The bank disaster is a Republican mess. If 100% of Republicans don't vote for a fix, Democrats

[denverbill]

should kill it.

Limbaugh, Hannity, Boortz, and all the other right wing shitheads are out there pounding Democrats over this bill, and frankly, most of America will agree that it sucks to bail out these idiot bankers. If Republicans are able to use this as a campaign issue, it will definitely hurt Democrats in November, across the board.

This is a damned Republican, free-market, deregulated mess. Until Paulsen, Bush, Cheney, and the other Republican nuts come up with a plan that they will ALL vote for, or at least 99% of them will vote for, Democrats should tell them to fuck off. I'm all for a 'free-market' solution to this mess, frankly. Let the Republicans sit their free-market asses in a meeting with each other until they come up with a plan. Until then, NO DEAL.

And while they are at it, the dumb-ass in the White House should invite Limbaugh and friends to the White House and let THEM suggest a plan. And if they still insist on bashing a solution instead of coming up with one of their own, Bush and everyone else involved need to make sure that Americans know EXACTLY who it is that is blocking this solution, and who EXACTLY is to blame for any worldwide Depression that results. Limbaugh and the others are in no small measure to blame for this mess, and now they are blocking attempts to limit the damage that their mess will cause. If they block the solution, I say let the Limbaugh Depression begin.

[Uben]

1. Any plan they come up with will.....

...stick it to the middle class, so why not let dems outline it? If there is going to be a deal, which I am opposed to, better for it to benefit the middle class than the fat cats.

[4dsc]

2. Democrat's should be saying NO very loudly...

I have to wonder why conservative republicans GET IT and out leadership doesn't GET IT.. Come on folks, over 70% of American's DO NOT WANT THIS BAILOUT!!!

[malaise]

5. Just Say NO!!

That is all.

[dkf]

3. Democrats are always the adults cleaning up after the Republican's crazy irresponsible partying.

Banks are failing, even with the FDIC guarantee. If we want to promote that feeling of fear and unease within our people, then we can stand back and let it happen. And then people can lose their jobs and stop spending money and not be able to get loans, and have their credit limits slashed with no access to the credit that is allowing them to just keep on.

And we can sit back and blame the Republicans for the mess we are in.

While they will blame us for running Congress.

I don't think that will happen though...Democrats can't handle being that irresponsible.

[MadHound]

4. There are also many Democrats and liberals who are against this bailout

Not out of any free market ideology, or even to punish the fat cats. But rather for sound economic reasons.

Injecting one trillion dollars worth of liquidity into the system will really raise inflation. That's not the worst part. The worst part is that at some point during this bailout and buyup, our US Treasury Bonds, the debt instrument that we use to fund our government, will be downgraded. When that happens there will be no, absolutely no, funding for the US government or for this country. This scenario is much, much worse than any Depression, it is an economic extinction level event.

I've talked with several reputable economists, and to the last one, they're scared shitless of this bailout. All this bailout is designed to do is rescue the government's corporate masters on Wall St., and buy a few months for Bushco to skate out of office, leaving this ticking time bomb for the next president to deal with.

Once more, as with the Patriot Act and the Iraq War, the Bush administration is using fear, fear, fear to stampede us off the cliff. Rather than be one of the herd, stop, think, get some information from real experts, not just the political posers on capital hill. And once it sinks in that this bailout is the worst possible option, fight back.

[denverbill]

6. I can't say I disagree with anything you said.

My main concern in writing this wasn't to promote the Bush/Paulsen bailout plan. My main point was that Democrats, at the very minimum, should not allow ANY bailout plan to be used against them in this election, and the only way to guarantee that is to make sure that not only Bush, but McCain, the Congressional Republicans and even the nutjob commentators are also on board. It almost sounds to me like Democrats in Congress are chomping at the bit to pass this, and they are afraid if they don't do something that voters will blame them for inaction.

I'd love to be in a position to know for sure whether doing nothing would in fact cause an economic calamity, but unfortunately, I don't have a good enough understanding of the problem or the possible solutions to analyze the options. Frankly, I'm not all that certain anyone does at this point. But what I do understand is that people are pissed about this, and if Democrats go out on a limb and pass something that is not 100% bipartisan, they are the ones who will get the blame.

