Monday, September 29, 2008
|
|
Beware the Unintended Consequences
|
|
Posted by:
Carol Platt Liebau at
7:06 PM
|
I would love to be wrong on this one, and to have the chance ultimately to congratulate the conservatives who opposed this bill as people who successfully protected the country from an unnecessary and undesirable government intrusion into the economy. But I fear I'm not going to have that chance.
As Hugh has noted below, Michael Moore denounced this bill and called for it to be defeated. Note well that the House's most left-wing Democrats (and few of them reknowned for their knowledge of the economic system) including Dennis Kucinich, Sheila Jackson-Lee and the Sanchez sisters also opposed the bill.
Why would they do this? Because they figure they've got two "good" (in their world) scenarios to hope for. One, the Democrats will put forward a loony left bill, pass it on a party line vote, and take credit for saving the economy in time for the elections. Or, nothing passes, the markets tank, many people are hurt and -- voila! -- as in the era of FDR, an unprecedented expansion of the federal government's powers results from the economic dislocation.
The Republicans who opposed the bill, on the other hand, can hardly hope that a more conservative version is going to garner enough Democrat votes to pass. So, to give them the benefit of the doubt (because who, on the right, hopes for another Great Depression?), they must be figuring that doing nothing will turn out OK. That's where I think they've taken a big, risky gamble with this country's economic future. Given market and economic realities -- like the 770 point drop today -- it's not likely that the economy's going to pick right up on its own.
Perhaps they hope that Congress is going to pass a loony left bill and get thrown out on the heels of it. Well, maybe so, but it's always risky to assume that if things get really, really bad, people will understand the glories of free market conservatism. More often, they great frightened and demand more government protection, and the concept of capitalism takes it on the chin . . . just what Moore and his gang of leftists are hoping for.
In the meantime, scads of seniors lose their life's savings. And as those on both sides who opposed the bill take all the time they want to "get it right," the damage continues unabated. That's not a scenario that helps Republicans, the markets, or free market capitalism.
Beware the unintended consequences.
|
|
"Why would they do this?"
You're falling into an either-or fallacy. There are plenty of reasons why Dems didn't hop on board.
They could have issues with the idea of using public money to bail out rich folks that made bad investments.
Or they might have had a hard time handcuffing a likely Obama administration with that much debt from a previous administration.
Or because they didn't believe anything that came out of the mouth of this Executive branch or its officers as that trust has been squandered.
But more likely than not, it was probably because calls from their constituents were running 100 to 1 against the bailout, and while I'm sure our 'leaders' have immense disdain for our opinions, those kind of numbers had to have given them pause.
My prediction, they'll wait a week, slap more makeup on it, and trot it back out as a reformed version to the public to see if they'll bite or forget about it.
And if that fails, they might just roll it out piecemeal in 100 billion dollar increments.
Whatever will please their corporate donors, pad their personal bank accounts, and not anger the serfs enough to jeopardize their careers. |
|
"Given market and economic realities -- like the 770 point drop today -- it's not likely that the economy's going to pick right up on its own."
And THIS is why noone should confuse you with a conservative. |
|
|
|
there is one immediate path the govt could take which would need no one's approval and would free up monies immediately. So, if Paulson/Bernacke have the best interest of the country at heart they will immediately implement that first thing this morning.
Quite frankly, Paulson appeared way too cozy with the Dem leadership.
If there are other routes other than a taxpayer bailout why don't they utilize all those routes before putting the burden on the taxpayer?
Any rewrite by the Dems will once again include gazillions of dollar giveaways and ACORN and other like minded agencies will wind up with even more taxpayer dollars. |
|
Hi,
Great thread - it's refreshing to read so many insightful and/or amusing posts!!
I realise this is a little bit off-topic, but I need some help.
I'm with an online business TV network called yourBusinessChannel, and we're looking to collect opinion on Obama and McCain's performances as persuasive communicators during the debate on Friday.
Ask yourself - politics aside, who would you buy a used car off?
yourBusinessChannel produces short internet business TV shows providing advice to business people and entrepreneurs on all aspects of business.
We are currently producing a series which focuses on how to be really persuasive when making business and sales presentations.
I've been reading the comments thread on this blog and have been impressed with the level of discussion here - so I'd love any or all of you to reply to this post with your views and opinions...
I want to know - in your opinion - which candidate:
- Had the most persuasive tone of voice?
- Made best use of body language?
