Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

McCain tells 'Dispatch' that bailout is emergency measure 'to stop bleeding'
The Columbus Dispatch ^ | September 28, 2008 | Joe Hallett

Posted on 09/28/2008 5:11:27 PM PDT by buccaneer81

McCain tells 'Dispatch' that bailout is emergency measure 'to stop bleeding' Republican nominee says Paulson, Bernanke convinced him plan needed Sunday, September 28, 2008 7:36 PM By Joe Hallett THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH Along with Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. John McCain has embraced a $700 billion bailout of the nation's troubled financial industry.

In a telephone interview with The Dispatch from Washington yesterday, McCain said that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke convinced him that the rescue plan is necessary.

"I'm sure everybody understands that this was something that just had to be done," McCain said. "I'm kind of sorry in a way, but the tone of voice that Bernanke and Paulson used about this crisis, I've never heard anything like it in the years that I've been in public office, or alive."

McCain and his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, will appear at a rally this morning at Capital University. In advance of the visit, McCain talked with The Dispatch about the financial crisis and other topics:

Dispatch: Some commentators criticized you for what they called erratic statements and actions last week heading into negotiations on rescuing the economy. Describe how you played a productive role in all this.

McCain: I'll leave that up to others to make that judgment. This was an issue that was transcendent. I suspended my campaign and came back to Washington because I thought that it was vital to do so. Sen. Obama said he was available to discuss the issue by phone. I didn't want to phone it in. I'm proud that we were able to get this done, and I'll give the credit to everybody else.

Dispatch: In the final analysis, what makes you think this bailout plan will work?

McCain: Well, I think that it has to. The world's financial structure as well as this nation's is under enormous pressures. I don't think it's our recovery. What I think it is, is an emergency measure to try to stop the bleeding. We've got a long way to go. This isn't the beginning of the end; it's the end of the beginning if we pass this, and I'm optimistic that we will.

Look, we've got to create jobs for working families, working families have to be able to educate their kids, they have to stay in their homes, and that's the key to this. In the meantime, we couldn't allow them not to be able to go and get the loans that small businesses need, the credit that people need to do the things that are necessary to educate their kids. This was a critical moment, but it's certainly a long way from ending the financial difficulties that working families are undergoing right now.

Dispatch: You have campaigned frequently in Ohio. Can you win the presidency without winning Ohio?

McCain: It would be very, very hard. You and I both know that you've got to go all the way back to Jack Kennedy (in 1960 to find a nominee who lost Ohio and still won the presidency). I think it would be very difficult, and I don't intend to find that out. I will campaign as hard as I can in the state of Ohio. I've got a real head wind, and I know that I'm the underdog.

Dispatch: Polling indicates and even Democrats concede that race will be a factor against Sen. Obama in Ohio. How would you feel if you won narrowly in this state and race was the deciding factor?

McCain: I just don't think that could possibly happen because I rely on the good judgment of the people of Ohio and America. Times are too tough. They're going to make a decision based on who they think can best bring some kind of economic future to working families in Ohio and across this country. I just have an abiding faith in the American people that, particularly in these times, that they'll make the choice based on who is best to lead.

Dispatch: What would you say to voters who are inclined to make race the basis for their vote?

McCain: I wouldn't do that. I urge them strongly that these are too perilous times, both national-security-wise and economically. All I can say to them is do what they think is best for them and their country.

jhallett@dispatch.com


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 110th; bailout; mccain
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last
We're sunk.
1 posted on 09/28/2008 5:11:28 PM PDT by buccaneer81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

Do you want a new age progressive or a traditionalist progressive? Otherwise, I’m not seeing much of a difference between the two.

McCain should oppose this bailout and rail against the Democrats who let Fannie and Freddie get out of control.


2 posted on 09/28/2008 5:13:58 PM PDT by Harry Wurzbach (Rep. Thaddeus McCotter is my hero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

The only people who were “bleeding” were the maggots on Wall Street who gave bad loans to other maggots who couldn’t afford them. It doesn’t make sense to give them 700 billion taxpayer dollars so they can continue doing it.


