How Do You Spell ‘Retaliation’?
I have been thinking about the Roman orator and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero lately. Like many people of my generation, my first recollection when hearing the name “Cicero” is of interminable Latin sentences where the critical word is parked like a caboose about thirty words later than you would have expected it, and in a gerundive construction suggesting causation or obligation. Or was it a double dative? In any event, in school Cicero was someone to be deciphered rather than understood. He didn’t like Catiline, whoever that was, but what has that to do with the market in ablative absolutes?
Now that I look back to Cicero’s life and work, however, few figures from any age seem as searingly pertinent to our own social and political life.
There is a reason Cicero’s work made such a profound impression on the American Founders. John Adams, reacting to a biography of Cicero, cut to the chase: “I seem to read the history of all ages and nations in every page — and especially the history of our own country for forty years past. Change the names and every anecdote will be applicable to us.”
Consider this passage from Cicero’s On Duties:
Whoever governs a country must first see to it that citizens keep what belongs to them and that the state does not take from individuals what is rightfully theirs. … As for those politicians who pretend they are friends of the common people and try to pass laws redistributing property and drive people out of their homes or champion legislation forgiving loans, I say they are undermining the very foundations of our state. They are destroying social harmony, which cannot exist when you take away money from some to give it to others. They are also destroying fairness, which vanishes when people cannot keep what rightfully belongs to them. For as I have said, it is the proper role of government to guard the right of citizens to control their own property.
It’s hard to believe that was written circa 44 BC, not the day before yesterday.
I intend to come back to Cicero at greater length on another occasion. For now, I simply want to wave the Ciceronian flag a little and suggest that his magnificent attacks on corruption and the abuse of state power have many lessons for Americans at the dawn of the twenty-first century.
Consider the news, which was reported just yesterday by the Wall Street Journal, that the Justice Department is suing the rating company Standard & Poor’s “in retaliation for the S&P’s temerity in downgrading U.S. sovereign debt for the first time in history in 2011.”
Oops! That was the unexpurgated version. The announced reason the Department of Justice is going after the company is because “the firm ignored its own standards to rate mortgage bonds that imploded in the financial crisis and cost investors billions.”
What do you think? Companies like S&P and Moody’s look at a variety of factors to try to determine the creditworthiness of a company or a country. Their assessments are festooned with warnings and cautions, just like those “past performance is no guarantee of future returns” slogans you see pasted at the bottom of every mutual fund you’ve ever plunked a dime into. Investors certainly did “lose billions” in the financial crisis. But whose fault was that?
The hyenas, in the shape of various states’ attorneys general and other entities unhappy about the fact that they lost money investing in some of the most exotic and risky financial instruments ever devised by the mind of man, are gathering around the tasty carcass of these companies. But no one forced anyone into making these investments. Credit ratings are not predictions, they’re educated guesses about the future based on the past. Often — usually, in fact — the future looks a lot like the past. Sometimes it doesn’t.
Partly, I think, the move against S&P (the other rating agencies are also in the government’s crosshairs) is a an example of the time-honored practice of scapegoating. People are looking for someone to blame and the rating agencies seem like low-hanging fruit: “Hey, they told me this might be a great (though risky) investment, and I lost money! Whom can I blame?”
But I suspect this is not only about scapegoating. I suspect it is also about retaliation. We are living with the most fiscally incontinent administration in U.S. history, perhaps in world history. Both S&P and Moody’s took note of this incontinence and broadcast the news by downgrading U.S. debt in 2011. The result? A $1 billion lawsuit against S&P. Merely post hoc? Or do you discern a teensy bit of propter hoc there as well? I do.
Meanwhile, if you are really interested in who and what caused the financial meltdown of 2008, I have some reflections here.






Of course, they didn’t go after Moody’s. White House favorite Warren Buffett is Moody’s largest shareholder.
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald’s war against the truth
http://illinoispaytoplay.com/2013/02/06/u-s-attorney-patrick-fitzgeralds-war-against-the-truth/
Nonsense, there’s no bad blood between Obama and S&P. If the administration wanted to avoid the downgrade wouldn’t they have just arranged some form of remuneration?
I believe that’s how these things are done.
Of course the lawsuit has nothing to do with the downgrade.
And Nakoula Nakoula is in prison for a parole violation.
In related news, we have always been at war with Eastasia.
You and other conservatives are going to fall into another Obama trap again.
They are counting on you to come to the defense of the rating agencies like Moody’s and S&P. So that then they can come forward with their evidence that these agencies screwed up badly. And then they’ll say “See? The GOP is siding with white-collar criminals.”
Don’t rush to defend these agencies. There have been numerous news reports of how badly they screwed up. Obama would like nothing better than to have us side with a bunch of idiot investors and even white-collar criminals.
