If I were the McCain people, I’d make a lot out of this. More than mildly contradicts the “he doesn’t know about the economy” rhetoric coming from the Dems. I mean – do Clinton and Obama know more about economics than Greenspan. I. don’t. think. so.
PJ Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that PJ Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. Please note that comments are reviewed by the editorial staff and may not be posted immediately. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pjmedia.com.
I dunno, Roger, a lot of people blame Greenspan and his easy credit policies for creating two gigantic investment bubbles, first in the stock market and then in real estate.
I’m an agnostic (to use your term) on his culpability, but some of his comments, talking out of both sides of his mouth on real estate (as one example) make his endorsement of dubious value, at least to me.
Scott
“two gigantic investment bubbles”
Well, if you mean two bubbles in an pacific ocean of economic expansion, I would have to say yes.
My sense is that Greenspan is still associated in the public mind with the prosperity of the ’90s ó and although he seems to be quite Republican, he gladly served under a certain Democrat president who is married to one of the current Dem candidates. That’s why I tend to agree with Roger on this point. This is a useful endorsement for McC.
My sense is that Greenspan is still associated in the public mind with the prosperity of the ’90s.
I think a great deal of that job entails a projection of stability and certainty when the reality is that all it hangs together pretty much on faith.
In my mind Greenspan put a human face on ‘God we trust’. I think is only fair that if you could be partly blamed when you guess wrong you should also get some credit when you guess right.
reminds me of McCoy’s line that Kirk trusted Spock’s guesses much better than other people’s facts.
Greenspan was one of the members of Ayn Rand’s inner circle. While hardcore objectivists may resent his pulling away a bit from some of Rand’s economiclly related ideas, such as her conclusion that taxation is immoral, there are millions upon millions of voters who will take his endorsement in a way that a Richardson or a Casey endorsement couldn’t hope to achieve. McCain landed a very big endorsement here.
OT (but still about politics): My guess is that McCain will pick Thompson as his running mate. I don’t think either Romney or Huckabee will get it, as both camps are too much in opposition. Paul is out. If Thompson doesn’t get it, then maybe Duncan Hunter.
Greenspan has always been anti pork spending and McCain has the strongest credentials in that category.