before he became chairman. sometimes he even wanted to go further and provide more easy money than chairman greenspan. yet even to this day, chairman bernanke continues to deny that fed actions played any role in inflating the housing bubble, despite overwhelming evidence and the consensus of economists to the contrary. and in his efforts to keep filling the punch bowl, which is a term used by chairman bernanke himself, he cranked up the printing presses to buy mortgage securities, treasury

alan greenspan, the former chairman of the federal reserve, said that the recommendations of senator gregg and senator conrad for a bipartisan fiscal task force is an excellent idea and that he hopes that we succeed. douglas holtz eaken, the chief economic adviser to senator mccain in his presidential bid said this in testimony before the senate budget committee just last year, i am a reluctant convert. i have always felt this is congress's job and, quite frankly, it ought to just do it. that attitude has earned me no friends and gotten us no action. so i've come around to the point where i'm in favor of something that is a special legislative procedure to get this legislation in front of congress and passed. and mr. geithner, the secretary of the treasury said this in testimony before the budget committee last year, it is going to require a different approach if we're going to solve the long-term fiscal imbalance. it's going to require a fundamental change in approach because i don't see realistically how we're going to get there through the existing mechanisms. and david walker, th

i oppose you because i knew you would continue the legacy of alan greenspan, and i was right. but i did not know how right i would be. and could not imagine how wrong you would be in the following four years. greenspan legacy on monetary policy was breaking from the taylor rule to provide easy money, and thus, in place bubbles. not only did you continue that policy when you took control of the fed, but you supportive every greenspan rate decision when you were on the fed earlier this decade. sometimes even want to go farther to provide easier money than chairman greenspan. a recent -- as recently as a letter you sent me two weeks ago, you still refuse to admit that action played any role in inflating the housing bubble, despite the overwhelming evidence and the consensus of economists to the contrary. and in your effort to keep fail -- keep filling the poncho, you crank up the printing presses to buy mortgage securities, treasury securities, commercial paper, and other assets from wall street. those purchases by the way led to some nice profits, before the wall street banks, a

underregulation, retirees losing life savings while wall street fat cats get their bonuses even sight of alan greenspanpologizing to congressional committee for keeping the reins too loose. then came the response from washington which was at least disconcerting if partially excusable by the prevailedding sense of panic. by middle last year the federal government essentially owned the nation's largest bank, largest insurance company, and largest automaker. managed a substantial portion of the financial sector and was declaring winners and losers in massive corporate deals more or less ad hoc. meanwhile government spending has exploded and lawmakers are busy building new entitlement programs even as existing ones fall into bankruptcy. for a moment, it seemed as though all of this would cause the american public to lose its faith in the market economy. last april the pollster scott rasmussen found only 53% of the americans agreed with the proposition that capitalism was better than socialism. but that moment passed. has been replaced by a wave of populist discontent directed as much as government than the