3 posted on 09/28/2008 5:14:41 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Here's your "crap" sandwich! Eat up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

What’s to stop the blood from spewing out of my eyes, ears, and mouth tomorrow?


4 posted on 09/28/2008 5:14:42 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

The only people who were “bleeding” were the maggots on Wall Street who gave bad loans to other maggots who couldn’t afford them. It doesn’t make sense to give them 700 billion taxpayer dollars so they can continue doing it.


5 posted on 09/28/2008 5:14:55 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Here's your "crap" sandwich! Eat up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

This was from yesterday!


6 posted on 09/28/2008 5:15:04 PM PDT by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (Obama and ITS thugs are made paranoid by Sarahnoia. (stole from molly_jack2007))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Harry Wurzbach

there is no choice. Maybe if we would have won the election in 2006, we wouldnt be here.


7 posted on 09/28/2008 5:15:36 PM PDT by se_ohio_young_conservative (McCain/Palin 08...Dont stop believin...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

His hero is Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt was a progressive, a big-government liberal in his day.

Well, even Roosevelt might’ve balked at bailing out Wall Street.


8 posted on 09/28/2008 5:15:36 PM PDT by Harry Wurzbach (Rep. Thaddeus McCotter is my hero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

When and at what time was this interview conducted?


9 posted on 09/28/2008 5:15:41 PM PDT by ABQHispConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Harry Wurzbach
You are a freaking brain dead in in the extreme if you don't see much difference between Barry the Marxist and John McCain.
10 posted on 09/28/2008 5:16:27 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

God I miss Fred Thompson. I’ve pasted Fred’s take below.

The Danger of Government Guarantees

I’ll bet it came as a surprise to most folks that the financial stability of the world as we know it depends upon the survival of a couple of outfits called Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Yet that’s what the so-called experts are telling us. Moreover, we taxpayers are now being asked to guarantee Fannie and Freddie’s tab, one that could make the $124 billion S&L bailout of the late 1980s look cheap.

So how did we get stuck with this bill? Well, Congress wanted to “do something” about what it saw as a “housing problem.” To them that meant that they should create an even bigger problem.

So Congress passed laws that made it easier for hopeful home-buyers to buy houses … even when they couldn’t afford them. Then the Fed and other regulators helped, in the form of easy money and loose credit standards for mortgages.

Not surprisingly demand for houses grew, home prices rose, lenders financed additional questionable mortgages, fueling even higher prices and so on. You get the picture. This is called a bubble.

Then an amazing thing happened – apparently impossible to foresee. Home prices did not continue to rise forever! Home prices came down and easy money dried up, causing the above mentioned cycle to reverse. In other words, the bubble burst.

So you’d think the in-over-their-heads homebuyers and the mortgage bankers would take the hit, and the market would right itself. No reason for an international meltdown here, right?

Not so fast my friends. Years earlier Congress established Fannie and Freddie as purchasers of these mortgages, which they could bundle up, repackage and sell to investors, freeing up more mortgage money. As government creations tend to do, the two companies grew until they either owned or guaranteed about half the nation’s $12 trillion dollars in mortgages.

Fannie and Fred were “government sponsored enterprises” which means heads they win, tails you lose. If they make money stockholders, creditors and Fannie and Freddie employees – some making millions annually – get the benefit. But now that mortgages have hit the skids, with mounting losses, the taxpayers potentially face trillions in exposure. This is because there is an “implicit” (read “actual”) government guarantee of Fannie and Freddie’s obligations and both are now too big to be allowed to fail. This is called the “bailout phase,” which will probably lead to a bigger bubble in the future.

Lost in this immense, complex mess is the root problem most people are missing: the government is gradually becoming the guarantor of seemingly every important aspect of American secular life, creating incentives and bureaucracies that cause failure and invite fraud.

In Fan and Fred’s case, it was in no one’s interest to turn off the bubble machine. Just the opposite. The system induced borrowers to take on financial obligations they could not afford and lenders to lower lending standards. Fannie and Freddie went along because their managers’ compensation depended on the firms’ short term financial performance. And investors continued to buy complex security packages they didn’t understand, because the securities were viewed as government-backed.

