TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says Bernanke's laissez-faire "policy" is at the heart of the mortgage crisis.

Spitzer's right. Believe me, much of what is happening in the bond market world in the insurance of bonds is about Darwin and laissez-faire and Ayn Rand. It is about letting the marketplace rule, and of letting capitalism run wild and roughshod. That's why I was so glad to hear Eliot Spitzer say as much on CNBC this morning.

Sure, many of the people who took these mortgages shouldn't have. But we have known since time began that you can fool people who aren't clever and who are greedy, so you have to protect them from themselves.

That's not what we did. Instead, we figured that the marketplace will take care of everything, that capitalism produces the best result.

New York governor Eliot Spitzer may be a lawyer by training, but he must harbor secret aspirations of becoming a financier. He will tell Congress today that the problems at bond insurance companies could become "financial tsunami" if they are not fixed.

Spitzer has a point. As Reuters points out, "if insurers are downgraded by ratings agencies, investors that can only hold top-rated bonds may have to sell billions of dollars of securities, lifting borrowing costs for cities and consumers alike." Banks might also have to write-down the value of any of these bonds that they hold on their balance sheets.

The debate now is whether the private sector should handle this on its own with banks including Citigroup (NYSE: C) providing financing to insurance firms such as Ambac (NYSE: ABK). The banks already have credit problems that could make those investments difficult.

If Spitzer truly wants to avoid what be feels will be a catastrophe he needs to say that New York State will provide the bond insurers some financial guarantees and capital. Then the banks are likely to come in.

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

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says AIG's Sullivan joins the "formers" at Citi and Marsh & McLennan as Eliot Spitzer's appointee failures.

Three strikes, and Spitzer's guys should all be out.

That's my thoughts about this Martin Sullivan/AIG (NYSE: AIG) (Cramer's Take) scandal. Remember that Sullivan was basically appointed to run AIG by Eliot Spitzer after he kicked out Hank Greenberg for a laundry list of bad deeds. Just like Chuck Prince was appointed to run Citigroup (NYSE: C) (Cramer's Take) when Spitzer booted Sandy Weill, and Mike Cherkasky was appointed to run Marsh & McLennan (NYSE: MMC) (Cramer's Take) when Spitzer axed Jeffrey Greenberg.

All three men were brought in to clean up the mess. Both Prince and Cherkasky were lawyers who were way over their heads as operators.

Prince presided over the destruction of a great American bank -- although it was kind of a re-destruction in light of how bad it was in 1990 -- when he allowed billions in off-balance-sheet borrowings that he simply did not understand.

Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER), Deutsche Bank AG (NYSE: DB), and Bear Stearns Cos. (NYSE: BSC) have been subpoenaed by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo as part of an investigation of "related to the packaging and selling of debt tied to high-risk mortgages," according to the Wall Street Journal (subscription required).

Among the information Cuomo is seeking is about the super cozy relationship between the banks and the credit-rating agencies, the paper said.

This is big.

Cuomo, the son of former Gov, Mario Cuomo, is a politically ambitious guy. His predecessor Eliot Spitzer made his mark exposing the sleazy practices of Wall Street analysts and brought down former New York Stock Exchange honcho Richard Grasso.

Sure this is a fishing expedition, but Cuomo is a captain of a mighty big ship. The banks better strike a deal with him fast or else they are going be in for a tough slog.

New York Governor Eliot Spitzer signed a bill last week eliminating state-imposed price restriction on reselling event tickets, effectively legalizing scalping. More and more states have been repealing anti-scalping laws in recent years, paving the way for companies like eBay Inc. (NASDAQ: EBAY) subsidiary StubHub to create a market for the resale of tickets.

As "deregulation" of scalping continues, StubHub and similar companies should prosper. It's hard to understand why it's taken so long for so many states to eliminate these antiquated laws. According to the Boston Globe, "The justification for anti-scalping laws has been the desire to prevent fans from paying exorbitant amounts for tickets."

But if someone wants to pay $5,000 for a ticket to see the Rolling Stones, why would the government interfere? Who exactly is being protected when the state tells a guy who wants to buy a ticket from someone who wants to sell it that he's not allowed to see the concert.

There's really no economics-based justification for anti-scalping laws. It appears to be a reaction to the unsavory perception of the business, but I can think of plenty of other unsavory industries that are perfectly legal. Now I'm going to go look at my cell phone bill and try to figure out why it's so high.

The day's trading results are in and it was a brutal session for eBay. The stock is down to $36.77, a 9% one-day drop the day after the company reported middling results. Volume was massive -- 47 million shares traded when eBay's 30 day average volume is 11 million. That's 330% more than usual.

Here's the rub: As far as I can tell, only one investment bank downgraded the stock today. That was RBC Capital Markets -- and only to a neutral rating. Plenty of other analysts kept their buy ratings on the shares.

So why the rush to the exits?

Could it be that some Wall Street analysts are quietly ushering their best clients to the exits while keeping their buy rating intact so as to stay in eBay's good graces? After all, the company has been doing quite a lot of deals lately.

I have no proof, but stranger things happen on Wall Street. Just ask Eliot Spitzer.