(Sep. 25, 2008): Chaos at the White House over Bailout Talks - Tempers have gone Supernova (FOX News)

[Ace]

FOX was reporting that there was chaos at the White House.

The talks didn't go well.

It doesn't appear that Obama was getting his way.

[GaGirl]

Even if McCain is not the Republicans preferred candidate, he is the Republican candidate. The Republicans are not about to let the Dems get any sort of upper hand.

[Agent 00½ FL]

Obamas excuse is that Cameras change things. Presidential Politics blah blah blah. WTF!@!@!

[Ace]

Obama is giving one of his uhh...uhhh...uhhh..uhhh type speeches again.

[sadie]

Obamas excuse is that Cameras change things. Presidential Politics blah blah blah. WTF!@!@!

LMAO, he actually said that?!? What is that saying about glass houses and throwing stones? :eek:

[Ace]

Obamas excuse is that Cameras change things. Presidential Politics blah blah blah. WTF!@!@!

good grief

[Agent 00½ FL]

I am so mad right now. They are saying McCain is a fraud that he didn't speak during the meeting today and this is some big show. I am so mad right now.:mad:

[lanney]

Yes, we know, Obama's San Francisco trip and Scarton, PA. Camera change and oh Presidential Politics.

[samkm]

Obama makes it photo op and gives statements and posturing.. before President Bush has had a chance to come out.

Neil Cavuto called this worse than socialism. .... Capitalism is about success, but it is also about failure.

[Agent 00½ FL]

Anybody watch FOX and hear how they are calling McCain a Fraud, that he didn't speak during the meeting today. I am so mad right now. :mad:

[Ace]

Anybody watch FOX and hear how they are calling McCain a Fraud, that he didn't speak during the meeting today. I am so mad right now. :mad:

This is primarily coming from the BO camp.

I think the idea from them was for BO to show up at the White House and throw a tantrum thereafter.

[EH]

Anybody watch FOX and hear how they are calling McCain a Fraud, that he didn't speak during the meeting today. I am so mad right now. :mad:

WHA????????:eek::eek::eek: Are they tanking, too?

[Michelle M]

Link:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,428165,00.html

[Ace]

They are discussing this on FOX right now.

(A bot is on air right now)

[HillaryVsPalin2012]

LMAO, he actually said that?!? What is that saying about glass houses and throwing stones? :eek:

I saw it as well. Obama really did say that "presidential politics" didn't help with "delicate negotiations" and that the best thing they could do was to go to Mississippi to debate. What a jackwipe!

For one, I'm glad that McCain brought up the alternative proposal. Let's at least consider and see if there's any way to solve it without squandering 700B.

Yes Fox was slamming McCain for not talking much. But his presence allowed the House Republicans to bring to the table this new idea to that permits the US to act as an insurer rather than buying all these securities outright. I'm not convinced it'll be as effective, but it won't send inflation spiralling out of control.

You know if McCain had spoken much more they would accuse him of grandstanding! IMO he was there to get everyone to listen, and he'll be up all night making phone calls to his colleagues to work something out. Hopefully!

Just IMO as someone who's an investor and intensely interested in finance -- I think a hybrid would be the best -- buy up 200B of securities or so to get things moving right away, but insure the rest.

[sadie]

Anybody watch FOX and hear how they are calling McCain a Fraud, that he didn't speak during the meeting today. I am so mad right now. :mad:

I would LOVE to know what enlightened pearls of wisdom Obama shared. Because if McCain "didn't speak", there's no way Obama played a role in this "meeting" at all.

[Ace]

BO camp stated that McCain didn't talk at all...the bot that is on air states that McCain did talk and that there was a plan being formulated that the Democrats didn't agree to...

[santafek]

Silence: This a powerful "power" technique. Let everyone blab their hearts out, show their cards, and then the silent one can act statesmanlike. Maybe that is McCain's technique? Basically, we all as taxpayers want to be protected. Ramming this thing through too quickly makes one wonder who is getting a slice of the pie.

