Given the total nightmare that the securities markets have become over the past few years, you would think that the SEC chairman would be a little bit ashamed of his tenure. At the very least, he wouldn't have the cajones to go on the record as being proud of his accomplishments, would he?

If his name is Chris Cox, yes he would. In his first interview responding to the well-deserved criticism that has been tossed at him, Cox said that "What we have done in this current turmoil is stay calm, which has been our greatest contribution -- not being impulsive, not changing the rules willy-nilly, but going through a very professional and orderly process that takes into account unintended consequences and gives ample notice to market participants."

Holy crap. This is the equivalent of Nero saying that he takes considerable pride in his measured, prudent response to the burning of Rome: "At least I didn't panic!"

He referred to the Madoff affair as a "big asterisk" on an otherwise good record. Right: the largest Ponzi scheme in history was an asterisk. So other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the show? Notably, Cox did admit that the ban on short selling of financial stocks was a mistake. Of course, we already knew that, and most intelligent commentators said all along that the SEC was barking up the wrong tree in going after short sellers.

By any objective measure, Chris Cox's tenure as SEC chairman was a pathetic failure. But watching him to try to defend it is sort of fun.

I've been screaming to anyone who will listen that the SEC's ban on short selling in financial stocks is bad for the market, the economy, and the world. It's good to see that someone far more knowledgeable than I am is also speaking out. In an op-ed piece in today's Wall Street Journal, renowned short seller and fraud buster Jim Chanos traces the history of scapegoating shorts:

In the 1630s, England banned short selling after tulipmania collapsed in the Netherlands to prevent a similar fallout in England. More recently in Malaysia and Pakistan, short sellers have been faulted for stock-market busts. In the U.S., we've seen how corporate executives have tried to place the blame for their failures on short sellers instead of on themselves. In the end, short sellers -- not management -- defended honesty in the pricing of shares by demanding accountability. Short sellers openly warned about the problems at Enron, Tyco, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before their meltdowns. . .

The huge losses and evaporation of storied companies underscores the need for short selling, not the danger of it. New rules requiring that short sellers disclose their positions cross the line, and will subject investors to harassment and "issuer retaliation" in the form of frivolous lawsuits filed by corporate executives who don't like people betting against their stocks. That's dangerous because short sellers are often the first people to warn other investors of malfeasance and excessive risk-taking at public companies.

When we look back on the current market mess with the perspective of a few years, it will be clear the short sellers had nothing to do with the current crisis.

Forget the ban on naked shorting. The SEC has just totally banned short-selling in 799 financial shares.

According to MarketWatch, "The ban takes effect immediately and runs until midnight on Oct. 2. The SEC said it may extend the order if it's necessary to protect investors, but it won't last more than 30 days."

A full list of companies covered by the rule is listed here.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.