Skip to comments.Romney Reiterates He Would Replace Bernanke
Posted on 08/23/2012 3:50:24 PM PDT by Perdogg
Mitt Romney said Thursday that he would replace Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, dismissing the advice of a top adviser who suggested this week that the chairman should be considered for a third term.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com ...
The "top advisor" should be replaced.
” Mitt Romney said Thursday that he would replace Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, dismissing the advice of a top adviser “
Who the heck are his advisors? This one sounds like the loser, Karl Rove.
Wait, were we talking about Romney or Bernanke? (supposed to be on the bottom of my above post)
Better yet he should cut the pseudo public / private tie with the fed altogether. Make them one or the other.
I think Ron Paul would rather be chairman of the Federal Reserve than President; and I kind of like that idea.
Romney should clean ALL of the RATs out of Washington. Not to do so is a recipe for disaster.
I like the idea too. Unfortunately reality would cause immediate and total economic collapse as we were forced to accept that we’re flat broke.
Yap, Bernanke is a college professor who never had a real job working for a real company which survives only if it makes a profit. This is an excellent decision by Romney, but will he follow up on that or flip-flop?
Mitt Romney is not going to replace ANYBODY, unless he gets elected in the first place.
And unless he also has a majority in the Senate to support him, confirmation of any of his choices remains a dicey thing.
Sooner the better.
Fire him, NOW!
You can never trust his judgement on anything if he fails this badly on Bernanke.
Burn-Yankee must go.
And all the R. governors should do the same thing in their states for the exact same reason. They need to decertify the union-RATs as well.
Well...Mitt can kiss the Bernanke vote goodbye....;^)
How about Arthur Laffer?
Well if he does get elected, since he loves to fire people, he can just get started on his busy schedule. He doesn't need confirmation to fire bureaucrats.
If he was to start at the top of each department and include a few deputy secretaries or whatever, it would still take him weeks...He might just have to appoint a "Firing Czar" just so he can let him have a field day and then approve of his progress.
If he fired enough deadwood out of certain departments and agencies, he may well be able to suggest that Congress not fund them at all.
I realize I'm getting all fired up about all this firing, but...What the hey?
Oh yeah, an aide to a Carter-era Secretary of Treasury... what an improvement! /s
Fischer is a lifelong RAT. Nuff said.
Failure to do so was one of the biggest mistakes George Bush made.
He thought he would be the nice guy but democrats just considered him foolish.
For the entire eight years of his Presidency he was plagued by democrat holdovers in the bureaucracy who were dedicated to undermining his policies and doing their best to make his administration a failure.
Recall the flap when he belatedly tried to clean out some lawyers from the Justice department. Clinton was smarter - he cleaned out his predecessors hold overs the day he took office.
Well, if he’s not going to end it (and I’m still on the fence myself on whether that would be a good idea or not)....it would be good for Bernanke to go. Preferably in handcuffs, but good that Mitt would send him packing.
Hopefully on that note, Mitt will also put in someone who will change things for the better.
Applause. Bernanke should also be charged with felonious theft.
Now, if we could hear what Romney would do with all the Czars.
I not yet heard anything about them.
Any replacement will be unable to interrupt the continuation of the fun of default, bond collapse, repudiation, currency adjustment ahead. Have fun. Enjoy the slide. Watch the local foreclosures, layoffs and general depositions like a great picture show.
No. Laffer is right on taxation, but, unfortunately, he's down with printing money as a means to spur the economy. Ron Paul for Fed Chairman!
Fed Chairman is Ron Paul's special purpose.
What if the republican controlled house vote articles of impeachment against the senate democrats? How would that work?
And what about Greenspan. They're not elected officials. They were both in on the CRA. There must be a zillion SEC/banking-fraud crimes with which they could be charged and prosecuted. Life in jail.
Throw Andrea Mitchell in there too, she's just another RAT accomplice.
Romney should gut the EPA of all ‘Agenda 21’ hacks working for the U.N., the Marxists in the State Dept., and especially the newly hired schizophrenic Fascist midgets at the DOJ!
There must be; I agree. Lock them all up and throw away the key.
Reinhart has been shamelessly campaigning for the slot on all the biz networks...kicking ole Ben to the curb all day long.
Or his wife... all a bunch of pork sucking tools
In the world of the possible, we will never get rid of a national bank, I.e., the Fed. The gov’t needs it to get loans. BUT, it is possible to end the ban on allowing private banks to issue notes/money. Not crazy: this was the US system for 80 years, it was quite solid, and with the modern credit card system, we are not that far away. The advantage of this is that the Fed has to compete with the private sector to maintain he value of dollars, and it worked with the 1st and second BUS.
Exhibit A - the whole Valerie Plame imbroglio - typical example.
he was appointed by Bush to the current position. He is an inflation hawk on the Fed. Read, if you can, the latest news articles about him.
He sounds fairly reasonable to me. I don’t need Ron Paul’s permission to support some one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.