The Alan Grayson Page

The Anthony Weiner Page

Guest Contributors


  • BN-Politics' administrators respect, but do not necessarily endorse, views expressed by our contributors. Our goal is to get the ideas out there. After that, they're on their own.
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2007

Blog Catalog

  • Liberalism Political Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory



« Largest industry bailout in history. Largest government spending splurge ever. | Main | Conservative Republican Opposes Bush's Bailout Plan »

September 23, 2008



It is a continuation of the only consistent policy of the entire Reign of Error, which could be summed up with the slogan, "all wealth to the rich." It appears that, for once, they may not be able to scare and bully their way through this one.

Imagine that. America with LIMITS on executive power. A Congress that finally does the job we want done. Do we dare hope?

Deb Cupples (Buck Naked Politics)

Hi Jolly,

I'm hoping -- but not holding my breath.


I think that in this case the greed and the corruption are so naked, so blatant, that it's hard for anyone to ignore. They are asking us to spend more than the entire cost of the Iraq war in one day, and to get essentially nothing in return. It's absurd beyond description.

Of course, the only reason they aren't going to get what they want is because even Republicans can't stomach this sort of action.

Deb Cupples (Buck Naked Politics)


I hope you're right. I'm feeling uneasy largely because of the Administration's recent spin -- stuff that ordinary folks who don't spend ours a week researching this stuff might actually believe.



While I would certainly agree that Americans should not blindly support this bailout, I think an important part your peice is inacurate and perhaps a little bias?

"While repeatedly shrieking such sound bites, Administration officials would conveniently fail to address salient facts of recent history such as the following:

- That they knew of the housing bubble years back

- That they knew of mortgage-foreclosure problems years back

- That they knew Wall Street firms were over-valuing assets to keep stock prices up

- Yet they failed (or refused) to step up with sensible oversight and regulations to prevent (or lessen the severity of) the very crises we now face."

Actually, the Bush admin. tried for years to get some oversight on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but was blocked by Barnie Frank & co.

see link.



In, fact it was Mr. Frank who was the most angry yesterday when the house republicans blocked this bill from being shoved down our throats.

Deb Cupples (Buck Naked Politics)

HI J4,

I suppose I AM biased, but it's not a bias that I blindly adopted. It evolved since 2001, when I started researching corporate crimes and regulation after Enron fell. [I know, I have weird hobbies.]

That and whatever bias exists does NOT mean that my claims or arguments are automatically false. Some are a matter of my opinion, and some are a matter of history.

Let me be clear: that I criticize some Republican politicians does NOT mean that I'm criticizing Republican voters. Please don't take it as a PERSONAL affront.

I think that Bush has screwed, in some ways, ALL of us voters -- and that's NOT the fault of us voters.

[I've also criticized Dems on some issues, incidentally.]

Thanks for the Gateway Pundit link. Basically, Gateway quotes lines from Bush's speeches (and some of them don't have sources listed). I would do some research before believing Gateway's thesis.

Mere public statements are not the same as presidential ACTIONS.

Below are a few things that Gateway doesn't mention.

1. OFHEO's chairman was APPOINTED by BUSH . OFHEO oversees Fannie and Freddie. If Bush had wanted real reforms, he would have pressured his hand-picked appointee -- or picked a different guy to head OFHEO.

2. Barney Frank and Gang had NO CONTROL over the House Banking Committee from 2001-2006, because Republicans controlled the House and ALL of its committees those years.

3. Since 2001, our SEC chairmen have been corporate friendly and anti-regulation (the worst being Harvey Pitt). BUSH APPOINTED all of them. If Bush had wanted better corporate regulation, he would have picked less corporate-friendly SEC chairs. PERIOD. Instead, Bush picked people that the securities and accounting industries lobbied for.

4. Two crucial years in terms of the housing bubble and the mortgage crisis were 2005 and 2006. Republicans controlled the White House and BOTH houses of Congress during those years.

Despite evidence of a coming crisis, Congress and the White House did NOTHING to prevent the crisis during 2005 and 2006. Period.

Honestly, I DON'T know whether (2007-present) the House Dems put forth legislation re: Fannie, Freddie, or CDOs. They MAY HAVE dropped the ball.

It would take a while for me to research, and I don't have the time just yet, so I'll withhold judgment on that issue for now.

The comments to this entry are closed.