- Seemed genuinely passionate about their message?
- Used humour to good effect?
- Showed total mastery of policy details?
- Rebutted his opponent most convincingly, and dealt best with criticism?
- Was relaxed and confident in making off the cuff comments?
- Avoided major faux pas and screw-ups?
- Came across as a real human being, not a robot regurgitating talking points?
...why do you think so?
cheers,
Steve Kerr
|
|
"Seize the day...
The House Republicans have there best chance right now to get a responsible bill."
Seize what day? The day is over. You obviously no nothing about the financial system and how integrated it is into the rest of the world.
The Dems are in control of Congress and can pretty much do whatever they want. The next thing that is going to happen will be that Congress either holds another vote on this same bill, or they come up with their own, with many more billions added on. They are more interested in winning elections than in saving the financial crisis we are in. And, don't forget, they don't need the votes of Republicans to get elected. How do you figure this whole thing will help the GOP?
Today, the economy in this country LOST $1 Trillion. I will bet you that with the drastic losses tomorrow in the European and Asian markets (they will tank), the market (DOW) here will lose anywhere from 500 to 1,000 points.
Do you know what that means in real life? . . . the rest of the world does not buy our products; businesses relying on trade close, people lose jobs, and finally all those people that have 401Ks will have NO retirement income. I heard several stories today, none good, where people were laid off because the company they worked for was unable to make its payroll. How does that sound folks?
These are real people, and you folks are playing politics as usual. This bill is the best you will ever see. And, in the meantime, you are hurting millions of Americans.
Worried about government intervention. Well, the government intervened many, many years ago when Freddie and Fannie were formed.
ALL OF YOU NEED TO GROW UP AND THINK OF SOMEONE OTHER THAN YOURSELF! |
|
---How come they are taking two days----
Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year.
|
|
would be of concern, this is a biggie to me:
"Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-renewable and committed to agency discreation, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Operating phrase: may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Don't know about anyone else, but I don't take kindly to an unelected bureaucrat having total authority over financial and non financial companies; where in the Constitution does Paulson get this right?
Furthermore, if this is such a dire circumstance, that something must be done NOW! not tomorrow, not next week or the week after but NOW! How come they are taking two days off?
And the Senate would not have taken the bill up til Wednesday? If it's that imperative it be
passed or else the sky would fall, why wait?
Doesn't pass the smell test. |
|
If the "Bailout Plan" said that they were going to raise $700 billion in taxes in order to fund the failing financial institutions, would Carol & Co. be saying that we shouldn't oppose it for political reasons?
Well, this "Bailout Plan" does just that! The $700 billion will be raised through inflating the currency, which is nothing more than a stealth tax increase. |
|
No financial adviser would EVER recommend that those on fixed incomes invest in the stock market. They would be in bonds, C/Ds, annuities, and other fixed income investments.
Their risk is in interest rates going up as fixed income instrument prices go down. But since they're living off the interest this isn't as bad as it could be.
Therefore, wailing about seniors, on fixed-incomes, are going to be badly hurt by the stock market drop is bogus! |
|
If a Treasury Department spokesperson said a week ago according to Forbes[1] about the $700 billion figure -
"It's not based on any particular data point, We just wanted to choose a really large number."
So how is anything else going to go right? If our own Treasury Department is clueless on the details, how is anyone else going to solve this problem?
I feel this is a case of the American sheeple (err people) having the wool pulled over their eyes again so government can grower bigger and have more control and certain people get immensely more richer at the expense of you and I.
[1] http://www.forbes.com/businessinthebeltway/2008/09/23/bail out-paulson-congress-biz-beltway-cx_jz_bw_0923bailout.html
|
|
Agreed, shame on all of those you listed.
Pelosi is the most shameful of all. Did you SEE that speech? She kept repeating the words "700 billion dollars", as if American investors, aka you and I, our parents and everyone else with a 401k or IRA plan, aren't losing that much almost daily now.
Because of HER inability to get the House in order! Isn't that HER job?
|
|
Presently we have conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan
and Pakistan (unofficially) of course. With the distinct possibility of war with Iran over its desire to see Israel wiped off the earth, not to mention its nuclear program.
