Has anyone seen a single poll of the American public on the Bailout?
Posted on 09/26/2008 6:39:28 AM PDT by pissant
Here's a shocker: No one likes the risks involved in Paulson 2.0 or the precedent of using so much public money to rescue reckless bankers, both private and semi-private..
But there is a very good chance that (1) it will actually make money for the Treasury and (2) without it the financial crisis will spread and the small businesses of America and the people who own and staff them will be deeply injured. These businesses are the backbone of the economy, and they are in danger. This isn't just a bailout of Wall Street; it is a breakwall for Main Street.
The GOP lost the majority and therefore doesn't get to shape the bailout except on the margins. That's the cost of past fecklessness, and intransigence in the minority during a crisis is nothing except a suicidal indifference to both the economic emergency and the reality of the possibility of panic. Gather with John McCain this morning --he is the leader of the party--- and invest him with the authority to conclude or walk from the deal. And then work to get the majority back that will allow a greater role in the future by going to the country with a persuasive case on the origins of the crisis and the reality of future crises unless serious fiscal conservatives replace Nancy Pelosi and her gang.
Some of you will say you cannot make such a case on the heels of a bailout. Wrong. You are at a fork in the road, and the public can be trusted to understand exactly how this crises evolved and why Paulson 2.0 was the best of the options available to you and why urgent action is needed to both use tax cuts and energy exploration to recharge the prosperity of the past twenty years.
But you cannot stand by and watch people's business and savings hemorrhage and expect them to reward you for your purity of purpose and incompetence of execution.
On the contrary, they have all the power in this. The minority has no power in the house, but politically, the Republicans couldn’t be in a much better position to force the right thing here.
Here are the Dems, standing with Bush on a plan that people don’t want. And here are the Republicans saying ‘Stop!’
The Dems are in no position to demonize attaching conservative pro-growth plans to this bill. Here they are advocating for socialism for CEOs and fat cats. Everything they’re supposedly against. How are they going to realistically say that adding a capital gains moratorium is ‘for the rich’ when they’re on that side of the argument?
The fallacy is the false premise that the Republicans don’t want to do anything about the problem. They have a different plan. A bailout (or perhaps loan) will be acceptable if certain changes are made to stop regressive liberal policies that inhibit growth, in addition to removing some of the policies that caused the problem in the first place.
This is one case where a real compromise can bring us out of this mess better than when we went in. And the Republicans and McCain are in a position to make that happen.
The Democrats have the votes to pass what they want. They just don’t want to give the Republicans the chance to watch their boat sink from the shore.
Republicans have to be on board in a big way before the Democrats will set sail.
I wonder if the gov’t called in the pollsters and asked them to NOT poll this. hmmmmmm. Just a thought.
What good would that do the lender? Take possession of an asset that they have no way in h3ll of selling?
I was just going to ask if anyone knew where the polls were today so I could support the House Republicans.
Perhaps we need to ask Fox, CNN and MSNBC to include a poll
on their site?
From what I've read, the problem seems to be the latter. Financial institutions have created an aftermarket for mortgage backed securities and that market has frozen up. But most of the underlying mortgages at issue are still having payments made on them by homeowners. If this is the case, what kind of monstrosity is the Treasury Department creating? Is the Treasury Department going to be buying mortgages or mortgage backed-securities or foreclosed homes or all three? If the Treasury Department is buying mortgage backed-securities are they going to resell them? Are they going to be accepting mortgage payments from homeowners? Is the US Attorney's Office going to be foreclosing on properties that homeowners stop making payments on? Is the Federal Gov't going to be hiring people to do upkeep on homes it has foreclosed on?
These are just a few of the questions that I haven't seen answers to. Scary.
When the market crashes on a failed bill that was written by a Republican Treasury and a Republican appointed Fed chair, but not supported by a Republican congress, who do you think is going to be blamed? Its one thing to posture that the bill is bad. Of course its bad. This is a horrible situation. But the time to do something about it was 10 years ago when all these congressmen, with the exception of Richard Baker who’s not in office now, had their thumbs up their butts.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
My very first post of FR was pointing out that Hugh Hewitt is always a cheerleader period.
He can sound appealing and knowledgeable to you at first but eventually you realize that he is the exact same everyday, always a positive cheerleader regardless of which side he is selling that day.
Also, conservatives make him nervous and he is always striving to move them to the left.
Far, far far better to take a week or two to get this thing right than to put this socialist swill of a bill into law.
Hey pirate, read and understand the complete point Hugh is making.
Conservatives are right to voice their objections about elements of the bill.
BUT, they are NOT in a majority position to shape the heart of the bill, or eliminate the stupidity injected by Reid and Durbin.
The economy can’t wait for conservatives to shame the liberals into doing the right thing. (liberals have no shame!)
Hugh’s point is to accept the revised plan, which is better than the original plan, and then kick the liberal’s butt for the stupid elements.
This way the patient lives to fight another day.
Far, far far better to take a week or two to get this thing right than to put this socialist swill of a bill into law.
Exhibit A as to why Hugh is a talk-radio guy and not a senator. He has difficulty with strategic political thinking.
Actaully, the revised plan is WORSE than the original.
They already sold out with Medicare prescription drug coverage. How many lines in the sand will we draw?
Don't forget that La Raza gets a cut too.
I recall that Hewitt went down in flames predicting a Republican landslide in 2006 even after all the polls closed.
In other words he's still drinking the funny stuff....
“I don’t think I could pay off my house”
If you have 15 or 30 yr mortgage and you are making payments under law the lender can not call the loan!
Takes a brave FReeper to speak the unwelcome truth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.