[DC_Mark]

Yuval Levin at NRO:

I am reliably told that John Boehner discussed the Republican Study Committee’s “Rescue Principles” at the White House meeting, and McCain backed up his assertion that House Republicans can’t just be ignored, especially if they have ideas that could improve the package, though he did not explicitly endorse the RSC ideas. McCain’s spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker is telling reporters that McCain is not pushing a particular proposal at the moment but is working to broker an agreement that could address the problems and include the broadest possible bipartisan coalition.

The McCain campaign put out a short statement that reads: “We're optimistic that Sen. McCain will bring House Republicans on board without driving other parties away, resulting in a successful deal for the American taxpayer.”

McCain was apparently a very active participant in the White House discussion, while Obama expressed his support for the general frame of the draft put together by the House and Senate Banking Committees but did not go beyond that. The Democrats did not expect to be presented with additional ideas beyond that draft, and left the meeting decidedly unhappy.

Looks like this is going to last through the weekend--if not beyond that.

[sadie]

I saw it as well. Obama really did say that "presidential politics" didn't help with "delicate negotiations" and that the best thing they could do was to go to Mississippi to debate. What a jackwipe!

For one, I'm glad that McCain brought up the alternative proposal. Let's at least consider and see if there's any way to solve it without squandering 700B.

Yes Fox was slamming McCain for not talking much. But his presence allowed the House Republicans to bring to the table this new idea to that permits the US to act as an insurer rather than buying all these securities outright. I'm not convinced it'll be as effective, but it won't send inflation spiralling out of control.

You know if McCain had spoken much more they would accuse him of grandstanding! IMO he was there to get everyone to listen, and he'll be up all night making phone calls to his colleagues to work something out. Hopefully!

Just IMO as someone who's an investor and intensely interested in finance -- I think a hybrid would be the best -- buy up 200B of securities or so to get things moving right away, but insure the rest.

Welcome HillaryVsPalin2012!! :D

[encarn]

The fact of the matter is that 50 of America's best and brightest economists at Princeton, Yale, MIT, U of Chicago, etc etc. all believe that this $700 billion bailout will actually hurt the economy and end up costing the American taxpayer trillions of dollars in the long run.

Yet no one on Capitol Hill, except the House Republican minorities is even willing to look at this data. Sure, Wall Street loves it. If i was going bankrupt and someone offered me $7 million to invest and "make things right" I would be happy too.

This is all happening WAY TOO FAST and BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. Americans have no idea what the details are and what we are getting ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren into. If this goes bad, we will have increased the national debt by 10% for nothing.

The Democratic Congress just wants to push something through before the election so it gives an appearance that the Democrats know what they are doing, regardless of damning our future or not. After their Anointed One enters office, then they can worry whether they screwed up. The Republican House Minority is worried that this will destroy the free market (upon which our country has flourished for over 200 years) and will disable our economy for 2-3 generations.

This reminds me of when my legs were run over by a truck in a terrible accident. I was able to walk inside my house and drive myself to a hospital. I felt pretty banged up, but nothing too serious. The orthopedic surgeon who saw me in the hospital said, "Listen to me. We need to do a fasciotomy to relieve the swelling in your leg or you will be permanently disabled." I freaked out as he explained what it was. It is basically slicing open an extremity to let it bleed out and thus relieving pressure. Check wikipedia for graphic description and pictures.

I refused the procedure and the surgeon kept yelling at me that I was "being a stubborn ass." I still refused. Four hours later, I got up and checked myself out of the hospital on my own recognizance and drove home. I had some pretty wicked bruises and tire tread imprints on my skin, but I recovered fully. If I had accepted what the surgeon suggested despite me feeling otherwise fine, I would have been permanently disfigured and would have had to endure years of reconstructive surgery and skin grafts.

