Smick on WaPo

If you are familiar at all with Smick's thinking, he is suspicious of populism/protectionism. He might be right here.

Smick lives in the land of geniuses, and doesn't seem comfortable integrating the sources of populism and protectionism. Namely: voters/constituents. It's hard to fault Americans who want to see financial institutions held accountable for their misdeeds. I would qualify Smick's article by adding that Obama needs time to build the case that either a) the banks are solvent; or b) the banks are insolvent. The former needs time to see if markets will rebound in the face of continued uncertainty. The latter requires investigation into the counterparty risk and maximum toxic exposure of the big banks. If the banks are truly insolvent, and Obama has to get all Swedish on 'em, there can't be allegations that he's a commie. Hence the plans to report all findings on the Treasury's website. If the banks are broken beyond repair, and taxpayers are going to take a bath, there must be nearly unanimous support for the necessary actions to place the banks into receivership and pay out all their obligations to bond holders (on top of whatever amount FDIC has to cough up for depositors).

So, please, take your time, Mr. President. Keep it all transparent.