Lawmakers React To Bailout
By Nicole Belle Sunday Sep 21, 2008 8:45amMan, I wish I knew which Democratic lawmaker said this:
We may strip out all the gives to industry in the predatory mortgage lending bill that the House passed last November, which hasn't budged in the Senate, and include that in the bill. There are other ideas on the table but they are going to be tough to work out before next week.
I also find myself drawn to provisions that would serve no useful purpose except to insult the industry, like requiring the CEOs, CFOs and the chair of the board of any entity that sells mortgage related securities to the Treasury Department to certify that they have completed an approved course in credit counseling. That is now required of consumers filing bankruptcy to make sure they feel properly humiliated for being head over heels in debt, although most lost control of their finances because of a serious illness in the family. That would just be petty and childish, and completely in character for me.
I'm open to other ideas, and I am looking for volunteers who want to hold the sons of bitches so I can beat the crap out of them.
Unfortunately, that kind of anger and cojones are few and far between in DC, and another lawmaker outlines how he sees it going:
Here's the industry's play: progressives will approach Nancy with ideas for reform, and she'll agree to push for their proposals, and she'll really mean it. Then industry lobbyists will go to Dennis Moore, Melissa Bean and a few other Democrats, and tell them how dire the consequences of the proposals would be, and that the members who understand how the economy works need to step up to stop Nancy and the crazy liberals from doing something rash. Then those Democrats will go to Steny and tell him how terrible Nancy's crazy ideas would be, and how we can't rush into something like that without much, much more thought. [..] The only way, our leadership will conclude, to get anything at all passed is to include nothing more than the inconsequential proposals that the lobbyists agreed to. Then we'll all go along because it would be wildly irresponsible not to act when we're staring over the brink of a complete collapse of world financial markets.
I'd diagram it for you if I had a chalkboard. I've seen the play again and again, and it always goes for long yardage.
The only defense for the play is for a significant group of Democrats to say they won't vote for any proposal that isn't unpalatable to industry, and mean it. It's a pretty high stakes game of chicken, but otherwise we come out of this with nothing but a $700 billion giveaway to a crooked industry.
Pathetic. Gutless. Bad for America. But watch it happen. If you haven't already, please take a few minutes to contact your representatives to tell them not to give President Paulson a blank check. Faxes and letters have more impact than phone calls, and as always, stay polite.
Login or Register to post comments.
No oversight, no courts, no congress, just trust us. Gee, what could possibly go wrong? Also, in all this cacaphony about $700 Billion, has anyone asked how much it's going to cost to administer this buyout of bad loans? More government, more no-bid private contracts?
I was just reading Paul Krugman's oped on this today in the NYT.
"Some are saying that we should simply trust Mr. Paulson, because he’s a smart guy who knows what he’s doing. But that’s only half true: he is a smart guy, but what, exactly, in the experience of the past year and a half — a period during which Mr. Paulson repeatedly declared the financial crisis “contained,” and then offered a series of unsuccessful fixes — justifies the belief that he knows what he’s doing? He’s making it up as he goes along, just like the rest of us."
That ain't cojones, that's just talking shit.
Whomsoever wrote those words is too gutless a slag to attach her/his own real name, in either case (the latter being the operant model, obviously).
This series of events should prove positively to anyone who dares/cares to listen.watch the pathetic, utter, conmplete sell-out of the People to the Corporations...
BOTH PARTIES AGREE IN PRINCIPLE, quibble over details.
But they're both gonna fuck us.
The only difference: the Pukes will be grinning, while the Dims cry crocodile tears...
More from the Krugman article I mentioned in comment #2
"But Mr. Paulson insists that he wants a “clean” plan. “Clean,” in this context, means a taxpayer-financed bailout with no strings attached — no quid pro quo on the part of those being bailed out. Why is that a good thing? Add to this the fact that Mr. Paulson is also demanding dictatorial authority, plus immunity from review “by any court of law or any administrative agency,” and this adds up to an unacceptable proposal."