Obama’s advisers have a shrewd understanding of the GOP base’s psyche, I’ll say that for them.
They know that the GOP base hates him so much that anything he goes after, they’ll reflexively rush to defend. In this case, AFTER he gets the GOP base on record denouncing this investigation, THEN they’ll come forward with all their evidence–and make the GOP base look like it’s siding with corporate criminals.
The horrendous flaw in your argument is that you’re assuming the Dems aren’t going to accuse the Republicans with siding with White Collar criminals anyway. That narrative is already in place and no amount of capitulation from the GOP is going to change that.
True enough. I believe no one here as much as squeaked about Egan-Jones, so why push the S&P affair? Ratings are a mug’s game, anyway, and if agencies make money out of gazing in their crystal ball, let them deal with the consequences as well.
“Don’t rush to defend these agencies.”
Yeah, SCREW THE RULE OF LAW!!!
Wall Street can defend itself. We need to make clear that Democrats are as heavily invested in Wall Street as Republicans, Independents and Libertarians.
Wall Street in general leans to the Left, and they always seem to know which way the wind is blowing.
So those who “can defend themselves” don’t deserve the protections of the rule of law?
Who else you gonna carve out exemptions for?
“They are counting on you to come to the defense of …S&P….And then they’ll say “See? The GOP is siding with white-collar criminals.”
Yes, thats 100% true…
The Communists Operatives controlling the Propaganda Machine will certainly feed their low-information base with that line. Nothing new here
My question is, how do we EFFECTIVELY counter these lies, if we’re too afraid of CALLING them lies?
Exposure. Ridicule. Constant and unceasing. Not getting hot and bothered and ineffective, like Rob Crawford, who sounds as if he were playing an agent provocateur.
Cicero on Verres: Tantum quisque habet in Sicilia quantum hominis avarissimi et libidinosissimi aut imprudentiam superfugit aut satietati superfuit.
Cicero on Obama (after Four More Years): Tantum quisque habet in America quantum hominis avarissimi et libidinosissimi aut imprudentiam superfugit aut satietati superfuit.
English please
That’s what Google Translate is for.
The Google Translate version isn’t as easy to understand as some of us might like. It’s a bit like reading those amusing instructions in English that are often enclosed with products made in Asian countries.
“Tantum quisque habet in Sicilia quantum hominis avarissimi et libidinosissimi aut imprudentiam superfugit aut satietati superfuit.”
So much of a man as much as each one has a most avaricious and licentious in Sicily satiety or want of foresight or superfugit some left over.
“Tantum quisque habet in America quantum hominis avarissimi et libidinosissimi aut imprudentiam superfugit aut satietati superfuit.”
Only one man has in America as avaricious and licentious or imprudence or satiety superfugit survived.
I kinda would like a translator for the Google Translate English.
Standard & Poors poisoned the wells Christians draw water from and financed the YouTube video which led to the attack at Benghazi. They are Illuminati Masters of Mind-Control and secretly ordered Chrysler to use lug nuts which spun “leftie-tightie/rightie-loosie” in the early 1960s.
Buy the book.
Are they the ones behind this whole “Metric Madness” too?
You’re all wrong; it’s George W. Bush’s fault, or it will be shortly.
Retaliation: o-b-a-m-a.
S&P et al are suffering from their own success. For years, nay generations, their assessments were conservatively reliable. This reliability was based upon years of Standard Products managed, sold and traded in Standard Ways. The financial instruments of yore were STANDARD.
Now enter the Academy. Lets generate lots and lots of MBAs (full disclosure, I are one.) who have been taught how to manipulate the mathematics and create NON Standard Products that are nearly impossible to evaluate in the Standard Way.
Hire lots of them at S&P.
Make the Old School (read Ivy) connection more important than good product…
You get the gist.
So we re and over regulate thereby add complexity to the system setting up the next failure sooner than later.
ta
I don’t know which is better: Roger’s post, or the comments it spawned.
” the move against S&P (the other rating agencies are also in the government’s crosshairs) ”
Don’t you realize that sort of eliminationist rhetoric is going to get someone killed?
This may sound like sour grapes but I cannot but help despair government that charges upward of $500 to get a car out of impound(tow away zone violation)San Francisco. It was my wife’s first day back to work after 5 months of cancer treatment and therapy. We admit she is not exactly on her game yet. We also admit that there probably are quite a few impounds that go unredeemed because of the cost. Of course this system is not FAIR. It has to pay for its own excess. And who pays but the poor sap that tries to do things the right way. By the way we have been making cobra payments so yea, we’ve got all sorts of diposable income.
By the way has anybody noticed the lights went out in the super bowl; it’s all Bush’s fault.
I don’t know what S&P did.
