« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Congressional Democrats Show Us What Leadership Is All About

Hurricane Warning for Tomorrow's Financial Markets

Published reports have it that Congress couldn’t get a deal done on the Paulson bailout plan. Sketchy reports at mid-day said that Congressional leaders had the outlines of a plan in place, with a raft of what appeared to be largely extraneous changes to the structure of the deal.

Evidently those modifications were intended to give Congress a way to second-guess the progress and implementation of the bailout. Financial markets figured that half a loaf was better than nothing, and they finished the trading day with moderate gains.

But tonight, the news is that there’s no deal after all.

Reliable information from Capitol Hill seems to have been blacked out for most of the day. The tenor of the published stories is that a small handful of Republicans in the House of Representatives are torpedoing progress.

My guess is that the Democrats, who are in total control of the proceedings, are well aware of both the critical need for this bailout, and also of the politically-inconvenient fact that the American people are disgusted and want no part of it whatsoever.

Consequently, it would make no political sense at all for the Democrats to pass the legislation on their own. They badly need a way to blame Republicans for it.

One supposes that the Democrats want the bailout to pass with just enough Republican support so they can call it a Republican bill that they were dragged into, kicking, screaming (and pork-barrelling) all the way.

That’s regardless of the facts that the bailout is needed to stabilize financial markets in the near term, and also that expert opinion is steadily moving in support of the idea that the bailout actually will improve conditions in the real economy.

It’s also regardless of the fact that the Democrats control both houses of Congress.

We’re not talking about a filibustered vote in the US Senate here. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barney Frank are the key players in this saga. They can do anything they damned well please with this legislation, and they need approval from not a single Congressional Republican to do it.

For the Democrats to blame a few Republicans for the failure to act is a craven lack of leadership. The country gave these people control of Congress in 2006 expecting they would do a better job than the Republicans.

And this is what we get, instead.

At this hour, markets are open in the Far East, but the critical credit-markets in London are not yet open for Friday trade.

Hours ago, when New York trading ended, it appeared that money markets were under extreme stress but not at the edge of panic.

The Fed funds rate centered around 1.5% for much of the week, averaged below 1.2% last night. The Fed’s target for this rate is 2%. There’s a distinct possibility of an emergency cut in policy interest rates, as early as the wee hours of this morning.

I would also look for additional emergency measures such as expanded currency swap-lines with foreign central banks, before New York opens for trading, a mere ten hours from now.

This is a hurricane warning. There is heavy weather ahead in financial markets. We’ve made an awful lot of history in the past ten days. We may be about to make some more.

-Francis Cianfrocca

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • FWGuy

    The house GOP and some critical GOP senators are the ones that are stopping this deal from going thru.

    The GOP will pay heavily in November, the election of 2006 will look like a GOP victory compared to 2008.

    Now another dominoe has fallen – Wamu !!

  • phred

    to make the McCain fly-in look foolish? And the eventual Obama fly-in a result of the non-agreement making Obama potentially look, well, stupid?

    Not to put myself on the level of your insight Blackhedd, but my instincts put the Dow at 9000 by 11am Friday.

    I don’t see how the Dems are able to pull this off as a problem the Repubs must solve, but perception is reality.

  • izoneguy

    Hurricane Obama is coming! It’s blowing real hard and destroying everything it touches. This makes Katrina look like a baby girl. The American public is swamped. 300,000,000 people are drowning. Where is the federal government?
    What? It’s bunkrupt? Everyman for himself!!

    • blackhedd

      It takes more than a day for the stock market to drop 2,000 points, because of circuit breakers.

      I haven’t heard any stories of massive market breakdowns yet. But the night is still young.

      And Congress still has a day to get this right.

  • js6774

    It seems to me there is much needed help being blocked by a few republicans. This thing is serious, we can’t do without this bill. These guys should let it through.

  • Siberian

    Right now the Democrats are claiming they were closed to a deal before McCain and the House GOP derailed it.

    There are even reports floating around of Paulson expressing the same views to some degree.

    I fully expect tomorrow that the Democrats and Obama will point to the losses on the Market and say “This is McCain’s fault for injecting presidential politics into the bail-out negotiations.” Then proceed to try to blame McCain for the drops in the DOW.