For goodness sake, take time to listen to the opposition and enough of the Presidential Campaign BS!

[Ace]

more breaking news after the commercial break from the White House...

Top Government officials will meet with Paulson and Bernanke to get this bailout agreement back on track...

The House GOP will have a meeting tonight that will go into the early morning hours...

[Memphis_Blues]

Looks like this is going to last through the weekend--if not beyond that.

Good! This is a lot of money and there should be vigorous and extended debate.

[Ace]

According to FOX: A brand new meeting will begin on Capitol Hill within minutes...

[HillaryVsPalin2012]

Welcome HillaryVsPalin2012!! :D

Thanks! :D Been lurking (really) and just now commenting because, well, it deals in an area I am very interested in.

First of all, the meltdown is very real, and it's coming, and for reasons, there will be unprecedented disaster starting Monday. Even the 700B Bush version (see below) will be better than nothing. If you don't believe me, believe Warren Buffett....

This is my take on the different plans I've heard:

Gingrich's proposal is to bailout nothing, but repeal regulations to grow our way out of it.

Paulson/Bush's proposal is to buy up the bad securities, plain and simple. Then we recoup the money bit by bit as the underlying mortgages sort themselves out. Similar with what happened to RTC -- some parts of that did end up making a profit -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolution_Trust_Corporation

Dems' proposal does the above, but sneaks in earmarks and other stuff that amounts to what is essentially a welfare bill for the billionaires and irresponsible alike, and of course they can't resist sneaking in all kinds of regulations to hamstring businesses. (There was even a report they tried to sneak in a ban on mining oil shales.) Enough regulation and enough earmarks and it'll indeed be worse than doing nothing.

House GOP's proposal is to essentially act as an insurer rather than buying securities. So, in theory, you don't put up 700B up front, but pay for losses instead. I'm not sure how this will work for securities when they're already worth 0, but I'm willing to listen.

Warren Buffett has a proposal that differs slightly from Paulson's -- haven't read too much into it because no politician pays attention to him :(

Most important is that this is all occurring behind closed doors. I only gave the hyper-simplified version, because that's all there is available to the public! And then Obama goes out and complains that bringing this to the public ruins Bush/Dems' little party! Who does he think he works for?

Finally, my take on McCain is that he's investigating the House GOP proposal right now. I have doubts about it myself, but McCain so far has shown he has a much better understanding of economics than your average politician (I recognized his health care stuff as straight out of Milton Friedman's book), and I'll trust him. One thing for sure, the Dems are going to fight against exposing their closed-door deals!

[BillDemo]

Just reported on Fox News Radio a few mins ago:

Bush said: "If these funds aren't loosened up soon, this sucker could go down."

Also, Obama is buying up the TV advertising time that McCain vacated by taking down his ads.
So Obama is capitalizing on this financial crisis.

[DC_Mark]

I think that's an apt analogy, encarn. While I don't think the bail-out would cost taxpayers that much--if at all, the scale of this government intervention could going to do permanent damage to our free market system.

[Ace]

Obama makes it photo op and gives statements and posturing.. before President Bush has had a chance to come out.

Neil Cavuto called this worse than socialism. .... Capitalism is about success, but it is also about failure.

An interesting graphic:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Pournelle_chart_color.gif

[evolin]

I am so mad right now. They are saying McCain is a fraud that he didn't speak during the meeting today and this is some big show. I am so mad right now.:mad:
No one ever learned anything by TALKING, but instead by listening.

[michu]

I vote for Gingrich's version. Unfortunately, I have no vote.

Warren Buffett stands to make a ton of money on this. Nothing against Buffett, but I don't trust anyone that is going to do well on this.

The dems are going to make money as well. The same dems running the show right now are the very same dems that have been getting the goodies for a while now. Hopefully, they will end up in the slammer, but I won't hold my breath. Lord knows, Barney Franks has been in trouble before and nothing happens to him.

I don't know enough about the Republican version to make an informed decision. It still smells of a socialistic bailout to me.

