1) Supported Bush's tax cuts in 2001, which added debt.
2) Encouraged banks to extend large low interest loans when markets needed to cool off (i.e. "He pushed out too much liquidity at the wrong time.")
3) Encouraged people to take out variable-rate mortgages they wouldn't be able to afford if rates went up.
And let's not forget Greenspan's famed support for privatizing Social Security, which would have added even more liquidity to the markets.
Still, today, Greenspan claims his support for Bush's tax cuts was "contingent" upon spending reductions. As a Washington insider, Greenspan is incredibly naive if he thinks he can hide behind this buck passing fig leaf ... either that or he thinks we're all idiots. As I recall, Greenspan advocated tax cuts 1) warning of the dangers of paying down the debt too fast, and even 2) defended his support for Bush's tax cuts years later.
Does anyone tied to Bush and his policy disasters take responsibility for anything? Honey, pass the buck, please ...