Fall Meek Journal Doesn't Like Justified Attack On "Too Big To Fail"

Via the great Lefty Coaster at the Kos, there is a report that the Wall Street Journal doesn't like writing about with how the House House Financial Commitee voted in favor of giving the government the chance to break up "too big too fail" banks.

You know, those wonderful banks that could cause another catastrophic event in our economy like they did last year if the same Las Vegas shenanigans proceeds to happen again (and that is looks to be the case).

As usual with a Murodchian owned piece of crap, the Fall Meek dreck didn't take too kindly to this possible government intervention. The whole article includes two SOP congressmen taking negatively about the bill (surprise) and this sweet paragraph of woeeeeeee opressive government:

The amendment illustrates how some lawmakers are willing to go beyond the authority sought by the White House -- which stopped short of giving regulators power to break up healthy firms -- in the redrawing of the financial world's regulatory framework.

I don't know what "healthy firms", the writer Mike Crittenden, is talking about there. Especially when most of these "healthy firms" had to receive TARP money.

And go beyond the White House's decision? Even though the White House at the end of the day has the say all, be all, jurisdiction to veto the bill unless overridden in Congress of course?

This really good bill has a long way to go. Because thanks to the obvious common sense of it, and a politically auspicious "attack on the bankers" narrative as well, the passage of this bill could potentially be harder than passing a good public option health care bill in the Senate.

Because with names like Tim Geithner and Larry Summers on board (unlike, say, a Karen Ignagni in the Administration or as an adviser on health care if she was), and how the banking sector still controls most of our politician even more than the health industry, the challenge will be another intricate one.

All due to a simple solution.