DougJ summed this up just about perfectly:
I have nothing special against Bernanke. I think he probably deserves credit for averting financial catastrophe.
But this is a pretty strong signal that elite media still worships the architects of our awesome financial system. Some things never change.
Though, ...given the alternative...
5 comments:
As I said at Toast's place, it's not an award, so I don't see how it's a signal that anyone worships anything.
From Wikipedia, it goes to someone or something that "for better or for worse, ...has done the most to influence the events of the year."
If you read the Editor's essay onwhy they chose him, it's pretty clear this is an affirmative pick.
It's still a bit too heavy on the "best and brightest" / guru / savior for me.
If they chose "Wall Street" and did a scathing exposé, I'd believe they had it closer to right.
Seems like this is a 2008 award, not 2009.
I've seen nothing from the government (any branch) that even approaches what we need: complete oversight into the Fed, and monies to be approved as all monies - through the legislative branch. There are one or two rabble rousers in the House but nothing in the way of leadership.
And McCrystal as #2? It was a really odd year.
Post a Comment