http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/let_them_eat_keller_20111020/

Let Them Eat Keller


By  <http://www.truthdig.com/robert_scheer> Robert Scheer

Funny, he doesn't look like Marie Antoinette. But when former New York Times
Executive Editor Bill Keller
<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/17/opinion/keller-good-news-no-really.html>
asks his readers if they are "bored by the soggy sleep-ins and warmed-over
anarchism of Occupy Wall Street," it displays the arrogance of disoriented
royal privilege.  

Perhaps his contempt for anti-corporate protesters was honed by the example
of his father, once the chairman of Chevron. In any case, it is revealing,
given the cheerleading support that the Times gave to the radical
deregulation of Wall Street that occurred when Keller was the managing
editor of the newspaper.

As the Times reported on its news pages in 1998, heralding the merger that
created Citigroup as the world's largest financial conglomerate: "In a
single day, with a bold merger, pending legislation in Congress to sweep
away Depression-era restrictions on the financial services industry has been
given a sudden, and unexpected, new chance of passage." 

The report all too breathlessly continued, "Indeed, within 24 hours of the
deal's announcement, lobbyists for insurers, banks and Wall Street firms
were huddling with Congressional banking committee staff members to
fine-tune a measure that would update the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act separating
commercial banking from Wall Street and insurance. ."

The "fine-tuned" law, combined with another one similarly drafted by
congressional Republicans and also signed by Democratic President Bill
Clinton, exempted trading in collateralized debt obligations and credit
default swaps from government regulation. That was the very action that
enabled the banking crisis that has brought the nation's economy to its
knees and protesters to Wall Street. Citigroup, where Clinton's treasury
secretary and deregulation advocate Robert Rubin ended up as chairman,
specialized in what proved to be toxic mortgage-backed securities and had to
be bailed out with massive taxpayer credits.

One would think that the failure of The New York Times to cover this sorry
tale as it was unfolding would leave Keller with some humble understanding
of why protesters, undeterred by rain, should be celebrated rather than
scorned. But such accountability has hardly been a hallmark of those in the
media or in business and political circles, who with few exceptions got it
so wrong. 

Just how wrong was laid out in the Tuesday night Republican debate by Ron
Paul, whose consistent libertarian critique has been refreshing throughout
the banking meltdown. Other presidential candidates stumbled over their
earlier support of the TARP banking bailout, and one of them, Herman Cain,
responding to a question about Occupy Wall Street, stuck by his statement
"don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks, if you don't have a
job, you're not rich, blame yourself."

Paul took him on with a clarity that plainly endorsed the main point of the
Wall Street demonstrators: "Well, I think that Mr. Cain has blamed the
victims." Paul pointed to the true culprits, those on Wall Street and their
partners in crime in the government and the Federal Reserve, who bailed out
the banks but not the people they victimized. 

"The bailouts came from both parties," Paul observed, adding, "Guess who
they bailed out? The big corporations, the people who were ripping off the
people in the derivatives market. . But who got stuck? The middle class got
stuck . they lost their jobs, and they lost their houses.  If you had to
give money out, you should have given it to the people who were losing it in
their mortgages, not to the banks."

It was heartening that many in the Republican crowd cheered Paul's
statement, as it was earlier this week when the respected Quinnipiac poll
found that "By a 67-23 percent margin, New York City voters agree with the
views of the Wall Street protesters." Despite the inconvenience of the
protests to New Yorkers, the poll showed that by a 72-24 percent margin
voters of that city say the protesters should be allowed to stay at their
Wall Street location "as long as they wish."  

That's an admirable sentiment on the part of New Yorkers, which was echoed
by Times readers who directed a torrent of criticism at Keller. He pointed
out on his blog that they took issue with what he referred to as "my
slightly snarky reference to Occupy Wall Street. Okay, maybe not 'slightly.'
" He now claims he didn't intend to show contempt for the protesters, but
that is exactly what he did. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to