Seriously, I grant that Barney’s right that banks "ought" to use the money for lending, in the sense that that’s the entire reason for the bailout: that banks weren’t lending.

But, he’s absolutely wrong when he says "Any use of the these funds for any purpose other than lending — for bonuses, for severance pay, for dividends, for acquisitions of other institutions, etc. — is a violation of the terms of the act".

Yes, and a word means exactly what I say it does. Honest. No Barney, the bill as YOU wrote it does not specify that and has no means of enforcement. As for your pathetic threat to hold back the next 350 billion dollars of the bill, well, that’s the roar of a lion who declawed himself. The way the bill is written the President decides if the money is needed and both the House and the Senate need to vote against it. Think you’re going to get 60 votes in the Senate to stop the money from flowing?

No Barney, you’re so full of it your eyes are brown. You are the primary architect of this bill, other than Paulson. You weakened it even further than the already weak Dodd bill. You know there is no way to hold Paulson or banks accountable because the bill you authored, the bill you pushed, the bill you were so giddy to have forced through the legislature by threatening martial law if lawmakers voted against it, doesn’t include any of that stuff.

Many of us pointed out these lacks, over and over again, and were ignored.

"No one could have predicted".

Sorry Barney, crying about the broken crockery after you demolished a wall to get the elephant into the china shop doesn’t pass the contemptuous laugh test. This is your baby, and everything Paulson and the banks do with the money is your responsibility as much as theirs because you refused to put into the bill any meaningful ways to control either the banks or Paulson.

It’s your baby, act like a man, and own your failure.