The Elite Have Been Given the Signal to Chew Up Alan Greenspan...

But in 1987, the press treated Greenspan as a near-god. Even years later he was hailed. In 2004, this is what Forbes had to say about him:

Comparing Greenspan, who took office in August 1987, to four other chairmen who served at least seven years--based on changes in the interest rate, the performance of the stock market and the level of interest rates--Greenspan is the man. Of course there are other factors--fiscal policy established by presidents and Congress, technology and luck being three--that play a large part as well, but the numbers during Greenspan's watch stand out.

Now they are all piling on, even Brooksley Born, who is usually trotted out for spin and cover up.

Bottom line, he's old and no longer useful so the power elite are chewing him up and spitting him out.
In 1987, there was only one man who understood who Greenspan was, and not afraid to write about it. In 1987, Murray Rothbard wrote, in what he had to call a "Minority Report":

I found particularly remarkable the recent statements in the press that Greenspan's economic consulting firm of Townsend- Greenspan might go under, because it turns out that what the firm really sells is not its econometric forecasting models, or its famous numbers, but Greenspan himself, and his gift for saying absolutely nothing at great length and in rococo syntax with no clearcut position of any kind.

As to his eminence as a forecaster, he ruefully admitted that a pension-fund managing firm he founded a few years ago just folded for lack of ability to apply the forecasting where it counted- when investment funds were on the line.

Greenspan's real qualification is that he can be trusted never to rock the establishment's boat. He has long positioned himself in the very middle of the economic spectrum. He is, like most other long-time Republican economists, a conservative Keynesian, which in these days is almost indistinguishable from the liberal Keynesians in the Democratic camp. In fact, his views are virtually the same as Paul Volcker, also a conservative Keynesian. Which means that he wants moderate deficits and tax increases, and will loudly worry about inflation as he pours on increases in the money supply.

And pour on the money, as we all now know, he did.