Monday, October 06, 2008

I don't get it. Will someone please explain it to me?

So, all the liberals out there in voterland absolutely hated the Bailout Bill because it was rewarding greedy Wall Street capitalists for all their corporating and speculating and oppressing, and doing it on the backs of the taxpayer.

And all the conservatives out there in voterland absolutely hated the bailout bill because it was socialist and meddled in the marketplace and propped up businesses that should have become fodder for the scavengers.

So, if Pinko Liberal America didn't like it, and NASCAR-'n'-Jesus America didn't like it, who did like it? (I mean, other than a bunch of scoundrels and scalawags in Washington who are apparently not even pretending to represent the will of their constituents anymore...)

Recall Them All.

29 comments:

jimbob86 said...

The scoundrels that are getting our money liked it...... Bastards.

CEOs getting paid multi-millions to run companies into the ground? And then getting those same companies baild out by us, U.S. .... because they are "to big to fail"..... bah!

West, By God said...

I suppose it could be argued that there exists a large group of citizens whose political views lie somewhere between "Pinko Liberal" and the "NASCAR-'n'-Jesus". Although I don't remember ever hearing from them (because you never do hear from them), one could assume these are the constituents being catered to. However, if this fabled tweener group does indeed exist, my intuition indicates that they care more about reality TV than the stock market.

Anonymous said...

Add enough pork, and they'll pass a bill making strangling their own mothers legal.

-SayUncle

jimbob86 said...

Our 2nd District Congresscritter, Lee Terry, supported the bailout the second time around (when it was even stinkier than the first time) even though his constituants phone calls/e-mails ran 10 to 1 against it. Odds of him being re-elected: slim to none. Sarah Palin stopped at a rally last night at the Civic Auditorium...... the GOP completely ignored him (Terry). This may be a case of the GOP cutting off their nose to spite their face, as this assures one more Dem in the House, in a seat that has lately been a slam dunk for the Republicans.... things don't look good, economically, politically..... none of it.

DirtCrashr said...

Recall them to work barefoot on a hog-farm in Arkansas.

GeorgeH said...

You don't have to like it, any more than you have to like a series of rabies shots. After all, the chances of the critter that bit ya actually having rabies are pretty low, but low enough to risk?

I don't like the bailout, but I like the maybe 5% chance of a 1930s type worldwide decade long depression caused by doing nothing even less.

It's disgusting and socialistic, just like the federal entities and mandates that caused it. The time to complain about the socialism was when Fannie and Freddie were created, or when they could have been wound down painlessly.

Lynx217 said...

I have to agree with George. Hopefully this will buy us time to fix what Bush fkd up in the first place so it never happens again. As one of those non-liberal, non-conservative independents, I am ashamed that we even had to consider a bailout but even more so that we didn't see this coming sooner. But that's what happens after 7 years of THIS president. But I believe we will recover. It's the American way.

OldTexan said...

I have a good friend who handles investment porfolios, he is smart as hell, super conservative and he is in his mid 70's so I asked him to please explain this bail out to me.

His take on it is that Fannie & Freddie, created by the government, were responsible for this mess and the implication was that they would stand behind the forced crappy loans.

Like georgeh above I was told me that for us to do nothing would be a disaster but the bailout would be a hard, nasty, necessary pill to swallow. When it failed the first time my friend was enraged and he told me that all the Republicans who went along to get along for years and then voted against the bailout should be kicked out of office since the next bill would be even worse, and it was.

My friend thought Nancy Rats-ass Pelosi played the Republicans like a trout on a light line letting them appear like idiots in the media where the truth does not matter.

Where the heck are the grown ups who should have been running the country all along; did you notice we conservatives had the Presidency, Senate and Congress all three for awhile and we let it the deregulation ride like an old fat lady playing craps in Reno.

I am a bit afraid of the outcome of the election next month and as a cop friend told me this weekend, do not pass up the chance to buy high capacity magazines and ammo during the next few months cause things don't look a bit good for gun people post election.

Anthony said...

"scoundrels and scalawags"... Awesome!

You forgot "dishonorable curs."

Tam said...

"...did you notice we conservatives had the Presidency, Senate and Congress all three..."

Well, 'Republicans' did; I don't know about 'Conservatives'.

theirritablearchitect said...

Recall?

