Seeking Alpha

On a day expected to be full of bruises for Bernanke, the statement from Sen. Jim Bunning - the...

On a day expected to be full of bruises for Bernanke, the statement from Sen. Jim Bunning - the only senator who voted against the Fed chairman's original confirmation four years ago - is still a standout, calling Bernanke's Fed a "creature from Jekyll Island" and going on: "Rather than making management, shareholders, and debt holders feel the consequences of their risk-taking, you bailed them out. In short, you are the definition of moral hazard."
Comments (13)
  • Capitalisim?
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
     
    The whole fed system is the downfall of capitalisim. It socialized risk, bailed out companies that capitalisim would have let die. We are NOT a capitalistic society. We are socialist for the poor and the rich.. the middle pays for both.
    3 Dec 2009, 03:19 PM Reply Like
  • a fat panda
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    "Rather than making management, shareholders, and debt holders feel the consequences of their risk-taking, you bailed them out. In short, you are the definition of moral hazard."

     

    Kentucky 1. Rest Of The Senate 0.
    3 Dec 2009, 03:23 PM Reply Like
  • MarketGuy
    , contributor
    Comments (3983) | Send Message
     
    Bunning will be greatly missed. He is an air freshener in a stinking pile of crap.
    3 Dec 2009, 03:27 PM Reply Like
  • Machiavelli999
    , contributor
    Comments (829) | Send Message
     
    I find these words so disengenous coming from Bunning. He talks about the Fed not following the Taylor rule in his speech, well the Taylor rule now says rates should be -4%. Yes, that's MINUS 4%.

     

    He talks about the Fed not doing its job on consumer protection, but I am going to guess that he is going to vote against the establishment of a consumer financial protection agency.

     

    In short, he throws out some populist jingo to get the lapdogs (like most the readers here) to yell "Hooorah!" but in fact he was just as much a part of the problem as everyone else.
    3 Dec 2009, 03:40 PM Reply Like
  • nightfly
    , contributor
    Comments (1017) | Send Message
     
    MarketGuy. I completely agree. He and Ron Paul are the only reasons to continue to believe that govt isn't all bad and owned by Wall Street.

     

    What happened to our revolutionary ways/heritage. I couldn't imagine our grandfathers putting up with crap like helicopter Ben's.
    3 Dec 2009, 03:41 PM Reply Like
  • DrBenway
    , contributor
    Comments (300) | Send Message
     
    GM shareholders got 0, GM bondholders got raped by the goverment, GM CEO got fired, so apart from these little pesky facts he is absolutely right. The only people who got bailed out are bankers and unions, but they gave the senators generously so you get what you pay for.

     

    The kudos go to Bunning's speech writer who made this fool sound knowledgeable by putting "Taylor rule", CDS, haircuts , etc. in his speech. The senator's less than illustrious career is summarized here :

     

    www.time.com/time/nati...

     

    On Dec 03 03:23 PM a fat panda wrote:

     

    > "Rather than making management, shareholders, and debt holders feel
    > the consequences of their risk-taking, you bailed them out. In short,
    > you are the definition of moral hazard."
    >
    > Kentucky 1. Rest Of The Senate 0.
    3 Dec 2009, 03:47 PM Reply Like
  • Tom Au, CFA
    , contributor
    Comments (6780) | Send Message
     
    Jim Bunning was a straightshooter decades ago when he pitched for Pennsylvania's Philadelphia Phillies and Pittsburgh Pirates, and he is a straightshooter today.
    3 Dec 2009, 03:52 PM Reply Like
  • enigmaman
    , contributor
    Comments (2686) | Send Message
     
    That statement and 2.75 will get you a latte at Starbucks, good for him but good for nothing because nothing will come of it, these hearing are just formalities, a forum for politicians to pander to their constituents, as each comes up for re election vote them out, its time to start over, 2012 vote our Obama so he can retire and hand with his peers Carter, Castro, Chavez
    3 Dec 2009, 04:00 PM Reply Like
  • The shark
    , contributor
    Comments (159) | Send Message
     
    I watched as much of the "show" as possible. Whatever you may think about Big "B's" policies I cannot but feel sorry for him been "grilled" by people who are clearly his intellectual inferiors.

