Hanks, But No Thanks

With friends like these...

Former President George W. Bush, when asked to critique his successor, said of Obama, "He deserves my silence." This implicitly slapped down his own erstwhile vice-president, Dick Cheney, who has had many critical things to say of the current team. On the Tonight Show, Condoleezza Rice agreed with Bush.

Now, it makes a lot of sense that a preceding administration shouldn't take immediate potshots against those that follow them. Indeed, even Bill Clinton waited a good time before he started criticizing the Bush administration. But, here's a question: Should the same philosophy hold when the predecessor has only good things to say about his successor? Even more, should that person still hold their tongue given that neither his policies nor those of his successor aren't exactly popular with the public?

Consider the two men responsible for the now-infamous TARP and AIG bailouts -- Treasury Secretrary Tim Geithner and his predecessor Hank Paulson:

"It's difficult," [Paulson] says, "to get the politics, the policy and the market reaction all right at any one point in time. It's virtually impossible to get all three of them right, but if you get any one of them very wrong, then you're not going to succeed."

[SNIP]

Mr. Paulson is an unabashed Geithner fan....[Much] of the Obama-Geithner-Bernanke financial rescue is built on Paulson-Geithner-Bernanke foundations, albeit with significant changes and substantially more emphasis on avoiding foreclosures.

[SNIP]

As Mr. Paulson puts it in a characteristic locker-room compliment: "I've been in the trenches with him. He can take a punch."

Under normal circumstances, a Treasury secretary of one party vouching for the policies of a successor from a different party would be cause for bipartisan celebration.

Not when the country is going through either Big Recession or Mini Depression. Not when the people are revolting over billions of bailouts going to companies who turn around and dispense millions in bonuses to employees (who may or may not still be there).

Paulson was the guy who got this ball rolling last fall, but Geithner is the one who has adopted Pauslon's child and ran with it (mixed metaphors anyone?).

Considering the respective approval ratings of the presidents who appointed Paulson and Geithner, maybe the current Treasury secretary might be better off if the former Treasury secetary also only offered up "silence"? After all, not even Republicans like the legacy of bailouts and corporate welfare left them by George W. Bush.

Robert A. George is a New York writer. He blogs at Ragged Thots.

Copyright FREEL - NBC Local Media
Contact Us