    Sadly, it might just work.

    • blackhedd

      I know you’re making a joke, but I figured it was worth pointing out that his net value-added in this process amounts to some mild comic relief.

      Gives us a lot to look forward to from him as President, doesn’t it?

      • OccamsRazor

        There’s always winners in this world. Calm Down.

        • JSobieski

          He reminded me of when I was a aummer associate at a law firm sitting in on a portion of a partner meeting.

          I’m sure he was focused on getting one or two pre-planned sentences out, and was otherwise playing it cool and quiet

  • olderthangandalf

    Let’s get real – neither party is going to take the fall for this by themselves.

    If it’s really a matter of great national urgency, both sides have got to saddle up and do it.

    If it’s not a matter of great urgency, or if the plan won’t work, it’s kosher to oppose it, and to kill it. The people who do that have to really be in favor of killing it, however, and have to be ready to take the political responsibility for putting the plan down.

    What won’t happen, though, is for one party to hang back, avoid supporting the bailout because of political concerns, let the other side pass a necessary bailout, and then campaign against them for having passed it. Congressmen and Senators are not that stupid or that patriotic.

  • Achance

    The Ds can pass whatever they want to; they have the votes in both houses. They want Rs to join them in their $700B assault on the American taxpayer. McCain called them. They can pass it an go out against the hurricane of R opposition about their $700B giveaway of OPM to their fatcat Wall Street friends, they can make a deal that McCain can take statesman-like credit for, or they can make the economic World fall apart. I’m thinking the Dow looks like a bungee jumper in the morning and maybe we’ll all find salvation in time to fly to Oxford, MS tomorrow night.

    • SeanH90050

      After my little bout with the spin cycle last night coming off the suspension of the campaign, you can tell this one from the Dems is total spin.

      When one side says “stunt” they’re just mad they didn’t think of it first. So they have to try to diffuse as much as possible. They know that if the bill passage goes smoothly, even on their terms, then McCain can look like a hero for acting for the good of the country. They can’t have that. But they know something must be done, so they’ll delay as much as they can, hoping the spin machine turns back against McCain.

      Last night I thought McCain would just pick up the Paulson flag and run with it. My reasoning was “that’s the John McCain I know”, working with both sides to find compromise rather than pushing for an alternative. I still believe this is what he is trying to do, but not with the pure Paulson proposal.

      I think McCain, realizing the groundswell of backlash against the $700B figure is working more with the house GOP’s proposal to limit that figure, as well as any centralization of the banking market. Lets hope they go for, and get even more than that, with something resembling Gingrich’s proposal.

      • blackhedd

        No butterflies in my stomach yet. Wednesday night of last week, I had a lot of butterflies. As I said, the markets will spot Congress one more day.

        • blackhedd

          …is a full vote on the Senate floor. This is financial legislation, so it originates in the House. The Democrats are in the driver’s seat.

          • olderthangandalf

            That’s exactly how it’s going to play.

            When you make a huge production of riding to the rescue, you better be careful not to kill the hostage by mistake.

            McCain’s only hope is to push through a differently structured bailout, and claim credit for that. The Dems and the White House might be panicked enough to buy that, but I wouldn’t bet on it, especially given the anger level towards McCain right now.

  • kevinforrester

    The unspoken premise of this post seems to be that any deal, any deal at all, is better than no deal. It seems reasonable to me to at least admit the possibility that a bad deal could be worse than no deal at all. Warren Buffett is, of course, famous for making good deals. Why don’t we just take the structure of his Goldman Sachs deal and pencil in “United States of America” in place of “Warren Buffett”? We probably won’t do better, and easily could do much, much worse, as deals go.

  • dt

    Someone with more expertise in these matters than me should pipe in here, but I think that a fair number of republicans (especially in the Senate) actually do have to support this thing to get it done. As I understand it, to get a bill like this passed quickly, the House and Senate rules essentially have to be suspended, which takes a 2/3 vote in the House and unanimous consent in the Senate. That’s why legislation is put on the “suspension calendar” at the end of the term. Thus, unless there is broad consensus on this package, it is DOA. Am I incorrect about any of the above?