That's what I want to avoid.

[MadHound]

8. I am in a position to know that this bailout will bring down disaster

I really don't care at this point which party takes the blame or gets the credit, I just want somebody up on the Hill to kill this damn thing. Otherwise we're really, truly screwed. We might coast for a while, the markets will look good for awhile, but at some point, probably deep into the second set of payouts, our bonds will be downgraded and we can kiss our economy and government and country goodbye.

Frankly, I siding with those on the right who are opposing this thing. We don't share the same reasons, but it is opposition all the same. The Democrats should fucking wake up and realize that once again, as with the Patriot Act and Iraq War, they are being stampeded into a really bad, bad decision. Then perhaps we can get bipartisan opposition and tell Bushco and his corporate cronies where to get off at. But it seems as though the corporate masters of the Democratic party have gotten to their pet politicians and they will force this atrocity through, thus dooming this country to economic hell.

What a fine legacy that will be:puke:

[denverbill]

13. Even a $1 trillion bailout is only double our current budget deficit.

Granted the dollar has dropped 50% in value since the idiot took office and blew the budget up, but it effectively only puts us 10% deeper in debt that the $10 trillion we already owe. And as much as I oppose the bailout, I don't know that an extra 10% would be enough to cause a catastrophic fall in the dollar.

As much as I oppose deficits, tax cuts that lead to deficits, and taxpayer bailouts of private corporations (privatize the profit, socialize the risk) I still don't think a bailout would necessarily be a disaster.

What would be a disaster is putting Republicans back in control of the White House and Congress, so they can push MORE tax cuts and further bloat the deficit, while continuing to export jobs and cut health care and wages. That's why I oppose Democrats being blamed for a bailout.

[MadHound]

15. We've already been on the brink of a downgrade for awhile now

<http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JA17Dj02.html>
"Rating firm Moody’s on January 10 signaled its belief that the long-term credit rating of US government debt might have to be cut - downgraded - below AAA. The firm was clearly neither downgrading nor about to downgrade in the foreseeable future. It was a warning about pension costs, healthcare costs and the track our government is on. " This warning was put out in January of this year. Clearly many people around the world thought that we were overextended then, before this bailout.

Earlier this week Financial Trader.com downgraded our bonds from AAA to B+. While this isn't an official downgrade, it is a sign of things to come. <http://financialtrader.com/Bond_Investor.html>

Our current debt to annual GDP is 67%, after the bailout goes into effect, it will rise to at least 72%, possibly much higher, a very unhealthy state of affairs.

We're also starting to witness inflation taking hold in this country, simply from the announcement of this bailout. Gold, oil and other such commodities are 'limit up' which means the offers to buy are unlimited, as a hedge against US inflation. Meanwhile, US Treasury Bonds are 'limit down', which means that nobody is buying, at least not at the current interest rate.

What we have here is a picture of an already overloaded US debt structure, one that can't on any more debt, whether it is in the form of one large payout or three smaller ones. If we take this debt on, it will simply be the last straw(albeit a large straw) that will break our financial back. It doesn't matter whether it is "only" ten percent of our current debt load(and how you can trivialize a ten percent rise in debt is beyond me), the fact of the matter is that we're already overloaded with debt, and any more, be it one, five, or ten percent will bring the whole rotten house of cards down.

Please, stop putting partisan concerns first and foremost in your thinking. Rather, put what is good for out country, our economy and our government first. This bailout is clearly not in our country's best interest, and whether it is proposed by the Dems or the 'Pugs, it is still a horrible policy that will devastate our economy and our country far beyond the warnings Paulson and others are shouting about. We can survive a depression, we have done so a number of times before. We cannot survive the economic tsunami that will swamp us if our bonds are downgraded. Please, think rather than react. Ask yourself this question: Bush has used fear to stampede us into the Patriot Act and the Iraq war. He is using fear to stampede us again. Do you really think that he deserves to be heeded on this decision, since the last two were such disasters?