Heavy campaign contributions by those benefiting from this scheme induced Members of Congress to avert their gaze from the ugly mess that was unfolding.

You’d think we’d have learned by now: when the backstop of the federal treasury makes it easier for politicians, lenders, borrowers, welfare recipients, government contractors, or anyone else, to serve their own self interest at the expense of the taxpayer, many will do just that.

That is why we continue to see self-dealing, moral lapses, outright fraud and lack of management and oversight in a wide array of programs and government-sponsored entities, from housing to Medicare, education and the Small Business Administration, all costing taxpayers billions, even trillions of dollars.

Our Founding Fathers knew more than a little bit about human nature. It is one reason why in the Constitution, the federal government was given certain delineated powers and no others. I hate to burst another bubble, but our government simply doesn’t have the authority or the capability to be the guarantor or insurer of our every need or desire. Isn’t it time we started sending that message loud and clear to the big enablers in Washington?

Fred Thompson


11 posted on 09/28/2008 5:16:41 PM PDT by NavVet ( If you don't defend Conservatism in the Primaries, you won't have it to defend in November)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

What the Dispatch isn’t saying is WHICH rescue plan. Is it the revised one, or the original? At this point I’d be happy if they kept the ACORN, La Raza, etc. junk out of the plan.


12 posted on 09/28/2008 5:16:48 PM PDT by madison10 (Pray for the brave Republicans in Congress...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: se_ohio_young_conservative
Maybe if we would have won the election in 2006, we wouldnt be here.

Yea but certain "geniuses" thought we needed to be taught a lesson.

13 posted on 09/28/2008 5:17:48 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

I hope he gets the opportunity to vote NO on this pile of sh1t bill at least as a point for the next debate. nObama has sucked all the air out of the media for two days and if not, we will have to hear John McCain at the next debate going Me Too! Me Too! I agree with Senator Obama that the pile of sh1t we just passed was the best thing to do...


14 posted on 09/28/2008 5:18:19 PM PDT by IllumiNaughtyByNature (I Love The Smell Of Schmidt Storm in the Morning...and Afternoon....and at Night!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited

I guess you have to be “brain dead” to see that both Obama and McCain are about to support an expansion of the federal government by about 33%, at least.


15 posted on 09/28/2008 5:21:19 PM PDT by Harry Wurzbach (Rep. Thaddeus McCotter is my hero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
This was from yesterday!

Yeah, when ACORN was still in the package. Do you really think he'll say no now?

16 posted on 09/28/2008 5:21:57 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ABQHispConservative
When and at what time was this interview conducted?

Well, it says yesterday, but it first appeared online @ 7:52 EDT tonight.

17 posted on 09/28/2008 5:23:56 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (Bob Taft has soiled the family name for the next century.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NavVet

I wish McCain were saying this.


18 posted on 09/28/2008 5:24:04 PM PDT by kenavi (BHO: The only constant is change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Harry Wurzbach

You really are brain dead fool! The bill that Barry and Friends tried to ram throgh is dramtically different than the one that the House GOP helped draft.


19 posted on 09/28/2008 5:25:29 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
Well, like he said, economics was never his strong suit.

The tragic crime of all this is that it is not an economic crisis but a political one.

20 posted on 09/28/2008 5:25:31 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

This is OLD News from Sat and he is talking in general terms .
Why does everyone freak out all the time here .Something does have to be done just like the S&L solution in 1988-89.


21 posted on 09/28/2008 5:26:24 PM PDT by ncalburt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

We will wait until tomorrow. Everyone needs to be on the phones. This isn’t as bad as the bill could’ve been but it still is ugly and the more I look at the more it looks like a scam to protect the few the powerful and Democrat constituents. This bailout will make it easy for the same banks who issued high risk loans to continue doing so. They should be more cautious but when they see the government willing to bail them out and buy their bad loans it becomes an invitation to fleece the government and the taxpayer. Where is the crisis? 95% of Banks and most loans (only 13.6% are sub- prime and only a fraction of those are in default) are ok. The problem is the biggest and most heavily regulated banks issued the most subprime loans so the idea that some how this destory the market I think is an exaggeration. We is the structural instability to suggest this? It seems to me that it would be a good thing for people with unreliable credit not to be taking out huge loans for homes and business or tuition. Why not freeze tuition rates at a rate so people can go to college without taking out loans. Liberals are always talking about sacrifice. ;-)


22 posted on 09/28/2008 5:27:01 PM PDT by Maelstorm (This country was not founded with the battle cry "Give me liberty or give me a government check!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

And here I thought a good old fashioned blood-letting was in order.


