Wouldn't that be cool?

If Elizabeth Warren took a more active governmental position?:

ON THE day after Tuesday’s electoral loss, the Obama administration brought an unfamiliar face to the White House - Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard Law professor noted for her staunch advocacy on behalf the middle class and fierce criticism of the bank bailouts. Perhaps the administration will take a more aggressive approach to Wall Street, along the lines of what Warren wants. But for Democrats to truly take ownership of the economic crisis, Warren will need to play a more prominent role. Not just her ideas, but the force of her personality is needed.

[snip]

As chairwoman of the TARP Oversight Committee, she’s been responsible for examining the bank bailouts and the regulatory response. Warren has vocalized the concerns of many Americans - but not many politicians - who are outraged by the rampant greed that led to the crisis, and the refusal of Wall Street to take responsibility. “I think the problem has been all the way throughout this crisis, that the banks have been treated gently and everyone else has been treated really pretty tough,’’ said an exasperated Warren last fall, echoing what so many others - in both parties - have come to believe.

These people need someone of Warren’s stature. The timing is perfect: her term at TARP Oversight will come to an end in the spring of 2011, just as a Senate candidate would have to be ramping up. She’d have a base of support on the Internet as soon as she announces. Sure, a Warren campaign would provoke guffaws from the right: What does a Harvard professor really know about an economic crisis? Yet underneath the polished pedigree is a teenage bride from Oklahoma. She’s as much an everyday person as Scott Brown; she just happens to be a brilliant scholar as well. When she’s championing the middle class, she’s not doing so because it’s politically expedient, but because she feels connected to it in a way few politicians are. And she has the intellectual chops to convert that connection into dramatic policy change. Sadly, few politicians can say that, either.

John Stewart thinks so:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Elizabeth Warren
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

They were for it before they were against it

It is a rather curious spectacle to see congressional Republicans express outrage at the exorbitant bonuses being handed out by bailed-out companies and blame the Obama administration for failing to curb the practice with AIG. Because when the first installment of the Troubled Asset Relief Program was passed it was the Bush administration and GOPers in Congress who were insisting that caps on executive compensation not be part of the legislation.

Just making sure we keep our facts straight because there's just too many people trying to rewrite history.....

They laid down for Bush without complaint

But they suddenly find their spine to stand against Obama? No, not the Democrats... the Republicans?

House Republicans are determined to oppose the release of the second half of the financial-industry bailout funds, a GOP House leadership aide tells the Huffington Post.

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) will work to persuade members to vote to oppose releasing the funds -- an enviable task, considering the unpopularity of the bailout.

The Republican conference position makes approval of the release of the funds difficult for Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and other House Democrats, many of whom opposed the original dispersal.

And just why on earth are they doing this? (my bold)

On Monday, Boehner announced that he would be personally opposing the release of the rest of the funds, though he stopped short of calling on his colleagues to do the same. "I remain disappointed about the way TARP has been managed and how its resources have been spent over the last several months. From the outset, the program has been implemented with too little transparency and in a manner inconsistent with the way it was presented to Congress last fall. Until officials can present a clear plan to Congress -- and, most importantly, to taxpayers -- demonstrating how the expenditure of additional TARP funds will benefit our economy and making clear an exit strategy for getting the government back out of the private sector, it would be irresponsible for Congress to release the remainder of these resources. I will oppose the release of these taxpayer funds when the matter is considered on the House floor," Boehner said.

The unpopular bailout has only become less popular over the last few months, as banks and the Treasury Department have refused to reveal details as to how the taxpayer money -- or, more accurately, future taxpayers' money -- has been spent.

Republican opposition, however, is a political freebie: the president will still get the money. He can veto congressional disapproval of the funds; House Democrats then need only 144 votes to sustain such a veto and authorize the money's release without any Republican consent. If they do, however, they may earn the sole political ownership of the bailout they fought so hard to avoid.

Oh, nice try guys! But you supported Bush and his neocon buddies for eight solid years, you own this economic disaster.