  • TomOConnor

    But none of them are crazy. A deal will be done, I’m guessing by Asia’s opening Sunday night, if not tomorrow. My guess is Paulson will get a check, it’s just a question if the Street thinks the check was big enough.

    • olderthangandalf

      The Democrats aren’t going to take ownership of this plan if it all turns partisan, and it can’t credibly be laid at their doorstep.

      The plan got started by Paulson, Bush’s Secretary of the Treasury, and Bernanke, whom Bush appointed to head the Fed. It’s being pushed by Bush, who still is the Republican holder of the highest elected office in the country.

      Because they are by nature spineless wonders, the Democratic leaders have yielded to the administration’s cries of urgency, contenting themselves with making minor and ineffectual tweaks around the edges (limiting executive pay, for example).

      Given that there is little chance of upside in being linked to this mess, the Democrats are on the verge of being in the perfect political position – it’s a Republican plan at risk of being killed by Republicans. Either way, the Democrats will be able to credibly disclaim responsibility.

      • phred

        I can’t quite place the importance of foreign cash in ratio with the treasury hit. My microeconomic intellect simply will not grasp the macro magnitude.

        • blackhedd

          The other night, he said that he made the deal because he expects Congress to pass the Paulson plan more or less as proposed.

          The premise of this post is that the Paulson proposal should be passed without extraneous amendments, and without a huge pile of extra pork for Democratic constituencies.

          Are you saying that the bailout as proposed is a bad deal?

  • FWGuy

    These events are sinking any chance of McCain getting elected and will assuredly cause a massive GOP ouster in November.

    Don’t forget there was about $3.3 Trillion in 401Ks, and allot of people will remember in November what their Sept 30th statement says they lost since Jan 01, 2008. On average about 25%+

    • dt

      See Rules XII through XV of the House Rules, particularly rule XV which says, in part: “A rule may not be suspended except
      by a vote of two-thirds of the
      Members voting, a quorum being
      present. The Speaker may not entertain
      a motion that the House suspend
      the rules except on Mondays, Tuesdays,
      and Wednesdays and during the last six
      days of a session of Congress.”

  • virgil

    I hate the idea of bailing out these companies. They danced with the devil, they should have to pay.

    • kevinforrester

      The wolves guarding the hen house are being asked to explain the absence of chickens. Yeah, there’ll be a deal.

  • MCM

    to agree to something very similar to the Paulson plan but with just a couple of changes that are hard for Dems to oppose in the circumstances – i.e. capital gains tax cut from 15 to 10%, diversion of the proceeds to the Social Security Trust Fund, etc. Something that will allow him to claim that he protected the taxpayers. The Congressional Republicans will back down (having now set the stage). The bill won’t be great, but it will be marginally better than it could have been. And McCain will be able to also claim that he brokered the deal by getting the House Republicans to come back to the table. In short he:
    (1) “fights” his own party (house Republicans), and
    (2) at the same time gives the taxpayer a slightly better deal than we would have had if he had not returned to DC.

    And then he kicks Obama’s butt in Oxford tomorrow night. He wins economy and foreign policy in 1 day.

    • Achance

      it’s a McCain v. The World thing. Hell, I don’t know if it will work, but I think that’s the thinking. You can’t be too rational about this stuff. I know you must have been a chess player of an athlete; you know what it’s like when you see the opening. Sometimes you score, sometimes you get your a__ kicked.

      • dt

        Some quick math here says that with 235 Dems, 199 Republicans, and 1 vacant seat, at least 55 republicans (or over 1/4 of the caucus) would need to support the bill for it to even reach the floor. And that analysis assumes that every Dem supports the bill.

        • SeanH90050

          from an ideologue point of view. But I’d take it.

          • virgil

            Now I know nothing about the markets but this is a Dem deal from top to bottom. Affirmative Action Lending for goodness sakes. Let ‘em fry.

  • jdripper

    The Democrats wanted 20% of all monies realized from this to go to ACORN and they would use the funds to help low income people with their mortgages.

    The American taxpayers were being set up to hand over $200,000,000 plus to ACORN.

    This deal was terrible. Thank God the Republicans shot it down. This was just the beginning.

    The legislation was to use a whole bevy of “community organizer” organizations to facilitate the use of the money. As with ACORN they were all organizations set up by George Soros.