But it was widely reported that Moody’s consistently overrated mortgage-backed securities as AAA safe, when they were nothing of the kind since they included subprime mortgages.
It comes as a surprise to a lot of folks that the rating agencies are paid by the issuers of the securities to rate those securities, not by the buyers of the securities–a clear conflict of interest.
I remember that when one issuer refused to do business with Moody’s, Moody’s retaliated by downrating his securities. In the recording industry, that used to be called “payola”–and it’s illegal.
That the rating agencies misrepresented these securities as safer than they were is a fact.
Whether they are guilty of deliberate fraud or just self-delusion is the open question at this point.
You don’t know what S&P did, but want us to throw them to the wolves, because demanding due process makes us look bad.
So, Moody’s consistently over-rated, but it’s owned by Friend-of-Barack Warren Buffett (who is disappointed he can’t pay more taxes) and won’t be prosecuted. S&P has no such friend, so it will be eviscerated. Nice. Good to be reminded where we stand.
Friends = rewarded handsomely
Enemies = punished mercilessly
At least Conan would say it honestly and not pretend he was just doing the right thing.
Conan, what is best in life?
Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!
It’s just a tax on the successful. If these companies had contributed more money to the Demos during the latest campaigns, all would be ignored. Moody’s, anyone?
Guilt or innocence have nothing to do with this case. S&P is just negotiating how much it will cost for this govt action to go away. If that’s not a tax, then John Roberts doesn’t wear a robe.
In a similar vein, gas prices have been up huge all over the country. Wait until about mid-July, right after Exxon et al report major second quarter profits. You just know there will be a call for a windfall profits tax on oil companies. Who will be exempt? Why BP, since they’ve already had to throw $20 billion into the leviathan.
I’m glad I didn’t learn lattin and that I was able to read Cicero’s works in English. I was instantly a fan and collected most of published works. He had a profound effect on my thinking for just the reasons you outlined. I think you are right that making Cicero just a tool for learning Latin does a disservace to a great mind.
” I think you are right that making Cicero just a tool for learning Latin does a disservace to a great mind”
Follow the money…
They are afraid of his MESSAGE, so the emphasis is on the TRANSATION methodology, not the meaning of what he’s saying…
Thats where the “just a tool” comes in.
You think any College Administration of the last 40 years will allow Cicero’s MESSAGE to enter the conversation?
Follow the money.
This justice department is an instrument of punishment and revenge–certainly not justice. What a joke! You could see this coming a mile away. If they want to go after an institution that caused the 2008 collapse of the mortgage backed securities and housing market, then I would suggest the executive and legislative branches of the US government. It was their threats of sanctions against lender which compelled more and more lending to people who could not afford the homes hey bought but all in the name of discrimination. Also the government approved the sale and securitization of these sub-prime loans to fannie mae and freddie mac.Duh! Then we all know what happened as these two incompetent players later securitized and sold these loans into the portfolios of global investors. These institutions caused the collapse not S&P and if there were ratings issues or misjudgements well guess what Moodys and Fitch were also doing about the same thing as S&P. This justice department is the same corrupt group that fought against voter id laws, sponsored the stupid fast and furious program, and other corrupt prosecutions across the country. We get this.
King Obama will not tolerate insolence against his regime.
A brief explanation: The banks bundled sub-prime loans (at best A- and at worst C rated) loans. They then asked the rating agencies, including S&P but also Moody’s and Fitch, to evaluate these bundles. Because the ratings agencies were being paid by the banks they rated the bundles as A+ (A+ is “good as gold” – the US government was A+ until the absurd budget cliff antics got it downgraded – and then sold them as such, to other banks, pension funds, foreign banks. Did your pension suffer as a result? If so, blame the banks AND the ratings agencies. But it you are OK with the banks and ratings agencies colluding to rip off all of us then you should support the prosecution of these thieves. Is the Tea Party about letting the crooks rob us and everyone else?
Govt has the legal monopoly on force, thus it is to blame.
” But it you are OK with the banks and ratings agencies colluding to rip off all of us then you should support the prosecution of these thieves.”
wait what? that basically contradicts the entire rest of your post. You seemed to be implying we should support these prosecutions, then say that we only should if we’re OK with being ripped off?
FWIW our credit rating was due for a downgrading regardless of any budget antics. How high can our debt actually get before it causes serious problems? 20T? 50T? 100T? It’ll be over 20T by the time Obama leaves office, we spend 50% more than we take in and that shows no signs of slowing. Our bonds can never be “good as gold” because the US government can inflate its way out of debt, but cannot create gold. When they inevitably decide mass inflation is the only way to handle the debt the bonds will become all but worthless while the gold will rise in value to keep pace.
Indeed a typo, thanks for pointing it out. It should read “But it you are OK with the banks and ratings agencies colluding to rip off all of us then you should OPPOSE the prosecution of these thieves.”
