And Paul's right: the media machine is lurching into action on the premise that Robert Rubin was responsible for everything that happened at Citibank when he was not there, and that Richard Cheney was reponsible for nothing that happened at Halliburton when he was there.
Posted by DeLong at July 29, 2002 01:17 PM | TrackbackThe Unofficial Paul Krugman Web Page
If you want to see the smear machine at work, this latest - apparently abortive - attempt to implicate Robert Rubin in the Enron affair is a classic. Here's what happened: we have learned that Citigroup helped Enron by structuring loans in a way that inflated reported revenue. This is not good, but also no surprise. For sure we will eventually learn that every major bank did something like that for some company. It was, alas, what was happening during the bubble years.
But it took about 30 seconds for the right-wing scandal machine to pounce. Robert Rubin works for Citigroup! And he was a Clinton-era icon! So he's guilty! Off with his head! Republican operatives began sending thousands of faxes; talk radio made Rubin's sins topic # 1; and Andrew Sullivan dutifully attacked Rubin in his blog. And with amazing gullibility, the likes of Tim Noah at Slate jumped on board, without bothering to check even the most basic facts.
The big joke is that the Enron deal took place months before Rubin joined Citigroup. Oh, well, maybe he had a time machine...
hhrrrrmmmmmm .... There is the matter of the phone call, and Rubin's role in "opening doors" is perhaps one which the ordinary folk of a democracy have reason to fear ...
But I'd let Rubin have as many Enrons as he likes if it were the price of having him back on the bridge for Brazil's economic problems, rather than a guy who goes out there and effectively says that the Brazilians send all their IMF money to Swiss bank accounts!
Posted by: Daniel Davies on July 29, 2002 11:08 PMCome on, Daniel, be nice to the Bushies. After all, Brazil is a country which has had recurrent economic crises. The Bush boys, with the full power of the US government, should be able to cause at least two more Brazilian econonmic collapses during their first term. If they can't, then they'll be out of the running for the 'toying with the peasants like a bored Greek God' contest, held at the next annual meeting of People Who Run the World.
Posted by: Barry on July 30, 2002 07:32 AMNext thing you know, you'll see someone proposing that Bush be absolved of blame for an economy that began to tank 9 months before he took office.
Naw, probably not.
Posted by: David Perron on July 30, 2002 09:51 AMDavid -- if you've got an actual example of Brad Delong blaming Bush for "the economy", let's hear it; otherwise, there are a lot of other blogs out there for you. Mr DeLong and Krugman both have been very clear in their specific criticism of Bush economic policy; that the tax cutting budget was irresponsible and reversed Clinton's successful deficit reduction policy. If you have an argument against that, et's hear it.
Posted by: dsquared on July 30, 2002 02:46 PMdsquared - from examining writings by delong and krugman, how much do you suppose the tax cuts slated for the rest of the decade might affect social security and medicare? when clinton left office even though the economy was slowing, there was reason to believe social security and medicare were well protected. the initial part of the tax cut helped ease the recession, the rest of it appears a threat. also, this bear market may have cut retirement savings unlike any past bear market. i am worried.
Posted by: on July 31, 2002 09:39 AMAre they investigating Halliburton or has that been dropped?
Posted by: on December 6, 2002 12:52 PM