I've read a few posts on here, "But what about the families!?" Not exact words, but basically what they were saying. The vast majority of these people didn't put a dime down on those homes and won't lose a thing by losing their homes. They were able to deduct their rent during the last few years; so they actually came out ahead. They'll simply move to more affordable housing and rent as they've been doing in reality and should have already done instead of hoping we'd bail them out allowing them to get their McMansion for nothing. I'm sorry. I have zero sympathy for these people and I resent the very idea of having to pay for their homes.

[cynthia2]

Originally Posted by Agent 00½ FL http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?p=398051#post398051)
Anybody watch FOX and hear how they are calling McCain a Fraud, that he didn't speak during the meeting today. I am so mad right now. :mad:

Yes, I heard that and it made me mad too. However, then there was McCain's camp telling all the meetings he has had all day. He didn't say anything because he actually knows how to LISTEN. He is there in order to LIASION with other Repbulicans, something Barak Obama knows nothing about. McCain knows to listen and understand and do his negotiating behind the scene and then bring something to the table. Obama is just unbearable.

[Ace]

LOL..Lauran Ingraham stated that France will become more conservative then the U.S.

[Kbentleyis]

HillaryvsPalin: thanks for the info. And, welcome to the group.

McCain is on top of things. Hope those dems and repubs don't have too much hiding in those closets.

[ALL4HILLARY]

Even if McCain is not the Republicans preferred candidate, he is the Republican candidate. The Republicans are not about to let the Dems get any sort of upper hand.

They Rebuplicans want insurance that covers the taxpayers

[geneo]

I vote for Gingrich's version. Unfortunately, I have no vote.

Warren Buffett stands to make a ton of money on this. Nothing against Buffett, but I don't trust anyone that is going to do well on this.

The dems are going to make money as well. The same dems running the show right now are the very same dems that have been getting the goodies for a while now. Hopefully, they will end up in the slammer, but I won't hold my breath. Lord knows, Barney Franks has been in trouble before and nothing happens to him.

I don't know enough about the Republican version to make an informed decision. It still smells of a socialistic bailout to me.

I've read a few posts on here, "But what about the families!?" Not exact words, but basically what they were saying. The vast majority of these people didn't put a dime down on those homes and won't lose a thing by losing their homes. They were able to deduct their rent during the last few years; so they actually came out ahead. They'll simply move to more affordable housing and rent as they've been doing in reality and should have already done instead of hoping we'd bail them out allowing them to get their McMansion for nothing. I'm sorry. I have zero sympathy for these people and I resent the very idea of having to pay for their homes.

a lot of the same people that caused this mess ,stand to make out like a bandit if this bail out goes thru! the super wealthy are are pushing this! they stand the most to lose!

[DC_Mark]

I'm starting to like the insurance idea more and more...

[Suzan]

Interesting thread. Thanks for all the info and different theories.

[Hillarysmygirl08]

yes it is very important to show you can listen to people. Who does Obama listen too. Some people talk and some people listen. I have learned one thing I would rather be around a listener then a talker.

[michu]

Gingrich's plan as of last Sunday:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGE5MmE0YmRiODA3YTRiNzFlN2FmNDU5N2I0ZDc3YTE=

Sunday, September 21, 2008



Before D.C. Gets Our Money, It Owes Us Some Answers [Newt Gingrich]


Watching Washington rush to throw taxpayer money at Wall Street has been sobering and a little frightening.

We are being told Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has a plan which will shift $700 billion in obligations from private companies to the taxpayer.

We are being warned that this $700 billion bailout is the only answer to a crisis.

We are being reassured that we can trust Secretary Paulson "because he knows what he is doing".

Congress had better ask a lot of questions before it shifts this much burden to the taxpayer and shifts this much power to a Washington bureaucracy.

Imagine that the political balance of power in Washington were different.