It is just a very peculiar position to support the very ratings agencies who were totally complicit in creating the financial crisis.
“Totally complicit”?
The government was the primary cause of the problem. They create both the push and the pull for the sub-prime bubble, and let the regulated buy them off rather than be regulated.
By all means punish the guilty. But at the moment what’s happening is the mob boss “policing” the petty grifters.
Obama and Company profited handsomely by throwing buckets of our money at ALL those theives when the sh*t hit the fan.
He had no qualms with bankrupting us to feather their nests.
The select prosecution of ONE of them now, only as a revenge tactic for downgrading The Obamas Credit Rating, is a farce.
Its more Political Theater for the Low-Infomation types that whore-ship The Messiah.
I think the S&P downgrade of the USA’s credit rating was a preemptive strike.
They knew perfectly well, as Brutus so succinctly sets forth above, that they had not been independent and neutral analysts regarding the subprime loan bundles, but shills, singing for their supper. And they also knew that they would be called on it, sooner or later.
But if they moved first, and said out loud what everybody knew- namely that the American welfare state has no damned intention of changing its ways or even starting to pay what it owes- then any subsequent action against them would be chalked down to political retaliation.
I predict an end result as follows: a slap on the wrist for S&P, who will reciprocate by suddenly- mirable dictu!- restoring America’s A+ rating, just in time for you-know-who to take the credit. The kabuki dance goes on.
You mean like how after Obama’s minions threaten Gallop that his ratings went up not only in Gallop’s polls but with other pollsters as well?
This suit is definitely a shot across the bow of S&P and the entire rating industry.
If interest rates spike in his second term, bye bye legacy. He just wants to get out of town before the financial armagedon hits and the art history majors start rioting.
S&P was way down on the mortgage and derivatives fraud food chain. The two Jaime’s, Dimon (Goldman Sachs the Treasury) and Gorelick (of no sharing of Intel between the FBI and CIA fame and later forcing financial institutions to qualify any person of limited means to buy more house then they can afford). And a whole host of bad people in for the greed at the major banks and AIG. And let’s not forget MF Jon Corzine that made $1.6 billion magically disappear, must have gone Global. The DOJ is metaphorically out to shoot the messenger and with no FBI or any remaining investigative law enforcement with integrity it is sadly a kangaroo court where the real or more guilty walk among the rich.
Cicero’s words should come as no surprise. People are still as they were in his day just as they were the same 2,000 years before him. We still have the same problem which is that the least worthy and most dangerous keep getting into power with the same disastrous results.
Humanity will be stuck in this cycle of tyranny, destruction and misery until it wakes up one day and decides to keep the psychopaths and other lunatics far away from the levers of power in politics, business and religion. It might take the next 500 year collapse to set the stage for that. Then again, probably not.
Yup,
Liberals think they invented the world….
“we are the ones we’ve been waiting for!”
When actually, THEY are the ones that have been f*cking things up since the dawn of civilization.
After someone ELSE tamed fire and built the walls, of course.
There were no liberals before “civilization” because they don’t have what it takes to survive in the Real World.
As much as I admire Cicero’s oratory and other feats of statesmanship, I would have everyone recall that, here, he was arguing on behalf of the nobiles, who had arrogated almost total control of the ager publicus to themselves at the time of the Catilinarian conspiracy. What free small landholders were left were debt-ridden and on the brink of slavery (the slave population of the republic had risen to something like 35%) thanks mostly to their farms’ long fallow periods, which were a result of the their commitments as citizen-soldiers in Rome’s many foreign wars.
The crisis, going back to the time of the Gracchi, split the ruling classes for a century, and the side that won out–the populares–was eventually successful because its policies of conquest and colonization worked to dilute the social unrest caused by so many poor citizens. “Give ‘em a jugerum from Jugurtha!” said Marius. The Optimates were too grasping to do so much as even consider foreign colonies, and they paid for it with the loss of the People.
Anyhow, I think this post draws a poor historical parallel, however superficially appropriate it sounds.
What’s your point? That his words should be ignored because he wasn’t speaking from paradise?
Acthung! You vill have consequences for that! (It must not be a fascist police state if it’s just Democrats doing it or something, I guess.)
Investors Beware of Central Banks Bearing Austerity
http://www.thedailybell.com/28662/Investors-Beware-of-Central-Banks-Bearing-Austerity
This is classic Obama. He and his regime screw up our economy to a fair-the-well and then get angry with the S&P because they had the nerve to graphically point it out. Alinsky tactics in action. Demonize the messenger.
Here is a good read: How to Run a Country: An Ancient Guide for Modern Leaders by Marcus Tullius Cicero and Philip Freeman.
Change the quote from Cicero to “circa 44th president” and it would work