Recall?

How 'bout we assemble the gallows on the front lawn of the Capitol instead?

I'm afraid the thick-headed morons wouldn't get the message.

Somerled said...

One has to follow the money to understand why it passed. "Sweeteners" were added in the Senate. That allowed members of Congress to go home and say they voted for it because it funded a project to help constituents.

Anyone who has cracked open an economics book knows the bailout will simply devalue the dollar more. It will take more pinkbacks to buy the goods. This will make financial statements and balance sheets look more favorable in the short term. Then, the work force will demand a "livable wage" increase. That will cause even more jobs to go offshore and a larger influx of illegal laborers who work for less.

The nation will become increasingly dependent on foreign investors financing the debt. This threatens our sovereignty as well as the economy.

crankylitprof said...

Recall them to work barefoot on a hog-farm in Arkansas.

In August.

Mark Alger said...

The group who liked it apparently are better known as "Campaign Contributors."

And, in all probable reality, they are contributors to a relatively small group of conspirators better known as "The Guilty Parties" -- i.e, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Chucky Schumer, et al.

The country got logrolled by a bunch of corrupt fat cats who knew if they didn't cover up good and quick, they'd be spending their golden years in federal gray jumpsuits in some country club in Connecticut. Or West Virginia. Or wherever that place is.

M

D.W. Drang said...

I've been saying that the government did not have to act, but that it was probably better that it did act, to restore confidence in The System. I had originally said that it should do nothing, until I started reading reports of how even people with sizable downpayments and decent jobs were geting turned down for auto loans. If credit is being squeezed that much, that indicates that businesses can't get the loans they need to operate.
We probably weren't looking at a 1930's style depression, but rather a long drawn-out recession of the sort that the Japanese have been dealing with for the last 10+ years.
As for the allegations that George W. Bush ran the economy into the ground, Presdient Bush tried several times to get Congress to act to fix the regulatory oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; on September 29th I posted on my blog a link to the text of the S. 190 [109th Congress]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005,
Sponsors: Sen. Charles Hagel [R-NE], Sen. Elizabeth Dole [R-NC], Sen. John McCain [R-AZ], Sen. John Sununu [R-NH].
I also posted a YouTube video of the 2003/4 hearings on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which featured prominently Obama's Financial Advisor, Franklin Raines, who was at the time the head of Freddie Mac. Mr. Raines insisted that there was Nothing Wrong, and Senator Barney Frank was quite offensive in his forms of address to anyone who was sugesting that there was something wrong.
My problem with the bailout bill was, and remains, that it did too litle to fix the underlying problems--shoveling mortgage loan money at people who couldn't afford the payments, started under President Carter in the 1970, increased under President Clinton in the 1990s!--did little or nothing to restrict "Golden Parachutes", and gave too much power to the Secretary of the Treasury, with too little oversight. And then they loaded all that BS pork onto it to bribe the congrescritters to vote "Yea."
So, yes, anyone who voted yes should not be re-elected.
Alas, most voters only support that for other people's congresscritters.

oldblinddog said...

I don't like the bailout, but I like the maybe 5% chance of a 1930s type worldwide decade long depression caused by doing nothing even less.

Just like the New Deal, this is only going to make it worse not better. Check the Dow, we are in for a ride people.

Nathan Brindle said...

What oldblinddog said.

Read Amity Shlaes' The Forgotten Man. It was precisely the actions of the government during the New Deal that prolonged the Great Depression. If FDR had left well enough alone, it would never have been as "great".

OrangeNeckInNY said...

There's a shadow group called "The New World Order" which is comprised of the banking giants in the world. They want to tear apart the walls separating our economy from those in Europe and Asia, etc. and create one giant world economy. Perhaps this is a way that they're trying to do it.

Tam said...

Y'know what?

Even if the bailout was 100% necessary and totally pork-free, that isn't the point.

The point is that these bastards publicly acknowledged that their constituents were adamantly opposed to it... AND VOTED FOR IT ANYWAY.

These are Representatives. They are not our leaders, they are not our lords and masters, they are goddam well our employees. If we tell them to take flamethrowers and go down to the mint, it is not their job to say "Well, that wouldn't be in the best interest of the country, little missy...", their job is to light the pilot light, say "Yes Ma'am", and get to torching.

theirritablearchitect said...

"spending their golden years in federal gray jumpsuits in some country club..."

Oh please, please, please, please...

It warms my heart to think of both Barney Frank and Chris Dodd (two, for example, of many) being hauled away and tried for high crimes and misdemeanors, then spending time in the clink.

Anonymous said...

Tam,

I must repsectfully disagree. It is the job of elected reps to vote intelligently for the best interests of the country.

We just get to judge them later and replace them if we disagree.

Burke had a lot of positive things to say about Parliamentarians NOT respecting theinstantanous will of the people who elected them.

Frnakly it's one of things that sets us apart from just having a demagogic system, running by a polling stattion.

"job of elected reps to vote intelligently" : there's the rub

Kristopher said...

Cranky:

Work in a hog farm?

Hell, cut them, and then feed them to the hogs.

Somerled said...

Members of Congress have been following the dictates of who put them in office. That's why the nation is several trillion in debt. Every city, county, state snd instutition public or private has its hand out for federal aid. And the people who elect representatives are no different.

Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were doing exactly what the people who put them in office wanted when they attacked those who wanted to reform lending practices.

D.W. Drang said...

Somerled said...
Members of Congress have been following the dictates of who put them in office. That's why the nation is several trillion in debt. Every city, county, state snd instutition public or private has its hand out for federal aid. And the people who elect representatives are no different.

And this is why the only term limits we have are for president, everyone is for limiting the other guy's congresscritter's terms, not the ones who bring home the pork for them.

perlhaqr said...

Anyone who claims that these problems arose because the banking industry was "deregulated" has a pretty funny idea of what that word means. The banking industry labors under the burden of mountains of regulation, irrespective of whether a few shovelsful had been removed from the peak or not.

And the Depression was as bad a it was because of government interference in the market, not in spite of it. All that this can possibly achieve is to make things worse.

Not that I expect people to remember and vote these bastards out come November.

I'm getting awfully tired of paying people to fuck me over.

Joe R. said...

To the anonymous above,

No, Tam has it right. The reps are supposed to vote the way the people who put them there tell them to. If that means driving off of a cliff in the process, so be it. I have to believe that the Founding Fathers warned us of the weakness of the system somewhere but that has been forgotten. You know what the weakness is? The weakness is a very stupid electorate. All of the dumbing down of the education system along with a news media that has become a propaganda organ for the socialists has made an electorate that just doesn't have a clue of how the country should be run. So you put a bunch of doctors, lawyers, and social workers into the Congress that think that the average person is as dumb as a box of rocks and you get what we have today - bread and circuses.

To lynx217,

Don't even go there blaming Bush for this shit. There is enough information on the 'Net to connect the dots on what happened here and Bush isn't even in the top 5 for receiving the blame for this...

Joe R.

Anonymous said...

Tam, I love you like the sister I never had, but you are absolutely wrong about what the reps are supposed to do. What you propose is Mob Rule with a minor time lag, based the ability of one group or another to sway the masses.

Stop and think about the repercussions OUTSIDE of the debate about the bailout. You are smart and well read: It won't take you more than a few minutes to conjure up several nightmares that would be possible if our reps did what the majority wanted every time they got a notion or a strong feeling.

This doesn't make the bailout any smarter. I don't know which is worse, the disease or the current cure. But I do know that there are some oscillations that hit the ground before they bottom out. I'm not sure if this is one of them, but a lot of people I usually trust think so (and quite a few think not). I used to fly for a living, but that doesn't mean I could walk into the cockpit and land a crippled 747 in a hurricane. I might have strong opinions about how to do it, but I'd much rather someone that ACTUALLY PILOTS 747's made the attempt. Even if they fail, they had much stronger odds of pulling it off than I did.

Formerflyer

Matt said...

Actually, We have two houses so the good of the country and the will of the people can both be voted.

Representatives to Congress are supposed to vote the will of the people.

Senators are supposed to vote for the good of the country. (That's why the Senate wasn't elected by popular vote... Until the 17th amendment.)

Anonymous said...

Matt, you're about 95% of the way there. The Representatives to Congress are more directly accountable to the will of the people, but they are still supposed to exercise judgement and restraint. They're just more likely than Senators to get whacked in the ballot box for it when they piss off the electorate.

Formerflyer