    Didn’t any of you read the fine print?

    • Achance

      I’m not Gov. Palin’s greatest fan, but there’s one thing I like and respect about her. Have you ever watched her eyes?

      She has the eyes of a sniper – or a point guard. McCain is playing it that way too. He should have just gracefully lost this election under the Democrat tidal wave. But if you’re a competitor, losing is just a bitch. So far he’s exploited every opening and created quite a few on his own. Maybe it works.

      • senatordl

        Congress won’t get it right. The dems need Rep, votes period. Not to pass the package but for cover. If only d’s pass it, the public will be all over them for putting that much public money to bail out bad and greedy decisions. Second, let’s not forget the fact that this entire situation goes back to the socialist policies of Janet Reno and Bill Clinton who threatened lenders with sanctions if they did not issue loans by essentially lowering their standards. Finally, both lenders and borrowers got greedy by both over lending and overborrowing. Let them all go to hell. There is so much foreign money in our markets, let the market collapse and then let the foreign investors come forward. We are not bailing out ourselves we are bailing out the oil barrens of the middle east and the corporate hogs of china and japan. Don’t kid yourself. If we don’t step in they can’t afford not do. We are the biggest industrial market in the world and no one can afford that kind of collapse. Dangerous game? You bet, but after you’ve already lost this much, the rest is not much more.

        • senatordl

          Wrong my friend. The D’s are looking for cover on a bad deal. They need R’s to give it credibility. Remember they’re in the majority in both houses so they have enough votes to pass the package and Bush said he would sign it. So, how can it be the R’s problem if, as Harry Reid said,they’re not needed?

          • dbecraft

            most of our debt is bout by foreign nations looking for investment. Looks like that is not going to continue…

          • JSobieski

            They know that with a huge bailout expenditure, future spending is greased.

            Deficit/debt talk is out the window. This is like the opening of the Christmas shopping season for them.

            They want this–they want it bad.

  • scottbomb

    The stock market swings hundreds of points in a single week. 400 down one day, 300 up the next. I’m far from being an economic guru, but I think a lot of it is just fear-driven silliness. One can draw a parallel to oil prices. Some lunatic in Iran says he wants to bomb Israel and oil shoots up over “supply fears” when in fact, the supply of oil is plentiful. I’ve never bought stock before (unless you count 401(k)) but if the markets take another nose-dive tomorrow (as I think most of us expect it to) I may just have to buy as much as I can because it will surely rise again.

    • BlueLandRed

      I think I’m like most people here, I hate the entire concept of the bailout, but failing to act is probably worse.

      I know I’m going to lose more that $2,300 dollars in the market tomorrow.

      The stuff I’m reading in the MSM seems to be pointing the blame finger at the House GOP. Which is fine, if they’ve got a better plan.

      But I’m not seeing it… other than tax cuts and less regulation. That’s not going to please the market, nor do I think the American public is going to buy it. Paulson certainly didn’t. I worry the Dems propaganda machine has convinced everyone that we need more regulation when it was really the failure of both greedy CEOs and lax enforcement that allowed this to crisis to happen. There is something to be said for the Chinese model where if you go too far in your greed you get a bullet in the back of the head.

      If all the House GOP accomplishes is to seem like they’re gumming up the works, I think it’s going to cost the GOP in November.

      • kevinforrester

        Warren Buffett gets preferred shares with a guaranteed 10% dividend, among other things, for his money. Under the Paulson Plan, Secretary Paulson gets the right to purchase bad debt with our money in his complete and absolute discretion without any right of review, ever, to wit: “Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”

        Yes, the “bailout” as proposed is a bad deal. The USA should become a lender of last resort, if necessary, to allow the bad debt holders to “workout” their financial problems. But the bailout is a bailout, insulated from any review, by anyone. It is a bad deal.

        • JSobieski

          I am not clear on how it would work. However, I have read several credible people about alternatives that are less costly and more conservative.

          Your share of the bailout would not be $2300 as only half of the population pays any taxes.

          • exitsfunnel

            I don’t think that the suspension rules go into affect until after tomorrow.