Krugman's final paragraph:
"But I’d urge Congress to pause for a minute, take a deep breath, and try to seriously rework the structure of the plan, making it a plan that addresses the real problem. Don’t let yourself be railroaded — if this plan goes through in anything like its current form, we’ll all be very sorry in the not-too-distant future."
It's ABSURD!! The democrats in Congress must grow some BALLS!!!! It is the repubs way to clean out the bank before Obama takes office. We couldn't find money to help Katrina victims, no one cares about the mortage crisis at least a year ago, now suddenly we can find 700 billions to help the rich crooks??? I don't think so. Just take the billions and give them to all the people to pay off their mortgages, won't the bank have money then? Lets do that. Surely the assholes who ran Wall Street to the ground still can afford to pay their bills with the golden parachutes. How could they object to that?
This is a disgrace to our country. Pelosi, get your brass balls out and lets put an end to this craziness.
Comedian Pat Paulson would make a better President...
another fine example of the true conservative economic ideology being overtaken by the new neo-con like world view of disaster capitalism. if you can nearly break the back of the financial arm of the american gov't, then spending on social security, medicaid/care and health care in geneeral, education or any social programs for that matter will become even more impossible and the goal of dismantling depression-era new deal reforms will be one massive step closer. AND if this can be done while blaming the consumer class and obfuscating the truth behind these events, the elite will have chalked up another success in their 30yr push back against the power of the middle class. Economics is a zero sum game. the easiest way the rich get richer is by taking from the tax payer . . . in fact a $700billion transfer of wealth in to the hands of the same fuckers who brought us this mess. its deviously perfect. it was 100% predictable, and like fried ice-cream, it is a reality! THINK - it aint illegal yet!
Sec Paulson wants a trillion dollars/American to give to his own industry?..BANG the loan court gavel says..LOAN DENIED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jusker @ 1:
Which maverick is willing to say no to this 'Financial Bridge to Nowhere'?
One word: FEAR.
pissed off patricia @ 2:
no, this has all been scripted well in advance.
check out naomi klein on bill maher, then find out about her book, "shock doctrine".
paulson shouldn't be made president, he should be asked to leave the country, and if he won't go, he should be arrested and put on trial.
Wall St. Seeks Expanded Bailout, for Hookers and Drugs
I think maybe in most civilized societies these banker/robber Republicans would spend their lives in prison...here in fascist Amerika we give them a trillion dollars. I guess it just must be me, I'm so negative.
Damn. Grow a pair, D's! It's not so bad that you have to act NOW!
Consider the options. Apply some liberal/progressive SHOCK DOCTRINE for a change! Take a page from FDR's Manual and bring in some young best and brightest to help figure out a policy that WORKS for US, not some half-assed POS!
Don't just complain here, I know it feels better than nothing, but also send your Rep a note, or call, or do something, 'cause I'm pretty sure my Rep is not going to read my posts to this site (though I wish she would).
Ultimately it'll likely mean nothing, but at least you would have tried.
Just remember whenever you meet some Republican out schmoozing, bullshitting, and shaking hands in public he or she will never know the reason your smiling at them is because your thinking . . . . .
"The Party That Wrecked America"
Blank Sheet
Semi-offtopic.. but what happened to Bush's legacy year?
You know.. this was going to be the year that Bush had some major wins, and when he was going to finally start to reap the fruit of his policies, vindicating his legacy.. How's that working out for ya'?
Guess the right-wing pundits were right, though. This year, Bush has managed to create a legacy for years to come. It's just not the kind anyone would've wanted.
tazed silence @ 16:
A valid point - unless your rep is Trent Franks, my "rep." This former Halliburton employee votes with pResident Shithead 100% of the time.
I used to call but got tired of having my "patriotism" questioned.