Now theorhectically speaking, what would happen if Israel launched a pre-emptive strike on Iran to knock out its nuclear sites? Without the satellites up there to detect incoming missiles into Iranian airspace their sitting ducks. This will no doubt prompt an aggressive response from Iran, and most likely other middle eastern nations. Russian forces will soon be brought into the conflict, thus coming to my main point: Even if the scenario doesn't play out to this full extent, President Bush has the power to implement 'martial law'. This without congressional approval because of the immenent threat of a nuclear confrontation with the middle eastern nations in its attempt to defend Israel.
This will postpone the Novemeber elections indefinetly until President Bush feels the threat to the United States and its allies is over.
It can happen just like this. Politics is a mean game, and to gain ultimate power people will do whatever it takes to gain that power to rule as their conscience will allow. It is once said that democrats are nothing but puppits on a string in the hand of the devil; while the republicans are instruments of God. However, to the surprise of republicans, we are all puppets of the devil, while God Almighty is the overseer of the puppeteer (Romans 13: 1-5). TAKE IT TO THE BANK--this ones safe.
Be Blessed in Jesus,
COLONEL JON RAMBO
|
|
by allowing the Free Market to work, then the Free Market doesn't work.
I suppose these seniors will not lose their savings by having the government pump 700 billion more dollars into the economy. Having inflationary pressure on medicine prices and food prices won't do anything at all to their "savings", right?
"The Republicans who opposed the bill, on the other hand, can hardly hope that a more conservative version is going to garner enough Democrat votes to pass."
I think the point is that we don't need any kind of "Bailout Bill" at all--conservative or liberal.
The stock market drop represents a reallocation of resources away from bad investments and toward good investments. Even if some of it is selling off "good" assets, it means that some parties are getting a great deal on those assets; they will be showing a real profit, soon, and will be the basis for the next expansion. The market will work itself out without help from the government. |
|
How in the world can the congress, senate and administration whip together a proposed bill that doesn't resolve the crisis, but makes it worse? Probably to hide the fact that they all played some part in causing the crisis to begin with.
Forcing mortgage companies to make loans to people who obviously could not afford them was one of the root causes of this crisis; however, the main cause was housing values taking a dive because of the glut of houses available on the market. Developers ran out and built thousands of houses when there was thousands of used houses on the market. Consequently, housing values took a dive. This left the mortgage companies holding bad paper in the billions.
Another factor affected by the housing values taking a dive was while the values were inflated many people ran to get home equity loans. They were spending the false equity as fast as the values went up to buy material things. Of course, when the values went down sharply, the banks were left with bad paper again.
This is a mess all the way around from bad mortgages to bad loans.
The bail out bill is a sham to cover up these poor management decisions and the fact our government pushed companies into making these bad loans and giving out these bad mortgages. |
|
The so-called bailout would do nothing but extend the agony. When someone eats poison, the solution is not to have them ingest more poison.
Where have all the real conservatives gone? It turns out they were in Congress, after all, instead of on talk radio and on the political blogs. The latter seem to have the idea that the free market won't really work "this time"....
This is one of the best explanations why this bailout won't work: http://mises.org/story/3131
|
|
|
I can't believe that these 4 people are on the same side as Pres. Bush - they criticize the Republicans for not siding with them to pass the bill but fail to mention that 65 Democrats voted against the bill - why not try to convince 13 out of these 65 instead of going after the Republicans - I believe that Nancy Pelosi would win the award for most disliked politician of our times - as for Barney Franks he is half the man that McCain is - McCain is a homosepian - Franks is half of that - |
|
Revised regulation towards Fannie/Freddie and some sort of transparency in the ratings of mortgage bungled securities is the first step. The democrats like Frank, Watters and Dodd who stood in the way of reform should be “made famous” as McCain says and dragged out of congress. I support some sort of govt action in this case mainly to restore confidence in our markets. Inaction will bring us more financial bloodlettings exceeding 700 points. Few mortgages are being defaulted on and helping lenders unload these “toxic” investments will bring in liquidity freeing up credit. Now banks are reluctant to give business loans, particularly construction loans.
The poster Sarah above mentioned auto loans were included in this rescue package. That’s outrageous. If you can’t afford your auto payments then your car should repossessed. I also disagree with this legislation allowing for the principal being reduced, interest rate fine. If the govt takes this “toxic” paper those that cannot pay their mortgage under revised interest rates should be foreclosed on and the home can be sold [short sale if it makes sense] or held until the housing market recovers and sold, possibly for a profit.