            -exits

          • civil_truth

            “Never try to catch a falling knife”

            Trying to guess a market bottom is an almost impossible proposition for experts, but for amateurs like us, it’s suicidal.

            I also seem to recall reading al old lament that “the streets of London are full of [homeless] persons who tried to buy at the bottom”.

            Forget about market timing and read some good books/articles discussing basic market investment philosophy.

          • dt

            But if the bill isn’t passed under the suspension rules, how will it get passed without being referred to committee first? We obviously don’t have time for that, so what’s the alternative?

          • SeanH90050

            Lindsey Graham say something about this tonight, but that was it.

            We need to see some fine print, that will help this discussion a bit, and help frame a plausible exit scenario. Got a link?

            And while we’re at it, someone get me out of the washing machine.

          • simpson316

            There are alternatives that don’t put $700B of tax payer dollars at risk.

            Doing something wrong just to do it can make matters much worse. Prudence is needed.

          • JLenardDetroit

            I’d go so far as to say it is finally time for at least one brave Republican to PROMISE FILIBUSTER (and reminding folks via CSPAN it was Dem pressures on Banks that got us all this worthless paper) and that if it doesn’t go from BAILOUT to just an Emergency “LOAN” program it will be DOA on the Senate Floor by and and all means necessary…

            Like I said before… Compromise keeps getting us more Socialism, more Spending, more of all the bad side of Govt. TIME TO BE COMPLETELY PARTISAN!!!

            Yet another example of why all this “Bi-Partisan” crud is for the birds… Every time we “Conservatives” manage to be “Bi-Partisan” it means we “compromise” to more SOCIALISM…

            Time for MORE PARTISANSHIP and Conservatives actually fighting for the right values. Being “Bi-Partisan” and willing to “compromise” (remember W ran on working with Dem’s, and unfortunately has far too many times) while in control of Congress got us ridiculous spending and being voted back out of power because we FAILED OUR PRINCIPLES. Here we go compromising them again…

            say no to Obama Bin Biden ticket

            Only reaching across the aisle I want to see Republicans to do is to SLAP THE S… OUT OF THE OTHER SIDE!


          • JLenardDetroit

            which is why any Republican that backs anything that remotely looks like a Democrat victory needs to be targeted for removal… Not ONE vote should come from any Republican…

            All those in favor of more Socialsim
            … NAY

  • Leverkuhn

    … earlier today about how I didn’t even want a bailout deal? Do you remember how I said that this was still a democracy, and we ordinary folks want to be consulted about these sorts of things.

    Well, I was a little out of sorts. I’ve had a chance to reconsider, and I’ve decided … that I really like banks. I want banks to continue to operate. I want my money to be there when I go to get it. Memo to Paulson, Bush, Reid, Pelosi, et al: Uncle. I give. No mas. I’ll take your big, fat, greasy, pork-laden deal. I eat with a side of misery and despair. Just get it done.

  • Flagstaff

    does the bill address the problems, or will it make things worse?

    I know that there are psychological reasons they want to pass it quickly, but absent that sentiment, is there actually a need to ram through such far-reaching legislation without any kind of appropriate inspection? It seems to me that a suspension or modification of the mark-to-market rule would take much of the pressure off the holders of the MBS.

    I imagine there is a lot I’ve missed, but Fannie Mae has been around a long time, and venal administrators and executives have been around even longer. Yet this came up rather “suddenly,” at least in the grand scheme of things.

    What has changed, however, are the accounting rules. If changing that rule could stop the bleeding, shouldn’t that be tried before such a massive bill, whether bailout or rescue? Even if, as Andy Kessler at the WSJ claims, the deal could make trillions for the Treasury?

    • JSobieski

      way to change the balance sheets of debt holders ever enacted in the history of mankind.

      • Leverkuhn

        … because if something like that doesn’t happen, whoever wins this election is going to have one huge mess to fix.

  • QueenOfCups

    It even made Skeletor shut up.

    • JLenardDetroit

      you said it, and is why the Dem’s want anything that moves fast and past the chance that the MSM might have to get backed into the corner and start to report the truth of how and where this all started! It covers their ass, appears as they are bi-partisan supporting the “Presidential plan,” and get more Socialism, they retain the “oversight” which was NO SIGHT what so ever (or we wouldn’t have gotten here), etc…

      Where were ANY Committee hearings about the “Mortgage Crisis” everyone has been clamoring about for the last couple of years… They couldn’t hold them, cuz they could not chance showing how the Dem’s hands been long deep in the cookie-jar.