23 posted on 09/28/2008 5:29:29 PM PDT by WKL815 (If the phrase "personal responsibility" makes you defensive, you may be a liberal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited; Harry Wurzbach

Some people can’t see the forest for the trees. Harry has only been here a couple weeks.
Obama vs McCain?
If they can’t see the differences ...they deserve what they get in the end.
McCain worked hard on this bill while Barry played politics out on the stump.
The bill is very different than the one that Pelosi was dreaming she could ram through.
For those that are jumping support...I have to ask just how much they really understand about ALL of this.
Or where we will be if Obama gets elected.
2006 elections sure did work out for us, didnt they?


24 posted on 09/28/2008 5:32:18 PM PDT by donnab (some people use change to promote their careers...others use their careers to promote change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
eh, shut up. Other than ACORN there's not much of a difference between the two. Expanding government by the largest amount ever is a more pressing matter than that matter.

There's no point in supporting the GOP when they are willing to give up on their principles to win an election just because the other guy may be a little worse. Look at Bush, genius. What the !@#$$? Look at what we got for supporting that genius for the last 8 years? The government has exploded and he rammed through the largest expansion in an entitlement program since the '60s.

Go ahead and continue to be a useful idiot. Socialism at a little slower pace! What a great campaign idea.
25 posted on 09/28/2008 5:33:26 PM PDT by Harry Wurzbach (Rep. Thaddeus McCotter is my hero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Harry Wurzbach
Other than ACORN there's not much of a difference between the two

That's just gross ignorance and stupidity. It was posted on an earlier thread what the diffrences were and they are quite a bit more than what your lame and ignorant bleating above claims.

26 posted on 09/28/2008 5:38:47 PM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Maelstorm

You can bet I’m going to be on the phone tomorrow. This is a huge SCAM. I see nothing behind this bill but pure greed. It is not good for America. It is not good for the economy. I am torqued. What torques me off even more is that it will likely pass despite whatever I say.

I thought it was horrible what Clinton did with selling pardons before he left office. It seems Bush wants to do even worst than his predecessor.


27 posted on 09/28/2008 5:40:35 PM PDT by 2nd_Amendment_Defender ("It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains." -- Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited

Yeah, and now they want to get Obama in so we can learn how bad it can really get.


28 posted on 09/28/2008 5:40:55 PM PDT by Truthsearcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81
He has failed the Leadership test and drank the Kool-aid, Paulson's been serving.

You're a follower John not a maverick.

29 posted on 09/28/2008 5:42:47 PM PDT by Tempest (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNlXgzzdJQA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Harry Wurzbach; buccaneer81

” Otherwise, I’m not seeing much of a difference between the two. “

Obama Doesn’t Want His Daughters Punished with a Baby

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNzmly28Bmg

CNN on Obama’s Infant Born Alive Act Rejection

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPZCXcTwZPY

Jill Stanek on Obama and Born Alive Infant Protection Act (MUST SEE)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIdbYjmbFzo

Obama Cover-up Revealed On Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Bill

http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/ObamaCoverup.html

Explosive Audio Found Obama arguing against BAIPA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypDwNpgIUQc

Babies left to die!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIdbYjmbFzo


30 posted on 09/28/2008 5:43:11 PM PDT by narses (...the spirit of Trent is abroad once more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Harry Wurzbach
Calm down. Go t Powerline and read the comparison of the old and new bill.
I am not for it but read about the facts.
Something along the lines of the 1988-89 S&l bailout has t be done to get this crappy paper from bring down the market.
That fool Paulson made this situation worse by setting up an expectation of a big bailout for Wall Street with his fellow Dems ( he is a Dem).
As usual Bush as allowed the completely out played in the PR game by the Dems and looks like a fool.
Bush ‘s moronic new tone set up this entire mess up by keeping dems in key positions .
31 posted on 09/28/2008 5:48:11 PM PDT by ncalburt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: buccaneer81

This should be no surprise to anyone. McCain never fails to make an effort to disappoint conservatives with bi-partisan stuntsmanship. He’s a pro at it. Maverick and all that. But, he is the 36% back door nominee. So he’s got that going for him.


