The real problem with the Washington Post's Federal Reserve transparency article
Most people have seen the Washington Post's "Focus on the Fed" article in regard to H.R. 1207 and S. 604, both of which are bills to audit the Federal Reserve. Here is a small taste:
Which brings us to the proposed Federal Reserve Transparency Act, sponsored by anti-Fed crusader Ron Paul (R-Tex.) in the House and socialist Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.) in the Senate. In the name of open government, it would subject the Fed's decisions to a full-blown audit by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress. Though the bill has attracted 276 co-sponsors in the House and 17 in the Senate, it is wrongheaded in the extreme. By opening up the Fed's most sensitive interest rate and credit policies to public second-guessing, the bill would create a risk -- real and perceived -- of monetary policy bent to suit congressional overseers. This would destroy financial markets' faith in the Fed and, by extension, the value of the U.S. dollar, just as surely as a political "audit" of the Supreme Court's deliberations would undercut public faith in the justice system.
This article makes comparisons that are utterly dissimilar. Not only does our justice system make available verdicts and vote counts the same day that the court votes on the issue, they also make public the dissenting parties with the articulated minority opinion. This is a a world of difference from the transparency policy of the Federal Reserve, who graciously offers us meeting transcripts five years after the meetings occur. The transparency policies of these two groups are in no way similar and making such a comparison is disingenuous at best.
But that isn't the real problem with the article.
If you look again you will see that the article has no author. As Glenn Greenwald has stated in a recent article, anonymous comments "are often worse than nothing: they're inherently unreliable because they're made without accountability". Here we have the Washington Post, which has been been labeled in the past "Pravda on the Potomac" for its lack of journalistic integrity and tendency for political coddling, writing an article which nobody is accountable for, which advocates the continuation of non-accountability in government. Does anything feel odd to you about this situation?
We continually hear, as the Washington Post's regurgitates, that H.R. 1207 and S. 604 would bring politics into managing monetary policy. However, as it has been stated in the Financial Services Committee hearings the bill would have no impact monetary policy nor would it give anyone authority to sit in on its hearings. The article advocates the continued secrecy of the Federal Reserve based on this premise. Unfortunately we have no source for this article and therefore there can be no dialog as to the accuracy of this claim or of the credentials of its author. I don't want to lead anyone into assumptions but the proximity of the Washington Post to Washington DC makes me wonder about the motivations of this article. So much for the standards Walter Cronkite wanted to establish.
When we see an anonymous article in the future we should immediately throw it in the trash like the unscrupulous, irreverent garbage that it is.
maybe an audit of the fed
maybe an audit of the fed will reveal the final resting place of JFK'S brain.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
" This is a a world of
"
This is a a world of difference from the transparency policy of the Federal Reserve, who graciously offers us meeting transcripts five years after the meetings occur."
lol TRANSPARENCY! its as transparent as lee harvey oswalds records that won't be released until something like 2050. Its about as transparent as the 14 filing cabinets containing daming information on M.L.K. that are sealed until the year 2040. I wish my personal records were that transparent.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
The more I think about it...
the more I think the whole concept of an editorial board stinks. You are correct in that it is not transparent, and because the editorials are done by vote and because the boards are probably composed mostly of mainstream "moderates" to avoid unresolvable disputes between board members, mainstream opinions will continue to be propagated and unconventional opinions will never be the official position of the newspaper. I'd be suprised if an editorial board of a major newspaper has ever endorsed a third-party candidate. They will continue to endorse the status quo positions for the most part and fail to challenge the two-party system. This will be one more good thing to come out of the death of the newspaper!
This Washington Post Op-Ed
Had to be the DUMBEST article I have ever seen in a major paper of record.
I would LOVE to have a two hour debate with the authors of that piece over national TV.
I'd intellectually shred those boot licking air heads to pieces.
Comparing the Fed to the JUDICIAL BRANCH are you FREAKING KIDDING ME?!?
_________________________________
Freedom - Peace - Prosperity
"This would destroy
"This would destroy financial markets' faith in the Fed and, by extension, the value of the U.S. dollar, "
Couple things.
1. The dollar has lost like 96% of its value since 1913. What value?
2. "This would destroy financial markets' faith in the Fed", oh really? Why? Hiding something? If they were doing so good an audit would not be coming.
This kind of stuff makes me so bad, but on the other hand it does label the enemies and terrorists of America.
What? What? Come on! It's straight from the man
Pfffft. Accountability?
But it's coming straight from the Man... behind the Man... INSIDE THE MAN!
I take it that the opinion is of those shadowy figures who actually own the company that owns the company that holds a controlling stake in the company that owns the newspaper.
You should be thankful that the Man takes time out of his day (He's very busy stealing from you) to tell you his agenda!
Good instincts. Here's the boss's bio
http://www.washpost.com/news_ed/news/edit_bio.shtml
Mr. Brauchli is a native of Boulder, Colo., and a graduate of Columbia University. He was a 1991-92 Nieman Fellow at Harvard University and led or participated in projects that won two Overseas Press Club awards and two citations for excellence. He has served on the boards of the OPC and the International Center for Journalists, and is an advisor to the Knight-Bagehot Fellowships program at Columbia. He also is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the New York Economic Club
Explore Orthodox Christianity
See, what a nice guy
Here's a guy who's busy with all kinds of important things. He's fleecing you, he's robbing your father's pension fund, and he's plotting to enslave you and your children forevermore.
And he took time out of his day to order one of his minions to order some of his minion's minions to write up some propaganda to make you feel better.
Triple the ammo!!
For why we must have a FULL-FLEDGED uncensored audit America!!!
Wake up, get on the train & order your representative to Audit the Federal Reserve!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpbW64vRrMc
THE FED IS SECRET BECAUSE THE MEN WHO OWN IT
are in violation of federal law.
Treason
The Smith Act
Fraud
Unlawful conversion
You bet their sweet bippy they want the meetings secret...they open the books since 1914?
They'll be two dozen vans running around Washington DC picking up white guys and taking them to jail.
Unify
The Washington Post was given a clear opportunity to express
their view on correct Washington leadership. In Steny Hoyer's District, the Majority Leader, he was endorsed by them, the predominant paper. His challenger was Collins Bailey who was endorsed by Ron Paul. They gave no better indication of where they stand than that article.
No, there's nothing wrong w/ Collins Bailey, he identifies w/ folks, he's self-employed.
For some reason, we're expected to know every law that exists in America & in our state so we don't break it. We're supposed to know this when we're 18. There's no litmus test for them, as in the 10 commandments or rhyme or reason. C.U.R.E.
The reason no author is given is because
the editorial was written collectively by the Washington Post editorial board. In my hometown paper there is 2 or 3 short editorials like this a day, none more than a paragraph or two long, and none with any author shown; the "author" is the entire editorial board. Its the same thing when a newspaper endorses a candidate, they'll write a short explanation of why they endorsed the candidate, and no author will be shown.
The argument stands.
The argument stands. A well known paper is advocating non-transparency and non-accountability anonymously. It is a little different then endorsing a candidate. If public discourse is the way we come to the truth and we don't know who contributed to this artcile, how is it meaningful whatsoever?
yes, I agree with you.
I don't like the concept of a collectively written editorial either, it is a cop-out. And many times the editorial is not even the opinion of the editorial board, the owner of the newspaper can have final say. I know of one instance in 2004 when the editorial board of the Cleveland Plain Dealer was ready to endorse John Kerry for president but the owner of the newspaper nixed that because he supported Bush. The newspaper ended up being the only major newspaper in the country to not endorse a candidate for president. What a joke! They could have at least endorsed a third-party candidate, or how about writing in NONE OF THE ABOVE! Pissed me off.
But in regards to my original comment, I think some people thought the editorial was was the opinion of just one person and that the Washington Post was hiding that author, I was just clarifying that.
Understood. Thanks for
Understood. Thanks for contributing to the dialog on this issue!
I also noticed it. "Who wrote this poorly reserched article?"
Then I noticed the lack of author. That is pathetic feeding people millions of Americans who have been robbed of their life savings with bullshit and knowing your not willing to back up your shit with your name on it.
Ha!
Didn't even catch that there was no stated author. Very revealing...
The claim of "independence"
is completely bogus given that the Constitution vests the power to regulate the value of money with the congress. At the point that the Federal Reserve achieves the kind of independence it seeks, Congress has illegally delegated its legislative power (read: doctrine of nondelegation). If audits are good enough for taxpayers, they’re good enough for the Federal Reserve.
Pravda on the Potomac...
How true. I was wondering where all the "secret funds" go to that the people aren't supposed to know about. Funding propaganda? Nah....not in America the home of the free...?
The real problem is....
.....There isn't accountability whatsoever, and the media is CONTROLLED by the very same Federal Reserve!
Double the ammunition for why we demand, and must have, an Audit.
http://www.endthefed.us
Unfortunately, since your
Unfortunately, since your post doesn't have;
9/11 conspiracy
swine flu conspiracy
Obama birth certificate conspiracy
or
Glen Beck
it woun't receive the attention it deserves.
*sigh*
"Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies."
Thomas Jefferson, 1799
Unfortunately
oops, Fortunately your division game does not work here.
Save it for the MSM sites.
lmao
My complements to the author
My complements to the author
"Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies."
Thomas Jefferson, 1799