[denverbill]

16. I do put "what is good for out country, our economy and our government first."

You yourself said that Moody's was already considering lowering our credit rating back in January. That didn't happen because of the bank problems.

George Bush and the Republican Party were handed a budget surplus in 2001. If they had kept their fucking greedy mitts off the budget, we would be about 2 years away from having paid off the entire national debt.

They didn't even make a feeble attempt to cut spending to compensate for their reckless fiscal behavior. Instead, they increased discretionary spending at a higher rate than at any time during Clinton's presidency, AND threw in $100 billion or more per year of 'off-budget' spending on a 'war on terror' in Iraq.

Personally, in 2000, I had hoped that Gore would have said 'no' to any tax cuts at all, instead of trying to pander to voters. Instead, he offered a tamed down version, which Bush was able to belittle pretty effectively. Sadly, there are enough people in this country that don't give a shit about the future, and only care about today, who will invariably vote for whoever promises them the most immediate cash, regardless of the consequences for this country.

You've seen the result. A $5.6 trillion debt has exploded to $10 trillion, or $11 trillion with a bailout. If Democrats do vote for this bailout, and let Republicans shift the blame for the bailout to Democrats, Republicans may well win another chance to govern in 2008.

I'm not minimizing a 10% increase in debt, I was simply putting it in perspective. When Bush can run a $500 billion deficit in a normal, non-emergency situation, in relative terms, a one-time $700 billion bailout is not THAT big a deal. The bigger deal, to me, is the $500 annual deficits that have added $5 trillion to our debt in 7 years.

And I have said repeatedly that I don't necessarily favor this plan. My main point is that if Democrats vote for ANY plan, it has to be done in a way that does not allow the disaster that occurred in 2000 to recur in 2008.

How would you feel about this plan?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4093018

[northsongs]

7. I'm from the government and ...

I'm here to help you. That's all I could tell McSame was saying in the debate when it came to the bailout. Is that what we need right now? Didn't the Repugs get us into this mess?

Bushco has framed this up as a no-win for Democrats and Americans. Nobody wants the Wall Street tycoons to get bailed out of their own mess, but now it looks like we own it. And as someone who's been out of work for 3 months and counting, I really don't want to see things get worse. I'd like to get back to work, instead of depleting our savings a bit more each and everyday.

i don't trust the admin, never have. They have more tricks up their sleeve than David Copperfield, but what if this once they're being truthful? The old boy who cried wolf story comes back to haunt them, and us. How many understand this bailout, or the consequences of not acting?

Is there some kind of way outta here? Said the joker to the thief. - Jimi

[loudsue]

18. I wish you and your family the best of luck, northsongs, and welcome to DU!

It really sucks not being able to find a job. Republicans have been a pox on this nation from the get-go.

May they all get raptured SOON, so the rest of us can live in a peaceful world.

[PVnRT]

9. They have a "plan"

Basically, we'll sell insurance to banks to protect them, then cut the capital gains tax. It's the underpants gnome method of solving the crisis.

[edhopper]

10. K & R

[dkofos]

11. They are being played again. Give us the money or the economy tanks.

Give them the money, and it's why did you give away the treasury.

Will we get real leadership after this election??

I doubt it.

[Dover]

12. Because this mess is 20 years in the making and bipartisan. And both parties are awash in money

from these financial institutions. Have you read some of the articles and links posted in this forum? There are many more bailouts to come. We aren't even half way to the bottom.

[denverbill]

14. The DLC Democrats were the beneficiaries, afaik.

The same cadre that voted for NAFTA and for the changes to bankruptcy laws that banks had demanded for years, and which was opposed by real Democrats all along the way.

But even assuming you are correct, and it's a bipartisan mess, that makes it even more critical that it be solved in a bipartisan fashion. If Republicans vote against it in mass and use it against us in November, we have only ourselves to blame for the result.

[bertman]

17. Go to Senator Bernie Sanders' website for some "straight talk" on this:

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/issues/crisis.cfm

[intheflow]

19. Basically, your advocating the Dems go on strike until their demands get met.

I like the way you think! :thumbsup: Good post.