Gee Paul, it would be nice if you admitted that you didn't invent the proposition you put forward in The Wall Street Journal today:

"The government has $350 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds that it can use to encourage new bank lending. If this money is directed to newly created good banks with pristine balance sheets, it could support $3.5 trillion in new lending with a modest 9-to-1 leverage. Right out of the gate, the newly created banks could do what the Fed has already been doing -- buying pools of loans originated by existing banks that meet high underwriting standards."

Uh huh.  Been reading a few Tickers Paul?

I know that I'm not the only one who has put forward this suggestion, but let's take a look here eh?

October 22, 2008: "Fiscal Cat 5 Hurricane Warning"

"If the bad debt defaults cause the collapse of the large money-center banks, then Congress should consider the creation of five or ten new banks with an initial capital infusion of $20 billion each, IPOing each immediately and attaching an onerous coupon (e.g. 10%) to the initial capital to strongly encourage its replacement with private capitalization.  This will provide a base lending support of $2 trillion into the economy."

And later, on January 30th, "On The Edge Of The Abyss":

"Be prepared to use the second half of the TARP funds to either internally capitalize new banks which will then be spun off to the public or add capitalization to existing good banks.  The cramdown and receivership of the bad banks will undoubtedly lead to lots of guaranteed deposits and good assets needing a home.  There are hundreds of perfectly solid existing banks that should be permitted to grow their asset and deposit base by feasting on the carrion of the deposed."

Standing on the backs of mice is perfectly fine Paul, but its outrageous for you to claim these ideas as your own.

Your "senior fellowship" should be revoked.