L.A. Confidential @ 17:
Or in the Dems case . . . "The Party that stood by passively and allowed the Cons to Wreck America"
Assuming 300,000,000 Americans, the 700 billion works out to $2,333/ person, send that to every American, we'd probably be better off
Get ready for a full-frontal Republican rightwing media assault of the Dems (and Obama) all this week for not immediately supporting the disastrous "Bush Bailout"[tm]. They will effectively turn this into a "what's wrong with the Dems (and Obama)?" media circus. If I weren't a rational person I would almost say this was a planned event.
If the Dems are smart (?) they will jump ahead of this. All they have to do is remind voters of the last time they gave in to the Bushies without thinking things through and how that little escapade turned out.
Plus we're rewarding the criminals who pulled this sh*t off. And Boosh Co gets to privatize the U.S. economy.
What a scam~!
If the congress doesn' t hand bush a "clean plan" I wonder if bush will veto it? Considering the emergency they say this thing is, could bush afford to veto it if it doesn't meet all of Paulson's demands?
Old man and his pig @ 14:
In China, the society they most want to emulate -- trading prosperity for liberty --they'd have been hauled out behind a police station, given a shovel and told to dig their graves. They'd have been shot, their bodies covered with quick-lime and forgotten by evveryone except their families...
What, exactly, does this bailout mean down the road?
Will these financial institutions -- the ownership of their real estate property, the ownership of their products (junk mortgages, etc.) -- belong to the US government and by extension US citizens, or remain in holding by the bailed-out companies? Will there be new leadership by government employees at the helm of each of these institutions, or will those who brought them to this pass remain at the wheel running them? Will their operations be transferred to Washington?
And will the "products" that are now bearing loan-burdens far beyond their real worth be sold for the value of the loan or at a loss? If it's at a loss, depending on who's actually running these institutions after the bailout, who takes the loss?
And furthermore, since there are no time limits on the bailout money (which can be replenished at Paulson's will), and given the actual value of the loan-products, can we expect Paulson et al to "rescue" the same institutions more than once?
I'm getting the strong message that the institutions being bailed out will just continue their business with the same individuals piloting the ships, and these institutions will no more "belong" to taxpayers than the moon belongs to taxpayers.
I have not seen one rational result suggested that would be the result of this bailout. The focus is saving the system now, not putting it on a stable path. I'm getting the strong message that this bailout is NOT the answer to anything but instead is a rubber band suspending a 2-ton truck over the edge of a cliff, even if government "regulation" is reinstated.
It's hopeless trying to maintain-prop up the life we used to have.
Everything is changing
your country just leaves me shaking my head some days
bullfrog @ 12:
Thank you so much for that link and I don't know why in the hell I have not yet bought and read her book.
anney @ 27:
You got it. Anyone who has savings and investments and assets understands this to well!
From Jon Nadler at Kitco.com
Any wonder, then, that investors are mimicking headless chickens? With profuse apologies to Led Zeppelin:
Been dazed and confused for so long its not true,
Wanted only profit, never bargained for you.
Lots of people talk and few of them know,
Soul of the markets was created below. yeah!
Try to love you greenback, but you push me away.
Don't know where you're goin'
Only know just where you've been,
Been dazed and confused for so long, its not true,
Wanted only profit, never bargained for you.
Take it easy Paulson, let them say what they will.
Will your tongue wag so much when they send you the bill?
What the proposed bail-out is is the fiduciary equivalent of the THE PATRIOT ACT.
Has NONE of you actually read Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine?"
this crisis is the "PERFECT FUCKING STORM": people confused, uninformed, angry and afraid. The Pukes ready with legislation which does nothing to correct the problems but redistributes power more and more the the executive.
Absent a massive--i mean MILLIONS of PISSED-OFF PEOPLE--demonstration around Congress and the ShiteHouse, they'll get away with this just as they've gotten away with every-fucking-thing they wanted since 2001.
Aren't you PISSED yet?
These guys are masters at destruction, and too few are willing to call them out on it. Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" is right on. But instead of just taking advantage of such opportunities, you'd have to be a fool if you didn't think they created some opportunities as well. Florida 2000 wasn't just given to these guys. They made it happen.