      We keep hearing about how this is all Politics on behalf of McCain, when it has been nothing but bait-and-switch and Politics of distraction/distortion of the Guilty parties Barnie Frank, Chris Dodd, Borat Usama, Joe BinBiden, John Kerry, etc…

      Pure Politics of Reid calling on McCain thinking he wouldn’t come, and back-tracking when McCain steps up and puts “Country First” over Borat BinBiden “Campaign First” strategy… All to minimize McCain – well, it backfired – and some Americans my finally open up their eyes after a very, very, very, long slumber…

      • Flagstaff

        the thin fellow on the right of the screen who’s really on the left?

        Did you know that Monica Crowley, who is often on Fox representing the Republican side, is Alan’s sister-in-law?

        • JLenardDetroit

          Loans, not gifts…

          SUSPEND the entire Capital Gains tax to promote investment as well as the “Mark to Market” rules temporary change. Should drop all Corporate Taxes by at least 10points to, reduces their Tax overhead and allows them some liquidity without having done anything else for them…

          FREEZE THE MARKET FOR A WEEK? While cool heads can then actually work without a collapse being threatened EVERYDAY.

          Lastly, Allowing some to fail so that the FREE MARKET can step up as the smaller, more efficient, lean, organizations can step up and into place and take over some of this debt and make profits from it…

          • dbecraft

            but know that too many namby-pamby Republicans will vote for the package.

            I agree though that they should be marked for removal.

          • Flagstaff

            “Buy low, sell high.”

            Forget about market timing and read some good books/articles discussing basic market investment philosophy.

            Every buy/sell decision includes a timing decision. Do it now, or don’t do it now.

            Another good one I heard just yesterday:

            “I never try to buy at the bottom. I always wait for the climb up.”

            Couple that with “even a dead cat bounces,” and you can see just how much those old adages are worth.

            I wish I knew what to do myself, because I’m living on my investments. So far, I just wish I had diversified more last year. Heh heh. Serves me right. It’s bad enough to be wrong. It’s worse to know the right thing and realize too late that you haven’t done it.

          • QueenOfCups

            Interesting tidbit.

          • QueenOfCups

            According to Lindsay Graham who was on Greta said that was in the Dem bill.

            McCain said “h-e double hockey sticks, no!”
            Or something like that.

          • JSobieski

            http://www.moneymorning.com/2008/09/25/credit-crisis-5/

          • JSobieski

            http://www.moneymorning.com/2008/09/25/credit-crisis-5/

  • JLenardDetroit

    MRE’s, check…. Water, check…. Weapons, check…. Bullets, check…. etc…

    Unless someones up for hunting down a boatload of Tea for Harbor dumping

    I’ll poke my head back out in 10 years see what’s left…

    LOL

    • QueenOfCups

      Not thinking that was part of the plan.

      He talked about suspending capital gains taxes, creating incentive for Wall Street to buy in.

      Other stuff, too that I have now forgotten since my mind is like a sieve when it comes to the jargon.

      All I can tell you is that the next three guests on H&C were nearly jubilant with the plan.

      And when Alan tried to say things like “But the debates” he was shamed into silence by their laughter – or something like that.

      I was actually trying in vain to get in here because I thought for sure people would have had much more insight than what was going on at Hot Air.

      • QueenOfCups

        My mom was a conspiracy theorist. :-)

        • ChicagoLaura

          And dump out the water…

          And batteries have all corroded by now…

          Wait, what on earth from a 1999 survival kit is still usable besides the waterproof, strike-anywhere matches?

          (Just a little concerned for your favorite conspiracy theorists unintentionally harming themselves.)

          • SeanH90050

            I was wondering why the doom I’ve been reading here has crept in, and I think its back to the spin/image argument.