I also want to know how they came up with $700 billion; sounds extremely excessive even by the DC Criminals standards. $100 billion is probably all that’s needed.
|
|
I am very concerned about how bad things are going. Not about McCain or Obama winning (or not) that is irrelevant. It is how in the bag the MSM is for Obama and how willing many are to derail the economy (both pro Obama folks and those WTO conservative anarchists who want to see a melt down to bring on a mythical conservative age).
I do not like this government intervention either, but if we are going to Ron Paul route we need to be honest about what that means. The tough love route might work in the long term, but it only works if you are consistent. A hybrid Ron Paul hands off approach with a massive Democratic entitlement expansion is a recipe to Argentina style economics. This is a very big deal and people better start wrapping their heads around that.
|
|
"Billionaire real estate developer Donald Trump, has accepted an offer to operate as the new "Chief Economic Advisor" in a McCain campaign, as well as the extended role into a McCain Presidency." Sources close to the McCain camp have said, "we expect finality within the coming days prior to Thursday nights debate."
If only it were true.
Colonel Jon Rambo
|
|
"bum's rush" when they saw it.
Its been 10 days since this was labeled a crisis that must be resolved immediately or we would face a meltdown. Seen a meltdown recently?
This bailout idea was Paulson's way to protect his cronies on Wall Street. Yes, unless the government gives them 700b, the Wall Street fat cats are going to lose their shirts.
Wall Street and DC think we are idiots and believe people with money will refuse to lend it. What alternate reality are they living in to think Americans are so stupid as to believe that? |
|
Why a rush to judgment? Why any bailout?
If Goldman can put up $50B toward the purchase of bad assets, why can't other private sector parties step up with such tremendous potential upside? Isn't that free market capitalism? To the risk-takers go the rewards, no?
This bill would've bailed out every stupid Main Streeter and every greedy Wall Streeter that could've jumped on the train--on the dime of all those retirees and 401K holders that Platt Liebau mentions.
Let the idiots fail. The nation will be better off in the long run.
Scaremongering be damned! |
|
The House Republicans have there best chance right now to get a responsible bill.
The Dems are mad, but they are more scared of loosing their own seats in Congress. The public do not want this, dem's and rep's. Obama supported this, but couldn't pull them through.
The Republican's have an edge for limited time, it's the american public. People know their vote of NO was not because of Pelosi, it was for the tax payer. They saw this as socialism.
Ball's in their court, move fast!
|
|
|
The Democratic Party cares about power. This time their drive to marginalize House Republicans backfired. You want a truly bipartisan solution, drop the finger pointing and positioning for political advantage and work on a solution acceptable to the American people. The Democrats are childish and irresponsible. As long as they continue to demonize the GOP, we're not going to find a way out of this mess. They're free of course to own the problem and pass their own bill. All week long up until today, the Democrats have been a profile in cowardice. |
|
Fear is the enemy of thought and that is what the Bailout Bill's salesmen are counting on.
"If you don't pass this bill, the skies will darken, the earth will crack open and monsters from the pit will come forth and eat your children."
Hooey! We are being told this by people who had no idea that pumping a trillion dollars into the housing market might just create a bubble. They also didn't think that "mark to market" would burst the bubble. Now they tell us that the answer is to pump up the bubble some more with another trillion or so! If we have to fear something, it should be their stupidity.
The answer is to let the prices fall and move the capital into other more productive areas. Dump Sarbanes-Oxley, cut federal spending by a few hundred billion, cut the capital gains tax and then get out of the way and let professional business people (not the big corporate drones, they are worthless, I mean small businessmen) do what they do best - create wealth.
|
|
If this bill is so good why don't the Dims just go ahead and pass it? They've got the votes and they don't need Repubs. Why?....'cause they don't have the nads to stand up and take the heat by themselves if & when they do.
This "crisis" is a creation of the Dims..let'em stew in their own juices.
The most productive economy in the world will survive and we will not be stampeded into turning our government over to idiots. |
|
|
Barney Frank and Pelosi are treating the financial problem as a Republican problem and not a Democrat problem. I can not believe they are blaming Bush. They are all to blame and it is time they owned up to it. They are just like Obama they will not accept responsibility. |
|
The House Rep smelled an ambush and then, just as fast as you can mix metaphors, Nancy P made her intentions clear before she had a chance to pull the football away as the Republicans tried to kick.
Supposedly she and her majority colleagues could have passed something last week. They needed "cover" from the minority. You don't get cover when 40% of your fellow Dems balk. |
|
Did you read Sec. 109??