     

    The lack of real insight shown by your Senate Committee Members is scary - I am not sure I would employ one of them.

     

    Whilst I have great admiration for President Obama, who I think under different circumstances could have been the much needed great Statesman of our generation; his current Administration task with today's realities seem completely at sea.

     

    If your Company was in BIG trouble, you would pull together the brains trust; develop a well thought through plan of action - built on short term (stop the bleeding - quick wins) with integrated medium and longer term strategic goals and performance measures - you would then address all your employees to explain the current difficulties (openly without holding back any punches) and the steps needed to ensure survival through the short term storm. You would also sketch out the desired medium term goals - you would critically want to maintain and show strong leadership and ensure your employees remained confident that you had a workable plan. You would over communicate on progress AND short falls on a regular basis so everyone had the correct information at all times.

     

    You would not throw out random "incentives" such as cash for clunkers; household energy allowances; tax rebates to indebt yourself even more; encourage risk and speculation by your Financial Department; ask your employees for ideas (the job creation summit) and you would not "mask" the difficulties ahead. Bearing in mind that people need consistent, reliable and clearly understandable guidance you would ensure your Executive is consistent in it's communication and you would ensure any "gives" add value and are sustainable. Lastly, you would be very clear on what can and WILL be done to support those that are made redundant / retrenched during this process - within reason and within accepted standards. You would not be adding additional funding pressures to the Company until the storm passes (free medical for all - no matter how ethical the proposed initiative).

     

    People would follow - accept the current hard times - confident that it will pass - and more importantly confident that your leadership will prevail. I am not sure any of today's Global Leadership instill this level of confidence - so if the situation worsens the fall out will be exponential. Lets hope the current signs of recovery take hold and despite "confused" leadership we get through this storm quickly.
    3 Dec 2009, 04:06 PM Reply Like
  • woollyB
    , contributor
    Comments (1019) | Send Message
     
    It's all just hot air, but that was the best hot air I read all day.
    3 Dec 2009, 04:07 PM Reply Like
  • Teutonic Knight
    , contributor
    Comments (2359) | Send Message
     
    The question that members of the senate panel should ask themselves before they cast that vote is this:

     

    "Is he the only (only in italics) person in the whole wide world of the economic and banking community of the USA that is most qualified, willing, and able to do the job?"

     

    I don't doubt his willingness, since he volunteered to stay on and got nominated, despite his inch thick face skins, like the Chinese saying.

     

    Is he qualified, or would there be an equally or more qualified person, out of perhaps hundreds of such candidates?

     

    Is he able based on his past 4-year track record?

     

    The answers to the last two questions are "Blowing in the Wind".
    3 Dec 2009, 04:40 PM Reply Like
  • davidbdc
    , contributor
    Comments (3181) | Send Message
     
    Can't criticize Bunning too much since he voted against Bernanke the first time around. Was he playing to the crowd? yes, but he also hit the mark with some of his statements.

     

    Bernanke is definately a part of the crowd that led us to this financial meltdown. He also probably did a good job for us once we were at that point. To me the question is do we believe he will continue to perform in the country's best interest and get us completely out of this mess? I don't have the answer to that question, and I doubt it will really be debated - unfortunately.

     

    Personally, I'd like to see Bernanke, Frank, and Dodd all fired for being complicant in this fiasco.....and fire Summers as well - how does that guy continue to hang around?
    3 Dec 2009, 06:13 PM Reply Like
  • a fat panda
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    I am puzzled by the criticism of Bunning here. It isn't like he is the one who has been asleep at the wheel. Bitching about how he may or may not treat Congressional staffers, when the subject is Ben Bernanke is a little like complaining about his choice in socks on a day when he threw a shutout. Whether his criticisms are well phrased or written by a third party seems a little beside the point. The point is that the criticism was well justified.
    3 Dec 2009, 11:16 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs