I'm listening to Senator Shelby (Repub) and I gotta admit, he's making some

[gateley]

sense -- as far as it goes. Of course, I'm not sure what he's NOT saying, but he's all for waiting until they can do something they KNOW will work, as opposed to rushing into this emotionally. Makes sense to me -- again -- as far as that goes. :shrug:

I'm unsure as to what exactly the Reps are opposing in the Dems' plan. Any expert enlightenment would be much appreciated.

[Warren Stupidity]

1. They are opposing any oversight or regulation

and are instead proposing a half-baked and impossible to implement 'insurance premium' scheme to encourage a private sector bailout (by who? the private sector that could finance the bailout is what needs bailing) and more deregulation.

They also pulled a bad faith negotiation stunt for the benefit of McPalin.

[gateley]

3. Oh - gotcha. Thanks. I should have known better, but I invariably give

people the benefit of the doubt. I never learn. :banghead:

[mike_c]

2. agreed, 100 percent....

At the very least, Congress should take only the least possible stopgap measures and those only when absolutely necessary. We should NOT save the current unregulated system under any circumstances. Rather, we need to take a long, considered approach to rebuilding a financial system that serves all of us, not just the greediest rat bastards who would foreclose on their grandmothers to make just a little more profit.

edit: I realize this isn't what the republicans actually advocate, but it's what *I* advocate, and if repubs slow this process down for whatever reason it serves the greater good, IMO.

[TwilightGardener]

4. Shelby's doing a lot of carping and bitching, but he doesn't seem to

be proposing anything constructive.

[gateley]

11. Well I'm getting an understanding of what it is that the Reppugs are going for

and as usual, it's not a concern for our benefit at all.

Well, even if it is to a certain extent, they're not willing to forego any benefit as a result of this for them and theirs.

[jojo54]

5. And once again, the Dems are the scapegoats because they

won't agree to any of it.

So, WHO may I ask is watching out for middle America???

[gateley]

12. Yes - and they (R's) are so good at fanning the flames and banging the drum

that's all we'll hear. That is what the general population will remember.

I don't know why we aren't as successful at that as they are.

[Nite Owl]

6. Not sure if I got this right but

I think this is what they want to do.

They would get the money from 'private' sources to bankroll the whole thing. The government would become the insurer of last resort. Good that we don't outright pay for it but if (when) they don't get paid back we the people get screwed and pay the bill. Same old, same old, privatize the profit and socialize the risk.

[gateley]

10. Thanks -- you and the other responders are helping me get a sense of it.

:hi:

[pocoloco]

7. Better get some expert advice!!

Start here!

http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/john.cochrane/research/Papers/mortgage_protest.htm

[gateley]

13. Thanks =-= I'll check it out, but I'm guessing there are experts weighing in

on both sides of the issue. Like any issue. :shrug:

[still_one]

8. Shelby is a far right conservative, who once in a great while may come out

with a rational view as opposed to most of the vermin in his party

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Richard_Shelby.htm

[ProfessorGAC]

9. I Don't Trust Him Or His Knowledge. But. . .

. . .he's right that it could be worse to act rashly and do something that accomplishes nothing, or makes things worse in the long run.

The Professor

[gateley]

14. Yeah -- with that statement, anyway, I'm in agreement. nt

[riverdeep]

17. My sentiments exactly.

We are entrusting our treasury to one or two people? Since when do we entrust anything of that great significance to just one or two? These people are not gods. In fact, their predictive powers are suspect because they let it get this far. How can we trust their predictions on a solution.

As far Shelby, that's one of many different solutions that can be proposed. The administration's version is 'OMG! OMG! your house in on fire! here's the only solution, now shut up and give us the money!' Classic con man game.

[doc03]

15. From what I heard they want more tax cuts

for the rich.

[bread_and_roses]

16. the real ?? is WHY are the Dems allowing the Rs to SOUND more populist on this Bail-Out than they do

????????????????? I heard that foul Newt G. on NPR the other day and if I didn't know better would think he was the best friend the working person ever had. I heard some other R yesterday sounding like he cared about the ordinary working person, blasting the CEOs and Corporate Greed like he'd always been the enemy of the Fat Cats.

Meanwhile, the Dems come across as wimpy apologists for this mal-administration and our Corporate Masters.

How can the Dems be so tone-deaf? Yes, Obama sound measured and Presidential but he is not using language that resonates with Main Street. This great gift has been given us, and they are blowing it.

[riverdeep]

18. This is my deep concern as well.

Although people like Tester from Montana were striking the populist chord, in the end, going for this bill will hang the bailout on the Dems, which is political suicide. Then again, I have gotten so used to Pelosi and Reid being outplayed at this point, I'm not really surprised. The mistake they make is trusting them. Always think the worst of them and you will rarely be disappointed.

[Xipe Totec]

19. When did this become "The Dems Plan"?

It's the Republican Administration's plan and the minority Republicans are rebelling.

[riverdeep]

21. You noticed that.

That is the theme the Republicans will be saying. That is the core of this charade. And lies, when they are spouted often and forcefully enough, especially with a confused and enraged public, can take hold quickly. Without Republican cover, the Dems need to walk. Hell, even with Republican cover, I think the Dems should walk. They should form an alliance with the renegade Pubs and call for hearings to delay this nonsense till after the election. Pass only the most necessary stop-gap measures if you have to, but no more than 50 billion.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

20. If either the Repukes or the Democrats start with the premise that what Paulson is saying is Fact,

I think either party could be making a dangerous mistake. Remember the Source, a minion of the Shrub.

I am also furious that the Democrats are accepting what Paulson is saying and although amending his 3 page plan to add in safe guards, they are still accepting what Paulson is saying as gospel. Why the hell should he be trusted?

The whole dilemma has be viewed from square one.