Rolling Stone on AIG

I could do without the vulgarities.  And I am not sure how you could spend multiple paragraphs blasting late-90s financial deregulation laws without once mentioning the name “Clinton”.  I guess Phil Gramm somehow signed all that legislation into law himself.  And I do not quite understand how, when Democrats accept hundreds of millions of dollars from Wall Street to pass said legislation, it is actually the Republicans’ fault.

But hey, what do you expect from Rolling Stone?  Someday, the internal contradictions in the heads of these young idealistic lefties — God bless them — will boil over and fully-baked critical minds will emerge.  Maybe.

Meanwhile, everything else about this article is really quite excellent.  It does a great job of explaining to a young audience what is really going on with these financial bail-outs.

The Big Takeover (Rolling Stone)

I strongly recommend the entire article.  To whet your appetite, I will quote from the end:

The most galling thing about this financial crisis is that so many Wall Street types think they actually deserve not only their huge bonuses and lavish lifestyles but the awesome political power their own mistakes have left them in possession of. When challenged, they talk about how hard they work, the 90-hour weeks, the stress, the failed marriages, the hemorrhoids and gallstones they all get before they hit 40.

“But wait a minute,” you say to them. “No one ever asked you to stay up all night eight days a week trying to get filthy rich shorting what’s left of the American auto industry or selling $600 billion in toxic, irredeemable mortgages to ex-strippers on work release and Taco Bell clerks. Actually, come to think of it, why are we even giving taxpayer money to you people? Why are we not throwing your ass in jail instead?”

Unrelated: Check out this movie trailer.  Looks like a truly epic film.

5 comments to Rolling Stone on AIG

  • I do not quite understand how, when Democrats accept hundreds of millions of dollars from Wall Street to pass said legislation, it is actually the Republicans’ fault.

    The article says: “The law passed 90-8 in the Senate, with the support of 38 Democrats, including some names that might surprise you: Joe Biden, John Kerry, Tom Daschle, Dick Durbin, even John Edwards.”

    You interpret that as saying it’s all the Republicans’ fault?

    Also, while you’re pointing out that the article doesn’t use the word “Clinton,” you might also note that it just uses “Bush” a couple times, and then only to refer to a Bush appointee rather than Bush himself.

  • Yes, one line in the 8-page article was critical of a few Democrats, in the context of how it “might surprise you”.

    I found the article highly partisan, but maybe that is just me. I do not consider any of this to be a partisan issue. The battle lines here are not Democrats vs. Republicans; they are the financiers vs. everybody else. And right now everybody else is losing badly. People who try to make this about Bush or Obama or similar are really missing the point, IMO.

    But perhaps I was unfair.

    All sarcasm aside, I do think the article was excellent overall.

  • johnhhaskell

    since Seamus’s site is dead, why don’t you just tell us the name of the film so we can find it ourselves?

  • Seamus’s site is working fine for me, but here is the YouTube video.

  • uik

    Opener: “It’s over — we’re officially, royally fucked. No empire can survive being rendered a permanent laughingstock,”
    Nonsense. All the great empires had a long list of appalling fiascos before they finally bit. Fiascos that made pious stone-chartered national virtues sound like a murderer’s blessing. Our list is just beginning. Hurrah!

Leave a Reply