Calling something propoganda while failing to point out inaccurate statements is propoganda.

Further, you should have a disclaimer in every one of your comments that you are paid by the industries Taibbi is railing about.

Put away your pitchfork and torch. I was responding to the GP's assertion that "screeds" and "polemics" are "valuable". My point isn't really changed by what other people think of the article.

Like "too big to fail"?

...that doesn't even fall into the category of "propaganda".

Seems like propaganda to me. That is the sound byte I associate with this whole mess. It was repeated quite often.

Usually by the enemies of the banks, though. It's at best propaganda for the other side, if at all.

Well, the banks got what they wanted. A big fat payout and subsidies from the tax payers. We hedged their risks. They don't need any propaganda. Now before the decision was made...

And didn't you say that is not "propaganda"? What is your definition of propaganda? Maybe we can have a rational discussion if you declare what you mean by propaganda.