Nancy Hopkins, as our faithful readers will know, is the MIT professor with the weak stomach who pranced out of a talk with Larry Summers because what he said threatened to make her black out or throw up.
Mel Watt decided to use his time to question chairman Greenspan in his semiannual testimony to Congress for a bit of grandstanding:
[transcript from Bloomberg]
GREENSPAN: I was. Good to see you, Congressman.
WATT: Good to see you.
I am going to try to understate this, because if I said it as aggressively as I feel it I suspect I would insult youand some other people. So I'm just going to make a one-sentence statement about it, and then I'm going to move on and ask you a question about something else, not designed to evoke a response.
I would have to say that when I hear you, when I hear the president use as a major justification for this Social Security reform plan that he's trying to look out for black folk, and when I hear you use as a major justification for private accounts that you are somehow trying to look out for poor people, it makes me nauseous.
I'm going to leave that alone and move on. If I said it -- if I dwelled on that, I'd probably throw up.
WATT: I'm moving on, Secretary Greenspan, because I don't -- I mean, I have no interest in getting into a publicdispute. I won't be able to restrain myself on that issue. So the best thing I can do on it is move on.
That's lovely, Congressman Watt, pontificate venomously and cut off any answer. Rather typical of the left-liberal mindset today. Mel Watt then went on to ask a ponderously silly question about the Social Security Trust Fund for which he demanded a yes or no answer. When he didn't get the answer he wanted/expected he asked for an explanation.