If this were a Democratic administration the Republicans in the House and Senate would be demanding answers and would be organizing for a “no” vote.

If a Democratic administration were proposing this plan, Republicans would realize that having Connecticut Democratic senator Chris Dodd (the largest recipient of political funds from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) as chairman of the Banking Committee guarantees that the Obama-Reid-Pelosi-Paulson plan that will emerge will be much worse as legislation than it started out as the Paulson proposal.

If this were a Democratic proposal, Republicans would remember that the Democrats wrote a grotesque housing bailout bill this summer that paid off their left-wing allies with taxpayer money, which despite its price tag of $300 billion has apparently failed as of last week, and could expect even more damage in this bill.

But because this gigantic power shift to Washington and this avalanche of taxpayer money is being proposed by a Republican administration, the normal conservative voices have been silent or confused.

It’s time to end the silence and clear up the confusion.

Congress has an obligation to protect the taxpayer.

Congress has an obligation to limit the executive branch to the rule of law.

Congress has an obligation to perform oversight.

Congress was designed by the Founding Fathers to move slowly, precisely to avoid the sudden panic of a one-week solution that becomes a 20-year mess.

There are four major questions that have to be answered before Congress adopts a new $700 billion burden for the American taxpayer. On each of these questions, I believe Congress’s answer will be “no” if it slows down long enough to examine the facts.

Question One: Is the current financial crisis the only crisis affecting the economy?

Answer: There are actually multiple crises hurting the economy.

There is an immediate crisis of liquidity on Wall Street.

There is a longer time crisis of a bad energy policy transferring $700 billion a year to foreign countries (so foreign sovereign capital funds are now using our energy payments to buy our companies).

There is a longer term crisis of Sarbanes-Oxley (the last "crisis"-inspired congressional disaster) crippling entrepreneurial start ups, driving public companies private, driving smart business people off public boards, and driving offerings from New York to London.

There is a long term crisis of a high corporate tax rate driving business out of the United States.

No solution to the immediate liquidity crisis should further cripple the American economy for the long run. Instead, the liquidity solution should be designed to strengthen the economy for competition in the world market.


Question Two: Is a big bureaucracy solution the only answer?

Answer: There is a non-bureaucratic solution that would stop the liquidity crisis almost overnight and do it using private capital rather than taxpayer money.

Four reform steps will have capital flowing with no government bureaucracy and no taxpayer burden.

First, suspend the mark-to-market rule which is insanely driving companies to unnecessary bankruptcy. If short selling can be suspended on 799 stocks (an arbitrary number and a warning of the rule by bureaucrats which is coming under the Paulson plan), the mark-to-market rule can be suspended for six months and then replaced with a more accurate three year rolling average mark-to-market.

Second, repeal Sarbanes-Oxley. It failed with Freddy Mac. It failed with Fannie Mae. It failed with Bear Stearns. It failed with Lehman Brothers. It failed with AIG. It is crippling our entrepreneurial economy. I spent three days this week in Silicon Valley. Everyone agreed Sarbanes-Oxley was crippling the economy. One firm told me they would bring more than 20 companies public in the next year if the law was repealed. Its Sarbanes-Oxley’s $3 million per startup annual accounting fee that is keeping these companies private.

Third, match our competitors in China and Singapore by going to a zero capital gains tax. Private capital will flood into Wall Street with zero capital gains and it will come at no cost to the taxpayer. Even if you believe in a static analytical model in which lower capital gains taxes mean lower revenues for the Treasury, a zero capital gains tax costs much less than the Paulson plan. And if you believe in a historic model (as I do), a zero capital gains tax would lead to a dramatic increase in federal revenue through a larger, more competitive and more prosperous economy.

Fourth, immediately pass an “all of the above” energy plan designed to bring home $500 billion of the $700 billion a year we are sending overseas. With that much energy income the American economy would boom and government revenues would grow.


Question Three: Will the Paulson plan be implemented with transparency and oversight?