Orangutan. @ 34:
Right the fuck on, my friend in the forest...
woody, tokin librul @ 33:
No I don't need to read her book I new this stuff long before she even got the idea to write it.
The bottom line is Americans are going to have to actually WORK soon.
And I don't mean sitting at the computer all day complaining.
Sheeyit, you mean Pat Paulson is finally President? Who's in the Cabinet, Tom and Dick Smothers? Steve Martin? Things are really FUBAR aren't they?
Mike the Canuck @ 29:
What do you mean somedays? This is business as usual.
The first thing you need to understand is that any media reference to the bailout mess is a deliberate misleading of American public opinion so that our collective life savings can be hijacked by the bankers cabal.
In the flim-flam now being pulled on the American public, the main players will not only stay in business, they will make new fortunes paid for with your tax dollars.
I'M PISSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Patrick Ruffini explains the corrupt Republican logic of voting against any bailout.
Here is an article on Nader's 10 point plan.
It's the concept of Problem-Reaction-Solution played out. They create a problem that causes a reaction that they then provide a solution for. It's history.
Here's a short video explaining the concept of Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kieyjfZDUIc
As I have said from day one, this is the greatest swindle in the history of the world.
How to explain the Wall Street Bailout plan as an illustrative metaphor. The colossal debt is not unlike the iceberg that sank the Titanic. In this case, it's the subprime mortage meltdown. Now that Wall Street has finally hit that iceberg. It's time to abandon ship, but since there aren't enough lifeboats what do you do? Here's how it works. You tell everyone you've got a plan. Since it's an emergency you must trust the captain to tell you what to do i.e. no oversight of the bailout. The banks get to keep the good debt, ie. the lifeboats. The taxpayers (aka steerage) get to pay for the deck chairs which of course they'll be able to rearrange any way they like.
Bottom line. Because there is no oversight in this plan this Wall Street Bailout = Selling us the deck chairs on the Titanic.
I posted this in the Kudlow email thread but I figured I would repeat because its more relevant here (this was sent to House member Mitchell yesterday):
Dear Representative Mitchell,
I am a constituent of yours living in the Shalimar neighborhood of Tempe, and I am writing to you to request that you resist and vote against the proposed bill by the Bush Administration to use tax payer funds to purchase real estate related securitized debt obligations, or other financial products, from private banks or any other seller. If the Treasury Department wants to use taxpayer funds to repay FDIC insured accounts fine. If the Treasury Deparatment want to use tax payer money to make loans to consumers or business as a market participant because the existing so called finance industry now refuses to do so fine. But to buy worthless assets with tax payer funds (that will be itself borrowed) that enrich private commercial interests (why do you think the stock market just went up) is outrageous. The Administrations conclusory argument that we have to do this or we get a depression is not substantive. They have not made public any coherent argument that that is the case or that buying worthless assets is a solution. The meeting with congressional leaders where supposedly everyone was scared with non-public information sounds like the same type of non-public and false information given out in the meetings before the Iraq war and look where that got us. Low stock prices is not a crisis, its either an accurate reflection of companies’ values or a buying opportunity. The only companies that need a high stock price or their fundamentals fail are frauds like Entron and that is the vibe this whole thing has. You don't fix an Enron problem by throwing money at Enron. We have had 200 years bankruptcy law in this country, put it to work for the non-commercial banks, and have the fed take over insolvent commercial banks just as it did in the late 80's. The liquidation value of these mortgage backed securiites will be determined in these processes and they will be sold to private investors, not taxpayers for insane premiums. One of the reason stated for this whole effort is to stabilize home prices. Using taxpayer money to prop up inflated home prices (prices that have disconnected from the peoples incomes to carry the debt service on them) is awful policy. Ironically none of these measures enables homeowners to restructure their home loans based on the liquidation value of their homes like one can do with nearly every other type of loan due to an exception secured by the lending industry in the bankruptcy code. If you struck that exception you would have given homeowners all they need to stay in homes that they can actually afford without a dime paid by the taxpayer. Finally, its my sense that you pretty much do whatever the Congressional leadership tells you to do. I am sorry if this perception is incorrect, but if it is incorrect please show some indepedence now and push back against this godawful 700 billion dollar trainwreck being rammed down our throats. Pardon the harsh tone of this email but it is a very important issue, maybe along with the Iraq war funding bills, one of the most important votes of your career.
Mark Giunta
Bottom line. Because there is no oversight in this plan this Wall Street Bailout = Selling us the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Yep. But AFTER the fucker hit the iceberg...So we'll have up-close and personal seats at our own embeggarment...
Alice X - (Chomsky Nader) - status quObama - change you can pretend in - @ 42:
Gee, this is just what I'd do, were it up to me.
Anyway, contacting Congress now is a waste of time.
The only thing that isn't is voting them all out this November.
From Obama:
The era of greed and irresponsibility on Wall Street and in Washington has led to a financial crisis as profound as any we have faced since the Great Depression.
But regardless of how we got here, the circumstances we face require decisive action because the jobs, savings, and economic security of millions of Americans are now at risk.
We must work quickly in a bipartisan fashion to resolve this crisis and restore our financial sector so capital is flowing again and we can avert an even broader economic catastrophe. We also should recognize that economic recovery requires that we act, not just to address the crisis on Wall Street, but also the crisis on Main Street and around kitchen tables across America.
But thus far, the Administration has only offered a concept with a staggering price tag, not a plan.
Even if the Treasury recovers some or most of its investment over time, this initial outlay of up to $700 billion is sobering. And in return for their support, the American people must be assured that the deal reflects some basic principles.
• No blank check. If we grant the Treasury broad authority to address the immediate crisis, we must insist on independent accountability and oversight. Given the breach of trust we have seen and the magnitude of the taxpayer money involved, there can be no blank check.
• Rescue requires mutual responsibility. As taxpayers are asked to take extraordinary steps to protect our financial system, it is only appropriate to expect those institutions that benefit to help protect American homeowners and the American economy. We cannot underwrite continued irresponsibility, where CEOs cash in and our regulators look the other way. We cannot abet and reward the unconscionable practices that triggered this crisis. We have to end them.
• Taxpayers should be protected. This should not be a handout to Wall Street. It should be structured in a way that maximizes the ability of taxpayers to recoup their investment. Going forward, we need to make sure that the institutions that benefit from financial insurance also bear the cost of that insurance.
• Help homeowners stay in their homes. This crisis started with homeowners and they bear the brunt of the nearly unprecedented collapse in housing prices. We cannot have a plan for Wall Street banks that does not help homeowners stay in their homes and help distressed communities.
• A global response. As I said on Friday, this is a global financial crisis and it requires a global solution. The United States must lead, but we must also insist that other nations, who have a huge stake in the outcome, join us in helping to secure the financial markets.
• Main Street, not just Wall Street. The American people need to know that we feel as great a sense of urgency about the emergency on Main Street as we do the emergency on Wall Street. That is why I call on Senator McCain, President Bush, Republicans and Democrats to join me in supporting an emergency economic plan for working families – a plan that would help folks cope with rising gas and food prices, save one million jobs through rebuilding our schools and roads, help states and cities avoid painful budget cuts and tax increases, help homeowners stay in their homes, and provide retooling assistance to help ensure that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built in America.
• Build a regulatory structure for the 21st Century. While there is not time in a week to remake our regulatory structure to prevent abuses in the future, we should commit ourselves to the kind of reforms I have been advocating for several years. We need new rules of the road for the 21st Century economy, together with the means and willingness to enforce them.
The bottom line is that we must change the economic policies that led us down this dangerous path in the first place. For the last eight years, we’ve had an “on your own-anything goes” philosophy in Washington and on Wall Street that lavished tax cuts on the wealthy and big corporations; that viewed even common-sense regulation and oversight as unwise and unnecessary; and that shredded consumer protections and loosened the rules of the road. Ordinary Americans are now paying the price. The events of this week have rendered a final verdict on that failed philosophy, and it is a philosophy I will end as President of the United States,” said Senator Barack Obama.
L.A. Confidential @ 39:
And that is exactly why its critical to look to alternative sources of media and news for input. Enough with the stupid labels and fear calling things or people "Conspiracy Theorists". Are you kidding me. Are you fucking kidding me. You are going to worry about some god damn label like a "conspiracy theory" when this shit is happening all around us. I'm not saying believe anything, but at least be open minded to new ways of thinking or concepts. Geez. Enough with the label induced limitations. Geez.
Just think, if Congress was controlled by the Republicans, this would be a non-issue. The Republicans would have pass the proposal by now and we, the taxpayers, would be left with the tax bag while people on Wall Street would be celebrating.
The markets are fine, credit is shaky buy no reason to rush this thru except to get it off the media.
It is death for the gop.
Like the drill, dril, drill, bill the gop wants to vote after the election.
I say debate the bailout bill and vote for it after the election too.
Perfect timing for early voting to start.
Obama is going to win this cycle.
And who says that Democrats aren't fiscally responsible?
(Conversely, who says that republicans ARE fiscally responsible. Any true capitalist would realize this and vote Democrat this November.)
We must be cautious regarding this bailout. People are in a rush to do something for a quick fix and not knowing the consequences that follows in the future. Remember, we rushed into a war with Iraq and we, the taxpayers are paying dearly for that mistake.
TX @ 49
Do you think this will really fly?
DUNCAN @ 54:
Exactly. WHAT'S THE RUSH?
Here is Glenn Greenwald's latest on the impending debacle.
An opposition party is forming at last, the REPUBLICANS!
Well of course, they don't want Obama to have these dictatorial powers!
We know the Democrats are worthless as an opposition party, the Republicans, however are good at.
HYPOCRISY abounds and IRONY abounds.
In any event, the Corporate Media will MISREPRESENT the PRINCIPLES, the PRINCIPALS and the PROCEEDINGS so as to confuse the electorate.
McCain is speaking (covered in whole by three cable news shows) trying to detach himself from Paulson's plan. Of course he's attacking Obama for having "no plan".
Glenn Greenwald has great point here. Isn't this McCain's reasoning for no Universal Healthcare?
"Can anyone point to any discussion of what the implications are for having the Federal Government seize control of the largest and most powerful insurance company in the country, as well as virtually the entire mortgage industry and other key swaths of financial services? Haven't we heard all these years that national health care was an extremely risky and dangerous undertaking because of what happens when the Federal Government gets too involved in an industry? What happened in the last month dwarfs all of that by many magnitudes."
This sounds exactly like the PATRIOT ACT with these guys. Except that instead of destroying the Constitution of this Country and our individual rights, this time they are attempting to destroy our Financial Future and Economic System. It's happened before.
Jo @ 56:
Ditto to what you both said. As I mentioned last Friday, bush's attitude toward this reminds me of his same attitude when he wanted to rush to invade Iraq. The consequences of not doing this are far greater than the consequences of doing it. He used almost the same line before the war that he used in regard to this last week.
Alice X - (Chomsky Nader) - status quObama - change you can pretend in - @ 44:
I usually agree with you, but not this one.
Two words.
Manifest Destiny.
I should would like all the discussions, meetings, etc. to be televised. If I'm going to help pay for something, I'd sure like to know what I'm buying. (I'm not referring to Sarah Palin here) I think we may be buying a pig in a poke.
pissed off patricia @ 2:
I've always believed that when someone says, "trust me," to hang onto my wallet.
MN USA @ 63:
With so much or our money being on the line, we should demand board member rights to attend all meetings.
Bush has ¡Arbusted! the whole fugging country.
Heck of a job, there.
pissed off patricia @ 4:
Does anyone understand what exactly will happen if these finance companies are forced to eat their own bad debts?
The Democratic party. The party of Wall Street. Flush with bribe money from the same thieving bankers that are in the process of looting the public treasury of hundreds of billions of dollars. They'll stick up to their paymasters on behalf of the taxpayers. Yesiree.