32 posted on 09/28/2008 5:51:06 PM PDT by TADSLOS (Cure CINOism- Write in proven conservatives at all levels on the ballot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donnab

I’ve been scanning threads on this and seeing lots of new posters - all of them foaming at the mouth about McCain and saying they’re going to vote for Obama. I think I’m smelling troll-smell on a lot of them.

The same thing happened with Bush and immigration. People with their hair on fire surfaced from nowhere, screamed and spewed. The result was that Bush hatred became the norm here, incredible ugliness was vented - and no bill got passed, no changes were made, nothing got done, and the problem remains to be dealt with by the next administration (which I am sure most Freepers will not like). I think a lot of them, especially the quasi-Stormfront ones, were trolls. That’s one of the vulnerabilities of the Internet, of course, but it’s something we all have to be aware of.


33 posted on 09/28/2008 5:53:11 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: NavVet
Fred's take on this situation has to be about the best I've seen. Spot on, plain sense, a pleasure to read (well, I imagined it being read in Fred's voice, so I should say a pleasure to hear.)

Where'd you find it?

I even agree with his prediction -- likely next major step, after we finish digging out of this hole, will be yet another financial bubble.

The best guesses I've seen as to this next bubble will be something related to energy or infrastructure.

The massive pile of new Treasuries being printed as we speak will find their way, via Sovereign Wealth Funds, back into various of these energy related projects, which will require a massive investment to get going.

Whether it's the Global Warming Left, looking for alternative energy sources, or the Drill Here, Drill Now neighbors of mine here in Texas (when they say "here", they mean "here"), or the Saudi's who know but can't publically tell us that their oil reserves have peaked, or the Russians, trying to extend their monoplistic control over energy supplies to Europe, ...

Mr. McGuire: I just want to say one word to you - just one word.
Ben: Yes sir.
Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?
Ben: Yes I am.
Mr. McGuire: Energy.
Sometimes predicting the future is just too easy.

I'm not necessarily rushing into all this Monday morning. For one thing, what I have to invest, some coins I found under my sofa cushions, wouldn't stretch far enough to invest in all these at once. And for another thing, we are still on the down stroke of this last bubble - real estate, mortgages, mortgage backed securities,credit swap derivatives thereof, and financial institutions thereon. We've got our year or three of sack cloth penance in recessionary purgatory to spend first, before this new bubble starts to really stretch its wings.

But over the next ten years, it looks to be the place to be.

34 posted on 09/28/2008 6:16:24 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (By their false faith in Man as God, the left would destroy us. They call this faith change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: livius
Your correct.
There is so much phony anger at McCain .
You should have seen the Troll fest on debate night .
its was over the top .
The Obama smear squad considers this site the first one to get shut down under the new Obama Marxist regime .
35 posted on 09/28/2008 6:28:56 PM PDT by ncalburt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt

Paulson is not a Democrat. He’s a Republican. How many times does this have to be said?


36 posted on 09/28/2008 6:29:14 PM PDT by LiberalsSpendYourMoney (Barry, you're more racist than 99% of Americans. And you're ugly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: NavVet
Here's Fred's Money Quote:

Lost in this immense, complex mess is the root problem most people are missing: the government is gradually becoming the guarantor of seemingly every important aspect of American secular life, creating incentives and bureaucracies that cause failure and invite fraud.

He sees what a lot of FReepers see and he's right. We're losing America.

