Tim Geithner's plan for rescuing the financial sector isn't "seize the banks and feed their executives to wolves" so it's stupid and no one likes Geithner. The Nation has a great idea, though:
Katrina vanden Heuvel says Obama's GOOD plans (like the job-creating stimulus and stuff) are getting all muddled with the BAD plans, and the BAD plans are basically every vague awkward thing this Geithner guy says. So, replace Geithner! But with who? Someone, maybe, who wasn't in some way responsible for the current crisis, right? Hey, how about that one guy who used to go after AIG back before going after AIG was cool? What ever happened to that guy (exactly a year ago this month)?
Then there's a novel idea. Why not bring in the man who took on Wall Street and AIG long before it was trendy? Eliot Spitzer. Call me crazy. But he foresaw the bubbles and disasters resulting from deregulatory frenzy and the financial service industry's creation of toxic credit default swaps and derivatives. As the Sherriff of Wall Street, Spitzer launched investigations and lawsuits deploying the creative cudgel of the previously-obscure 1921 Martin Act. Yes, he acted miserably toward his wife and family and he should pay the price for that. But some believe Spitzer was taken down by certain "masters of the universe" seeking vengeance for his aggressive policing of their financial fraud and corruption.
Oh, come on, Katrina. "Some believe"? You edit The Nation! Own that lefty conspiracy theorizing.
But seriously—while "some believe" that Spitzer's Wall Street crusading was just one more self-aggrandizing expression of his ultimately destructive narcissism, he probably would be better at this than Geithner is proving to be, so far. But while we'd gain a more competent Treasury Secretary, we'd lose a Slate columnist. Do you really want that, Ms. Vanden Huevel?
(The confirmation hearings would certainly be entertaining, though.)