(watch out linguistics pedants, this comment thread is draped over a crudely dug pit lined with poisonous spikes)
Haha, this is how you horrible youngs ruined the word "blog" by using it to represent a blog post in addition to the blog itself. Joke's on you; We're destroying the planet in your lifetimes.
@Dan Kois I mean, right, like there are other kinds.
I still think of Ramona wearing her new pajamas under her clothes whenever dressed too warmly for the day. (Also: Runaway Ralph 4ever!)
Well, fine, but a lot of this rides the same sort of bullshit assumptions that conservative economists have used in arguing against the New Deal: essentially, that things didn't get better overnight, that we have all of these unintended consequences, and that, um, please don't think about the near-certainty that shit would have gotten much, much worse if it had never happened. You don't have to like Goldman Sachs to recognize that it's a market failure if the banks that were basically fully hedged against their mortgage and derivatives exposures were suffering the same liquidity freezes as the Lehmans of the world. And I'd argue that the propagandists here aren't the journalists trying to remind an angry, irrational, Tea Party-filled country that, ahem, TARP didn't actually cost us anything and probably saved the economy, but the bloggers who opposed TARP at the time and still do, and who would hate anything to do with Wall Street even if it involved free blowjobs and a cure for cancer.