Answer: Implementation of the Paulson plan is going to be a mess. It is going to be a great opportunity for lobbyists and lawyers to make a lot of money. Who are the financial magicians Paulson is going to hire? Are they from Wall Street? If they’re from Wall Street, aren't they the very people we are saving? And doesn’t that mean that we’re using the taxpayers’ money to hire people to save their friends with even more taxpayer money? Won't this inevitably lead to crony capitalism? Who is going to do oversight? How much transparency is there going to be? We still haven't seen the report which led to bailing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It is "secret". Is our $700 billion going to be spent in "secret" too? In practical terms, will a bill be written in public so people can analyze it? Or will it be written in a closed room by the very people who have been collecting money from the institutions they are now going to use our money to bail out?

Question Four: In two months we will have an election and then there will be a new administration. Is this plan something we want to trust to a post-Paulson Treasury?

Answer: We don’t know who will inherit this plan.

The balance of power on election day will shift to either McCain or Obama. Who will they pick for Treasury Secretary? What will their allies want done? We are about to give the next administration a level of detailed control over big companies on a scale even FDR did not exercise during the Great Depression. Is this really wise?

For these reasons I hope Congress will slow down and have an open debate.

And in the course of that debate, I hope someone will introduce an economic recovery act that makes America a better place to grow jobs. I hope the details will be made public before the vote.

For more details on my action plan for getting the American economy back on track and building long-term economic prosperity, you can read this message recorded yesterday to American Solutions members.

This is a very important week for the integrity of the Congress.

This is a very important week for the future of America.

If Washington wants our money, then it owes us some answers.

[Paul F. Villarreal]

Even if McCain is not the Republicans preferred candidate, he is the Republican candidate. The Republicans are not about to let the Dems get any sort of upper hand.

Yep. And there isn't a damn thing the Congressional Dems will do, either, to help Obama on this unless the GOP gives them cover. There is no way those cowards will put their necks on the line for the Chicago Fraud.

If the Dems go solo on passing the legislation, all of them could lose their political careers over it. And they know it. Which is why they absolutely will not do it without GOP votes. Not to mention the Prez could veto any measures (which he likely would not, but could).

This is why Reid just came out with his trusty white flag and said there will be no votes Friday night. What this means is that Obama and the DNC Dems have lost. McCain now can do whatever he wants for the debate, and he will look good. There won't be any legislation passed by tomorrow night, and that means McCain's gamble has paid off, big time.

Dems just got flat-out triangulated, Clinton-style. They got wedged between the GOP and the American people, and that's why Bambi's Boys threw a hissy fit at the White House. They lost, and they know it.

[DC_Mark]

This open letter by John Allison, President & CEO of BB&T, entitled "Key Points on “Rescue” Plan From A Healthy Bank’s Perspective" is worth reading:

http://scconservative.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/rescue-plan-from-a-healthy-banks-perspective/

[michu]

This open letter by John Allison, President & CEO of BB&T, entitled "Key Points on “Rescue” Plan From A Healthy Bank’s Perspective" is worth reading:

http://scconservative.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/rescue-plan-from-a-healthy-banks-perspective/

Thanks for the link.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/09/fannie_mae_and_congressional_d.html

[lynfreedom]

Something I read earlier said that McCain was meeting with Republican House and Senate members at different times. If he was not saying anything when the dems were i the room, it was because he had already had his say quietly and humbly taking care of business.

[HumbleDave]

Reid needs to go. Him and Pelosi both have proven themselves to be complete failures when it comes to leadership. Complete failures.

[Perry Logan]

Dems just got flat-out triangulated, Clinton-style. They got wedged between the GOP and the American people, and that's why Bambi's Boys threw a hissy fit at the White House. They lost, and they know it.
It's the old Republican trick--screw things up beyond imagination, then blame the Democrats for not fixing it. I can't believe they still work this scam.