SEC. 109. FORECLOSURE MITIGATION EFFORTS.
(1) IN GENERAL.—To the extent that the Federal property manager holds, owns, or controls mortgages, mortgage backed securities, and other assets secured by residential real estate, including multifamily housing, the Federal property manager shall implement a plan that seeks to maximize assistance for homeowners and use its authority to encourage the servicers of the underlying mortgages, and considering net present value to the taxpayer, to take advantage of the HOPE for Homeowners Program under section 257 of the National Housing Act or other available programs to minimize foreclosures.
(2) MODIFICATIONS.—In the case of a residential mortgage loan, modifications made under paragraph (1) may include—
(A) reduction in interest rates;
(B) reduction of loan principal; and
(C) other similar modifications.
About how many homeowners that are current on their mortgages would have been contemplating going into foreclosure??? Hmmm.....let's see. Those that would LOVE to have their loans modified, reduction of interest rates, reduction of loan principal and other similar modifications -RAISE YOUR HAND. If the bill would have passed in it's current form I think we would have seen a "surge" of foreclosures in the very near future.
I don't believe people who knew they could not afford the homes they purchased should be bailed out!!
Then, during the House floor debate today John Dingle asked Barney Frank to clarify if auto loans were included and he said YES!!! I am sure this also included HELOC's and credit cards. This is insanity to every American.
A lot of us played by the rules and lived within our means. Passing this bailout bill would have been a complete slap in the face to all of us!! Why is it so hard for some to understand America's outrage???
|
|
The gambling "they've taken a big, risky gamble with this country's economic future" began a long time ago, as we're not really operating in a free market economy. Its wasn't today's legislators placing reckless wagers, the Fed has loaded the dice, and lost - Greenspan's credit bubble of 1% interest rates has burst.
The truely sad part is that the most virtuous yet vulnerable will suffer the most as our "managed" economy takes the inevitable nosedive of failed monetarist policies: those thrifty out of necessity who have mal-invested in poor quality savings vehicles like overpriced real estate and pension plans with negative returns. Abolish the Fed so that the "price discovery" mechanism of a healthy (productive and creative, not passive and consumptive) economy can be re-established.
The predominance of the utopian path of financially-derived wealth creation is behind us, but the clawing out of the financial hole is not. We must relearn the value proposition: deliver superior customer benefit by minimizing resources at risk. The dollar has been at risk for most of the last decade and we are less secure abroad and much less stable at home. The brand ("conservative") has been seriously damaged, but the people's inherent goodness has prevailed -- they saw through the charade and demanded of their public servants the courage of their convictions. |
|
The so called seniors who are losing their life savings were asleep at the switch durin "watergate" and the Carter administration. Pound sand or go to your grave. I am a single dad not a home owner am white so I get passed over for jobs, education, and any type of goverment loan program so cry me a river.
Futher Carol if this puts McCain at a disadvantage well that is because doesn't have the courage to talk about CRA.
Bush has proven to me that he is a non confrontational wimp more so than his father who allowed the Democrats to tag him at fault for every bad thing that happened on his watch.
You wanna pass this thing because you are worried then start talking about including abolishment of the CRA in this legislation and you will have 100% GOP support both elected and public. Otherwise grow a garden, pick up cans or cry about it.
Your free ride is over sister we ain't your Uncle Tom's GOP we demand CONSERVATISM
|
|
are learning what that means today. Unless we allow the market to straighten this out, we are just postponing and magnifying the eventual reckoning. |
|
Carol, you just don't get it. You can't cave every time the other team scores. You have to stick to your game plan, hopefully a conservative one. There will be ups and downs but how you deal with the downs in particular shows your character. Yours is looking a little ragged right now.
Remember the song: "Tomorrow, tomorrow", the world will be brighter and better tomorrow and the sun WILL shine again, believe me. Just have a little patience and FAITH. Stick to your principles and show some guts -- people will respect you a lot for that.
This bill was rotten to the core, even the democrats didn't like it.
