How Paulson Just Picked the 2012 GOP Nominee

Thank God for the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

At least someone is paying attention to first principles.

The discussion we should be having very soon is how to reform Congress, not the financial industry. This entire problem was the creation of bad laws and overregulation, not underregulation. It was as if Congress decided to repeal the law of gravity for people who had no credit, bad credit, or irresponsible credit.

Believing this is a crisis is harder to swallow when the incumbicrats are larding up the bill with the largest earmark provisions in history...I read 20% of each bad loan, good or bad,going to ACORN and other left wing "community organizing" organizations was a Chris "Countrywide" Dodd provision.

Not that a goodly share of republicans didn't benefit politically from this, but sorry, most who did were liberal republicans in name only.

It's time we start a new party, the "Grown Up's Responsibility Party". Throw these crooks out...the symbol could be a noose, tar, feathers and a pitchfork. Anyone want to get lapel pins made, let me know.

That said, thanks to the Republicans who have enough sense not to believe Paulson, the "consistently wrong" treasury secretary, and George "I want my Legacy" Bush. And it is hard to take Congress seriously when they leave several of the prime architects of this disaster...Dodd, the laughable Barney Frank, Chucky Schumer...in charge of the negotiations.

Jesse of MT @ Sep 27, 2008 21:30:15 PM

Money for Homeowners

I haven't heard anyone take this angle on the problem, but as a non-homeowner this seems like another gigantic transfer of money to homeowners and businesses that cater to them. They already get huge tax breaks. I'll further point out that home prices are also a big dividing line for things like education, quality of life, etc. I also agree that it is a bad precedent because it will only promote misbehavior by lenders in the future. Whatever the solution, it should be long-term and fair to all, not just people who own homes now.

Steve N of CA @ Sep 27, 2008 19:44:25 PM

Typical GOP. Take NO responsibility for your past actions. Take NO responsibility for fixing the problems YOU caused. Seek political gain in whatever smarmy way you can. Shameful.

BobN of CA @ Sep 27, 2008 19:37:53 PM

"What this Country needs is a good Depression!" - My Mom

In order to really make substantive changes in this country, particularly a move to implement a more progressive economic system, it might take a fairly dramatic turn of events as an impetus. With that in mind, it may be that the best thing that could happen for the long-term benefit of the United States would be an economic meltdown that is perceived as being both the result of deregulation and triggered by the Republican Party's refusal to acknowledge this basic fact.

If the House Republicans would ultimately rebel and effectively quash this bailout, and the result of that was an economic meltdown, Reaganomics might finally be discredited and the Republican Party could be out of power for a generation. Not only that, but the Progressive wing of the Democratic Party could end up with a mandate to remake our country into something resembling the Scandinavian Social Democracies.

From an entirely selfish perspective, I'll admit I am hoping that the House Republicans see reason and sign on to the Bailout. However, if I put the good of my Country ahead of my own personal well being, I would instead hope that the House Republicans complete their suicide mission. I'll admit that if it were up to me, I wouldn't have the guts to throw the country into a 10 year economic tailspin in order to save it from Republican Crypto-Fascism, especially since the cost to me personally would be huge. If I were a little less selfish though (and had the opportunity) I might pull the trigger myself.

Mike Hadland of CA @ Sep 27, 2008 19:20:56 PM

Ditto

I agree with you the next presidential candidate for the GOP will be someone who voted against this bailout plan. I also think the next Republican nominee will be someone who is closer to Ron Paul's view than McCain's.

After tonight's debate, I'm afraid I'd have to put my money on Obama. McCain could have won by coming out against the bailout and making the case why it's stupid economics. But as McCain acknowledged a while back, economics isn't his strong suit.

James Cooke of MA @ Sep 26, 2008 23:14:52 PM

Unacceptable

If this were a plan to allow the Treasury to facilitate markets in MBS, then a rescue plan would have made sense. But now that Dodd/Frank/Schumer have larded this up with punitive socialistic amendments, there's no way that buyers or sellers would want to participate. Meanwhile WB is down 37% and NCC is down 29%. Are they next. Perhaps by the time Congress passes something the markets will have put many of the bad banks out of business.

LindaK of NY @ Sep 26, 2008 15:28:22 PM

Tom

I've been thinking about Sarah Palin and how she would make a good reform running mate for McCain.

However, if McCain signs onto this bailout plan the way it is, by forcing taxpayers to buy these crap loans AND the fact that Dems 20% of later profits in the event they sell houses/loans for a profit later are NOT given back to the taxpayers but are used for ACORN and La Raza and more pork, Sarah Palin would be going against everything she stands for in fighting the old boy network that got us all here in the first place.

If I were Palin, I'd seriously consider leaving the ticket due to John McCain NOT being the maverick we thought he was, but just another spendthrift Washington insider.

Seriously, if you are Sarah Palin, do you really want to turn your back on the people by playing short-term politics to get someone like McCain elected with a bogus bailout plan that can't possibly work more than a year or two out?

She needs to secretly send the message to McCain that this is NOT what she signed up for when she agreed to be the 'alledged' Maverick's VP.

Sarah, consider dropping out of this race if McCain caves in to the Dems and goes with the current poor bailout plan.

Remember your principles in standing up for the people, and don't become PART of the problem.

Tom of AL @ Sep 26, 2008 15:18:37 PM

Paulson bail out

Free markets are not free. They as subsidized by currency manipulation,tax breaks, baksheesh, and military assistance. Free markets allow competition for the cheapest labor, the least control of resources, the protection of governments, and tax benefits, These are the benefits of free markets long before the production of products or the transportation and sale of goods are determined.

Conservative principles begin and end with profit at any cost.

Morton Kurzweil of FL @ Sep 26, 2008 15:00:33 PM