[Sandy in PA]

Yep. And there isn't a damn thing the Congressional Dems will do, either, to help Obama on this unless the GOP gives them cover. There is no way those cowards will put their necks on the line for the Chicago Fraud.

If the Dems go solo on passing the legislation, all of them could lose their political careers over it. And they know it. Which is why they absolutely will not do it without GOP votes. Not to mention the Prez could veto any measures (which he likely would not, but could).

This is why Reid just came out with his trusty white flag and said there will be no votes Friday night. What this means is that Obama and the DNC Dems have lost. McCain now can do whatever he wants for the debate, and he will look good. There won't be any legislation passed by tomorrow night, and that means McCain's gamble has paid off, big time.

Dems just got flat-out triangulated, Clinton-style. They got wedged between the GOP and the American people, and that's why Bambi's Boys threw a hissy fit at the White House. They lost, and they know it.

Yup--the Dems are terrified that if they pass this on their own, which they can do, and it fails, that it will be their fault. As usual, its politics first, take responsibility for nothing with the democrats.

Meanwhile, I think the American public is beginning to realize that it was the democrat's Community Reinvestment Act and the actions of Barney Frank & Chris Dodd that pushed this thing over the edge.

And now we have those two losers running the show on the bailout.....and Reid is sticking shale oil bans into the legislation, proving once again how corrupt the democrats are.

[HumbleDave]

It's the old Republican trick--screw things up beyond imagination, then blame the Democrats for not fixing it. I can't believe they still work this scam.

Sorry Perry, but that argument won't float. The actions of your own politicians speak for that. Plenty of blame to go around. Time to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem.

[Laura Cereta]

I heard BO riled up the Dems and the two sides were actually yelling at each other. Wouldn't expect any less from Mr. Unity... :rolleyes:

[adventures7]

It's the old Republican trick--screw things up beyond imagination, then blame the Democrats for not fixing it. I can't believe they still work this scam.

That's something Pelosi and Reid would say!

[Linda C]

Reid and Pelosi are so afraid of "being wrong" they have become ineffective.

Mortgages are only part of the problem and there is no use to continue to blame the poor for our problems. People made a boat load of money off of the poor by selling off their mortgages at sinful profits to even more greedy people. If you are carrying a substantial credit card debt. Have used your own house as a personal piggy bank..then you are part of the problems as well.

The problem with the entire economy is that people have become rich by not producing a thing. They swap pieces of paper not tied to anything real. They bet on stocks falling as a way of making money. Yep..they make money off of others misfortune. If I was in the business of becoming rich off of others misfortune..then it would behoove me to create as much misfortune as possible. If I carried no responsibilty for my actions in wealth creation, but simply could drive the company into the ground, making money for myself along the way and then walking away with a bonus..then what? If I could cook the books to give myself and my friends huge bonuses while undercutting the company ..and still walk away..then what?

[foxyladi]

FOX was reporting that there was chaos at the White House.

The talks didn't go well.

It doesn't appear that Obama was getting his way.

awwww!was the baby upset??????:rolleyes:

[Bella]

Sorry Perry, but that argument won't float. The actions of your own politicians speak for that. Plenty of blame to go around. Time to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem.

Blame Bush~! :D I feel bad for Bush actually. I think he is going to go down as the worst president in our history. The war, the financial meltdown..but not really his fault directly. You can see Greenspan for that! Mr. anti-regulation to the hills who flat out refused to use the muscle congress gave him in 1994 or so to stop the bad and scamming mortgages. Bernanke has been trying to do some good for months but it was already too late.

Either way the economy is going to hell in a handbasket. We could lose if we bail-out or we will definitely lose if we don't. The ripple effect will travel thru the entire world all the way to the old person's pension fund, which ALL own securitized mortgages.

Oh and it was Paulson who first addressed this chaos over a year ago. What have the Dems done? I can't think of any policy they tried to put forth other than maybe Barney Frank. The fact is, they all took to long to do a damn thing.