I too was wondering if this was a democrat setup, a "pig in a poke" so to speak, that became a "catch-22" for the Republicans. No matter though, on principle it had to be defeated and it was via a bi-partisan vote. If it was a setup then the people responsible will NOT be forgiven by the Folks out in the Heartland. |
|
|
|
|
I realize it is not this simple, but I see it this way. You can't take it with you. We are selling the soul of America because we don't want anyone to suffer. It's not realistic. I suffer, you suffer... It's life. To expect a life with no hardships, is to have a life with no character or personal growth. Stop feeding false hope. |
|
did you even read the bill? On the first page it went awry. They had four purposes for the bill. The purposes were not prioritzed. One was to minimize damages to the taxpayer. Another was to shore up housing for the needy. These are conflicting purposes.
If they had said there was one purpose and that purpose was to protect the taxpayers, it would have had much better legs. Still it was bad.
The bill essentially put the government in the position of managing bad assets until they are gone. |
|
Boy: we're sure finding out how so-called conservative the major Townall bloggers really are. They're NOT.
Second in worrying about how this will affect Republican chances I would swear I am hearing Liberal Democrats talking!!
Dave M. |
|
Enough with the hysterical posts already....If you can't be any more measured in the way you are sorting through all this, then just don't post until you can. Yes it's painful, and yes, many of us have lots of skin (read $$$) in this game, but that bill needed to die a quick death so we can get something palatable crafted. Our economy and our democracy can stand some shaking while wise heads prevail in Congress. The last thing we conservatives need to be doing is passing terrible legislation out of fear and intimidation. No one can predict what the coming weeks will actually bring, so better to roll up the sleeves and stop having a hissy over what "might" happen, and get a real plan going.
|
|
No thank you.
Let the chips fall where they must. The answer is FREE MARKETS AND people taking responsibility for their actions!
My best friend and her husband were one of the fools who bought a house they damn well KNEW they could not afford. When the bank foreclosed, all my friend could do is b*tch about the bank, never taking responsibility for her greed and stupidity. |
|
|
But to say this is somehow John McCain's fault or that it is principaled to derail this deal from the GOP is not right. McCain has been holding back unleashing on Obama-Dodd-Frank in fear of undoing any chance of compromise. We are going to lose trillions of dollars when a temporary loan could have bridged this to a softer landing. It is BS and the citizens will pay for it. |
|
Shame on Mike Pence and other House Republicans for playing ideological games while the credit crisis continues.
Shame on Nancy Pelosi for politicizing what should be a non-political issue.
Shame on the Dennis Kucinich wing of the Democratic Party for helping two-thirds of House Republicans kill the bill.
Shame on Bush, Reid, Pelosi, Dodd, Shumer, Frank et al on trying to push through a flawed bill quickly before people really had a chance to judge its merits.
Shame on the same group for the actions that brought us here: forcing banks to make bad loans while taking away regulations that prevented them from making other utterly stupid decisions in the name of personal greed.
Shame on Senate Democrats for defeating a Hagel/McCain/Dole/Sununu-sponsored bill that would have headed this crisis off before we got to this point.
Shame on Harry Reid again, just for being Congress' prissy drama queen.
Shame on Barack Obama, uninterested in how the nation crumbles around him except in how it might improve his election chances.
Shame on Democrats and Republicans both for putting partisanship before the good of the nation.
The only guy who looks at all competent in this scenario we find ourselves in is the man who won the Republican nomination in spite of the best laid plans of the party elite: John McCain. |
|
|
This bill was so bad, it should not have passed. The one party system that's trying to bail out their cronies with taxpayer dollars has been exposed. The citizens don't like this any more than amnesty. |
|
|
What total BS. WE DON'T NEED A BAILOUT BILL! Whatever happens to everyone's savings will happen with or without a bill so let's kill these bills and address the real problem: the government is too big and intrusive! |
|
The fact that Michael Moore agrees with us on this one is not an argument. We conservatives act on OUR principles. Michael Moore can say what he wants. That's his business. He maybe right on this one? Is that a bad thing?
Second, you are also defending the need for ANY bill. Who says we need a bill? Ron Paul is absolutely right when he says that the cure for run-away government spending and big bureaucracy is not to spend even more to make government even bigger.
Face it Carol, you are a Republican Uber Alles. Your arguments would have clarity and coherence if there was a principle involved besides liberal Republicans are always right.
What happened today, as with the amnesty bill, is that conservatives can prevail. It's not about Dems vs Reps but conservatives against the one-party system. It's about voters vs their corrupt government. You are defending government corruption. You can't spin your way out of it. |
|
...consequences more!
Especially when yer bein' herded into the pen by Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Bush, Paulson, and RUPERT MURDOCH (via FOX news)
|
|
|
|