37 posted on 09/28/2008 6:31:44 PM PDT by TheThinker (It is the natural tendency of government to gravitate towards tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
More energy projects:
38 posted on 09/28/2008 6:34:31 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (By their false faith in Man as God, the left would destroy us. They call this faith change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
CAPTION: Chris Dodd uses Barney Franks to demonstrate what Congress is doing to the American public. Franks later said the demonstration "could have used some lube".
39 posted on 09/28/2008 6:34:37 PM PDT by Toymaker (The Obama People's Party Liberation Express (TOPPLE) HQ: http://www.cafepress.com/Khaotik_Ink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LiberalsSpendYourMoney

yep goolged him .
He is a Repub.
Thanks


40 posted on 09/28/2008 6:39:24 PM PDT by ncalburt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: LiberalsSpendYourMoney
Do you have a source for that?

The best discussion I've seen of Paulson's political leanings is in Robert Novak's article Hank Paulson's DNA. It seems to say Paulson has donated to both parties, and his allegiance is not political, but rather to his own power and wealth.

41 posted on 09/28/2008 6:39:34 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (By their false faith in Man as God, the left would destroy us. They call this faith change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Toymaker

I can take all three at once with ease!


42 posted on 09/28/2008 6:51:22 PM PDT by rlbedfor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow; LiberalsSpendYourMoney
Your right .
Never mind.
I take that BACK.
He is a big buds with Chuckie Schummer and John Corzine .
43 posted on 09/28/2008 6:57:48 PM PDT by ncalburt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt
I like that you never let facts get in the way of your arguments:

Political donations of Henry Paulson

$336,250* Republican (51%)

$13,990 Democrat (2%)

$311,300 special interest (47%)

total: $661,540

44 posted on 09/28/2008 7:05:01 PM PDT by LiberalsSpendYourMoney (Barry, you're more racist than 99% of Americans. And you're ugly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
Do you have a source for that?

The best discussion I've seen of Paulson's political leanings is in Robert Novak's article Hank Paulson's DNA. It seems to say Paulson has donated to both parties, and his allegiance is not political, but rather to his own power and wealth.

Political donations of Henry Paulson

$336,250* Republican (51%)

$13,990 Democrat (2%)

$311,300 special interest (47%)

total: $661,540

So, yeah, he's donated to both parties. But he's donated more than 25 times as much money to Republicans than Democrats.

45 posted on 09/28/2008 7:07:19 PM PDT by LiberalsSpendYourMoney (Barry, you're more racist than 99% of Americans. And you're ugly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: LiberalsSpendYourMoney
NOw I recall the scope on this guy after that Novak piece. What are special interest ? Dem 527s ?

Paulson largely Democrat party staffers leaked the Repub GOP bill ideas submitted to him to Obama. Obama used them in the Thursday meeting to blow it up .
Paulson reportedly knew about the leak and warned no one .
Rush reported about that fact on Friday.
Paulson is no repub . Just an sleazy operator trying to bail out his buddies who are mostly Dems .

46 posted on 09/28/2008 7:25:04 PM PDT by ncalburt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: LiberalsSpendYourMoney
Did I read somewhere that it is his wife who handles the Democrat donations?
47 posted on 09/28/2008 7:29:34 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (By their false faith in Man as God, the left would destroy us. They call this faith change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ncalburt

Give it up burty. No one who is a rat donates 25x as much money to Republicans.


48 posted on 09/28/2008 7:30:30 PM PDT by LiberalsSpendYourMoney (Barry, you're more racist than 99% of Americans. And you're ugly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: LiberalsSpendYourMoney
Your the one that seems to be in denial about Paulson Democrat Party run Federal Reserve not me !
Paulson STAFF gave Obama the GOP request list in secret to sabotage the Thursday meeting with the Pres Bush and Paulson KNEW ! These staffers are still at the Fed Res as we speak busy working for Obama !
I could care less about Paulson's donations to the BUsh family who gave him a few JOBS.
I noticed how you ignore these facts and those special donations. So I give it right back to You!
49 posted on 09/28/2008 7:52:58 PM PDT by ncalburt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: LiberalsSpendYourMoney
What about Paulson wife ‘s political donations to Dems ??
You seem to be real interested in protecting Paulson !
50 posted on 09/28/2008 7:54:30 PM PDT by ncalburt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson