Home | About | Donate

'Did You Have Your Eyes Stitched Closed?' Warren Blasts Former Fed Official


#1

'Did You Have Your Eyes Stitched Closed?' Warren Blasts Former Fed Official

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

At a Senate Banking Committee hearing on Tuesday—which was described as "little more than another attempt to rail against Wall Street regulation"—U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren spent seven minutes tearing into former Federal Reserve deputy director Leonard Chanin, a man she said "might have one of the worst track records in history on this issue."


#3

"No hard data presented to the Fed..." I threw shoes at my TV when Greenscam would mealy-mouth his way through his policies and by 2003-2004 I was imploring my friends to not buy houses. I have no formal training in business, unless watching the screwing of America counts. It's "hard data" when taken up the ass, Mr. Chanin.


#4

Greenspan should have stuck with his clarinet playing......


#5

Or his Randy endeavors...


#6

Watching this beltway scum slither around Senator Warren's questions is a sight to behold. I think about how his managerial class has become like machines. A machine does what's told by its masters and has no feelings. It endlessly repeats the same message and does the same thing. Add AI to this mix. Now the machine uses its analytical skills to defend itself but because it is a machine still has no feelings towards others. Is it a sociopath? Is this beltway worm a sociopath? Are many of the managerial class in government and business sociopaths? Is the form of indoctrination that young people get in schools of management really more like training people to be soulless machines? Skilled with words and modes of thought that are like machines.


#7

Love the rhetoric. I believe Dr. Warren may have taken Leonard out of his "safe space."


#8

Excuse me, but Warren said some harsh words to Chanin?! That's the big news?! She "blasted" him? One assumes he, to paraphrase the old saying, was dreadfully embarrassed all the way to the bank.


#9

Insofar as expressing, "No hard data [was] presented to the Fed...", is implied "soft" data was "presented to the Fed..."? If so, why did not "the Fed" pursue the indications of the soft data with more intense study to determine if "hard data" supported the "soft data"? Even further, who did not present "hard data ... to the Fed"? The Fed's staff? Outside sources? Who? Indeed, did "the Fed" even seek data, let alone "hard data"? Chanin, who is now employed by a large investment firm, left open many questions about his and the Fed's behavior in the lead up to the 2008 crash.


#10

perhaps a viewing of the "Big Short " would refresh his hard data bank ,, or maybe stitch his eyes "wide open"


#11

Hard Data 12' X 16' cement, no carpet w/bars is hard data, the country is a ghetto from there being no-hard-data. I'm sorry, don't mean to be rude, just sick of being screwed.


#12

Plus it's just great to see Mrs. Greenspan on TV-that never gets old.


#13

If only we had more pols like Warren.

And, the two mugs behind Chanin nicely back up his lack of remorse.


#14

Yes, they are. Its government by sociopath. Although they only make up 5% of the population, they love to work in govt. and are way over-represented there. Where else can you lie, cheat and steal and never be called out for your crimes? Oh...and Elizabeth is a goddess.


#15

She should have thrown a shoe while she was at it.

Maybe she would have gotten lucky, hit his head and stimulated a few neurons to fire.


#16

Awesome woman. I would vote for her, just not Hillary. In fact I think if Sanders wins she should be his vice president. Wow what a winning ticket for them and this country.


#17

eyes stitched wide open

With apologies to Burning Man and the bighairmonkey Trojan horse


#18

No politician has more fingerprints on financial industry deregulation and regulator dilution than the Clintons do.

Eight figure annual corporate speaking fee income ($17 million for Bill in 2013 alone) and corporate donations to the family foundation confirm a stellar return on investment for the Clintons.