            McCain stopped the campaign to help, but the MSM is reporting that while Obama led the discussion for the Dems in the meeting, prior to its devolution into a rooster fight at least, McCain supposedly kicked back and watched. Couple that with the Dem spin of ‘we had it until he arrived’ (which we know is bunk, but not to people hungry for a resolution) and ‘it’s the GOP fighting itself on this issue’, it appears the MSM feeding troughs are still quite full of Dem rhetoric. Meanwhile, nothing has happened, and that looks bad if the general public were to believe that McCain did this unprecedented move to foster an agreement quickly.

            I hope McCain comes out before I wake up tomorrow (meaning before the market opens) and lets us know his line in the sand. Then tell us how (in general terms) it’ll work and garner Dem approval and please us as well. Like others, I hope its more reminiscent of the House GOP and/or Forbes plan, but we’ll have to see. Show us how it’s better than Paulson’s plan, Dodd’s plan, and nothing, then we’ll get on board, and you have a new flag to run with. But he needs to be proactive in the public eye with this, at least as much as he can.

            We’re still in the high risk – high reward stage of this, never a comfortable position. Lets hope the river doesn’t suck us all dry.

  • kchand

    McCain says to the Dems, we need to cut the pork, like the HUGE Acorn payout, and make it more like a loan than a payoff of the Wall Street crooks.

    Otherwise, Johnny says, “I told you, I will make you famous.”

    He can go to the debate and say I’m trying to protect the taxpayer’s $700 billion. “We don’t need to just write this HUGE check from taxpayers to pay those that created the problem. There is a better way and I have laid it out.” The public is behind him on this 4 to 1.

    I just don’t think Johnny will blink on this one. He’s in the driver’s seat; he has the spotlight. BO is in the back seat like a hitchhiker trying to figure out where he’s headed.

  • Spartan4Life

    The Dems created this mess. Now they want us to provide them political cover? I say, let them write and pass their own bill. Use it as THE issue and club them with it in November. Serves the greedy bastards right. Remember that Dodd, Frank, Johnson, Raines, Gorelick and many more have been feeding at this trough.

  • Bladesinger6640

    I only read some of the comments here and my mind started spinning with thoughts but to be brief although in no way concise I wanted to make a few blanket statements.

    There was never a plan agreed on that was just media talking out their blow hole LOL ? It was only that they agreed on the principles of a plan.
    I personally think This is all going to work out well ? Sure a Bailout Blows unless of coarse us taxpayers are gonna see a divided check at the end of it all (yeah right) But The fact that this problem was caused by Democrats I think it really leverages Republicans to say hey we did it your way now lets try some conservatism. If the republicans do it right they have all the power. Democrats wanted to cut and run from the start and if they don?t put aside partisanship and get something done it will come back to haunt them. In the end there is no way McCain can get blamed as long as people keep pushing for the truth. The Media can?t hide this one, the evidence is too overwhelming. There is no reason for republicans to cower here except for the fact that they didn?t push conservative values earlier 5 years ago 8 years ago and even longer. Now is the perfect time to say see, this is what we were trying to say before and for the sake of being fair we let you D?s have it your way now let us get you out of the mess you are in. It will then be a bi-partasin solution and we can press forward and let politics play out how ever but right now we have to fix this and quick. I see republicans with the upper hand in this negotiation regardless of the majority. Any way just my two cents with out any numbers only though because I have to get to a meeting ?

    • JLenardDetroit

      Seriously, you are correct…

      Most people don’t realize that Bottled Water does have expiration dates, usually about 2 years from bottling date… That is because the water bottles are porous and can let contaminants in (liquids, gases, etc… that come in contact with the bottles can get in and odor, disflavor, discolor, potentially make toxic)… If you have a very good system of an off the floor and enclosed in a well sealed cabinet – kept dry and cool – it will be fine for a longer period of time than the date. Those dates are there to protect the Bottlers as far as “Freshness” most drinks just go flat/stale, but not really “bad” though some can/do (especially Diet drinks)

      I had a Vending co. – when in doubt, adhere to the expiration dates. If you have ANY beverage that has come into contact with Flood waters DISCARD IT – DO NOT DRINK

      • Moe_Lane

        …in a Congressional context will fix your ignorance nicely. Nothing personal, but we insist that our visitors from the Other Side be up to our educational standards.

        Write it up, send it in and maybe we’ll turn your account back on.