????觀察鳥類飛行模式的科學家告訴我們，在“V”型遷徙隊伍中帶頭的那只鳥時而朝前看，時而朝后看。它總是在查看身后的隊形，同時不斷調整位置，以確保自己處在“V”字的尖上。每隔一段時間，帶頭的那只鳥就會飛離原來的位置，另一只鳥就會向前移動來取代它，它們會不斷地重復這個過程——領飛，調整位置，領飛，再調整位置。

????上周，美國總統奧巴馬談到了美聯儲主席伯南克的未來。外界認為，奧巴馬的話清楚地表明，伯南克將在任期結束后離開美聯儲。奧巴馬說，伯南克在任的“時間已經超過了他本來的計劃”，此言引來眾多猜測。伯南克會被解職嗎？會讓他完成任期嗎？奧巴馬對他不滿嗎？評論人士正在努力地把這些點點滴滴連成一串，權威人士則一拍腦門說，如果伯南克沒能出席今年在懷俄明州杰克霍爾舉行的全球央行行長會議，那就應該真相大白了。所有這一些可能意味著什么呢？

????作為美聯儲主席，伯南克的任期截止時間為2014年1月1日；而作為美聯儲委員，他的任期將到2020年1月31日結束。撇開猜測不說，現在讓他卸任似乎毫無道理（有評論人士猜測：“奧巴馬總統說這句話時可能沒看提詞器”）。奧巴馬無意謀求連任，在經濟發展日趨緩慢的情況下，現在才有人跳出來搶功或者當替罪羊都已經太晚了。

????當然，有些人認為從一開始就不應該任命伯南克為美聯儲主席。獨立金融研究和媒體公司Hedgeye一直對伯南克的政策不滿意——這種情緒遠在伯南克上任之前就已出現。從很多方面來看，伯南克都稱不上一位領袖，他只是艾倫?格林斯潘、亨利?保爾森和蒂姆?蓋特納一派的成員，對富人呵護有加。我們一直堅決支持沃爾克式（指提出了“沃爾克規則”的保羅?沃爾克）的變化，它能將所有不利影響壓縮到很短一段時間內，然后徹底解決問題。

????同時，我們還想鄭重地說一句，我們要高度稱贊伯南克的智慧、奉獻以及他在任職期間的全力投入。在最理想的環境下，無論是否作為，美聯儲主席都會受到譴責。即使沒有拿過普林斯頓大學（Princeton）博士學位，我們也都能看出來伯南克從來都沒有遇到過最理想的環境。

????不過，還是那個問題，他要承擔多大的責任？

????伯南克采取的辦法一直是刺激金融市場，進而激活主要銀行和金融公司。我們不知道伯南克是否相信數萬億美元的擔保、無本萬利的國債交易以及實實在在的援助資金真的會變成美國公司手中的貸款。伯南克是全球聞名的大蕭條專家，他對大蕭條的解讀是，政府所做的遠遠不夠。實際上，后人可能對他做出積極評價。美國社會太自由，政策因此受到很多牽制，立法和監管又充滿了妥協和對抗，自上而下地管理經濟絕不是一件容易的事。

????Scientists observing bird flight patterns tell us the lead goose in the migratory V-pattern switches back and forth between looking ahead and looking back. It constantly checks the formation behind and adjusts its position to make sure it remains at the point of the flock. Periodically, the lead goose swerves out and another moves up to replace it, going through the same drill of lead, reposition, lead, and reposition.

????President Obama made noises last week about Bernanke's future, comments which are being read as a clear signal that Bernanke will leave the Fed when his current term expires. Hot speculation was set off when President Obama said Bernanke has been on the job "longer than he was supposed to." Will Bernanke be fired? Will he be allowed to serve out his term? Is he in the Presidential doghouse? Commentators are furiously connecting the dots as pundits smack themselves on the forehead saying, We shoulda known when Bernanke failed to show at this year's global central bank confab at Jackson Hole, Wyo. What could all this mean?

????Bernanke's term as Fed Chairman runs through January 31, 2014. His term as a member of the Federal Reserve Board ends January 31, 2020. Speculation aside, there seems little point in letting him go at this juncture ("Maybe President Obama didn't look at his teleprompter when he made that remark," one commentator mused.) President Obama is not up for reelection, and with the wheels of the economy grinding, it's too late for someone else to step in and take either credit or blame.

????Of course there are those who wish he'd never gotten the appointment in the first place. Hedgeye has taken exception with Bernanke's policies from the beginning -- starting well before him. Bernanke is in many respects not a leader, but rather a follower of the Alan Greenspan-Henry Paulson-Tim Geithner school of coddling the rich. We have been firmly in favor of a Volcker-like jolt, one that pushes all the pain into a short time frame, then gets it out of the way.

????At the same time, we wish to state for the record that we have tremendous admiration for Bernanke's intelligence, for his dedication, and for the profound commitment he has brought to his stint in public service. Serving as the appointed Head of Bloody Everything is a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't proposition under the best of circumstances. It does not take a Princeton Ph.D. to recognize that Bernanke has not been faced with the best of circumstances.

????The question remains, though, how much of that is his fault?

????Bernanke's approach has been to stimulate the financial markets, and with them the major banking and financial firms. It is not clear to us that Bernanke ever believed the multiple trillions of dollars in guarantees, free profits on Treasury spreads, and actual cash handouts were ever going to turn into actual loans to America's businesses. Bernanke's read of the Great Depression -- a topic on which he is famously a world-renowned expert -- is that the government did not do nearly enough. And history may in fact judge him in a positive light. In a society with so many freedoms tugging at the strings of policy -- and with such a compromised and conflicted process driving both legislation and the regulatory process -- it can't be simple to manage the economy from the top down.