MN USA @ 67:
Ummm.... for the first time ever, the socialist bankers on Wall Street posing as free market capitalists will be held accountable for their criminally negligent shenanigans.
I want to be on record that I would gladly be a volunteer to help hold the sons of bitches down so the above mentioned congressperson could beat the crap out of them.
And I will volunteer to add a few kicks and punches of my own.
People need to be taught what War Profiteering means. Also, it should be included in the list of actions considered as treason. Any funds that can be seen raised from profiteering should then be frozen in the international market.
On mortgage loan documents, there's a clause that informs everyone involved that filling in false information is illegal. Will the loan administrators who filled out false income and false home values and other false information to get the loan passed be prosecuted? Perhaps the CEOs and top executives and board members should be fined, say $100,000, for each bad loan. That could go towards helping their victims keep their homes.
jax @ 69:
Just fuuking QUIT IT.
This is NOT 'Socialism" for the Elitocrats.
It's CorpoRat Welfare.
Socialism requires reciprocity from its beneficiaries.
This is just a give-away, a free-pass, a get-out-of-jail-free card.
Wanna see sumpin interesting?
Compare Obama's 'plan' with Nader's.
Eye-opening, net paw?
BAIL: Money put up by the innocent to put the accused back on the street. Higher amounts are associated with more serious crimes. Bail amount is forfeited if accused fails to show up in court.
Just so we're all clear on the concept.
OOOOPs...
Linkee busted:
Nader V Obama comparison here
Jo @ 70:
We need Lord Ishido's punishment from the end of Shogun - bury them up to their necks in the town square, let anyone who wants to come by and take a whack at 'em with a wooden sword (for the sake of American spirit, we'll substitute a baseball bat).
Was it Bernie Sanders?
L.A. Confidential @ 17:
Oh, come on LAC. The vote on CFMA was 377-4 (Two Dems and two Reps voted "nay") and the repeal of Glass-Steagall was 90-8 both of which Clinton signed with Robert Rubin sitting at his feet cheering the f*cking things on for Christ sake. The Republicans are fascist MF'ers but the "opposition" are pathetic, corrupt, lying enablers who sold out long ago.
Explain to me the difference between Phil Gramm and Robert Rubin?
Gramm: Introduced and pushed through both CFMA and the Glass-Steagall repeal, left office for UBS, made millions and now is a Senior Economic Advisor for McCain
Rubin: Championed and convinced Clinton to sign both CFMA and the Glass-Steagall repeal, left office for CitiGroup and made millions and now is a Senior Economic Advisor for Obama.
Shadowgm Hussein @ 76:
We should make them apologize to Lord Vader.
"We need to put legislation in this bill that will ease the pain of foreclosures on average Americans" - the Democrats
"Gaaaaaah...we can't afford it!!!!" - The GOP
"We need legislation in this bill that will ease the devastation of personal bankruptcy on average Americans" - the Democrats
"Gaaaaaaah....we can't afford it!" - The GOP
"We need legislation in this bill that will make it easier for average Americans to refinance" - The Democrats
"Gaaaaaaaaah....we can't afford it!" - The GOP
This is what I sent to my Rep.:
I am writing to you to express my displeasure at the $700B bailout that Congress seems overly willing to give the financial industry. I would find it ironic that homeowners, who's subprime mortgage securities are at the heart of the collapse of financial sector firms, are being offered no relief. I would find that ironic if it was not so unbelievably unfair. Now is the time when you and your colleagues need to decide who you work for: corporations and lobbyists or the people. Do you want to sacrifice the national debt and give Mr. Paulson the right to make unreviewable decisions on how to dole out $700B, as stated in the bill? Do you want me to ask my children to pay for foreign corporations' portion of the bailout, as Mr. Paulson said they would yesterday? Do you want to go back to your constituents and tell them it is the best for them to do nothing for them?
Assuming not, please work for the people and against this bailout.
Regards,
B
Response, as always, is doubtful.