Skip to comments.The "October Surprise" - a lttle early
Posted on 11/15/2008 10:26:30 PM PST by Lancey Howard
If the Presidential campaign of 2008 was a football game, the game-changing play came when the alleged "looming meltdown" was announced. The stench of this announcement was so strong that it still staggers the mind that nobody stopped and said, "Wait a minute...! You, Henry Paulson, just discovered today that there is an imminent economic meltdown so catastrophic that Congress needs to pass a $700 billion bailout bill by freaking Monday??"
It made no sense on the face of it, and I figured it had to be a setup. I mean, this horrific news about global economic meltdown breaks just six weeks before a Presidential election?? I was born at night, but not last night. Then when Obama curiously and suddenly took a low profile I knew it was a setup. The Obama team knew what was going on. It was the Democrats' "October surprise", launched a little early and very likely set up by George Soros, who already had God-knows-how-much money invested in this and other campaigns around the nation.
Of course, McCain played right into the scheme by "suspending" his campaign and jumping on his white horse to race back to Washington and take charge and.... Well, who knows what he thought he could do. It doesn't matter, because he ultimately contributed nothing to the process and only made himself look impotent.
All the while, Obama kept his distance as he quietly sat and watched and chuckled. McCain ended up accomplishing basically nothing - - and getting almost no TV face time, to boot! After a day or two of floundering around he finally bailed out (no pun intended) of Washington and made his way back to that debate he wasn't supposed to make... You know - - the debate Obama wouldn't agree to postpone? And Congress did what it did (handed 700 billion taxpayer dollars over to Hank Paulson) without any help from McCain.
The biggest question remaining is: Who orchestrated this election fix, and was George W. Bush in on it? (Yeah, I know - - where's my tin-foil hat. The timing of this was all just an amazing coincidence. Right.)
That’s easy. The Dems’ friends at Fannie May and Freddie Mac convinced Paulson that there was a sudden emergency, so he then convinced Bush. Congress fueled the fire on cue too.
I don’t think President Bush was “in on it.” His demeanor during his speech to the nation was not an act. IMO, Paulson, and “whomever” set this whole thing up. Who knows Paulson and his friends at Goldman Sachs could have orchestrated this for the commissions that would have been made when all that money moved in and out of the market. The whole mess turned out WAY too well for the financial industry.
It stinks to high heaven.
Schumer’s letter re IndyMac in late June was the punk. Chuckie believes “Party First”.
I have posted a shorter version of this piece in several threads, so sorry if it sounds familiar to some freepers. But this unbelievable turn of events in late September and continuing to this day seems to be almost dismissed as just one of those things. It is incredible to me that the people we entrust to run the government aren’t just freaking out at the brazeness of this financial attack.
And that’s what it was - - an attack.
The funny thing about attacks like this one are that they are largely fueled by propaganda. “Bad news” easily becomes worse news, like a self-fullfilling prophecy. Wait until the retailers report Christmas sales this year. That snowball is already rolling downhill, and quickly picking up speed.
Maybe if things get as bad as many financial experts believe they will get - - ie., when reality bites the nation in the rear-end and masses of people are threatened with the loss of their homes and savings - - our elected representatives will wake the hell up.
I’ll bet the “good folks” who ran Lehman Brothers, AIG and the other outfits that failed are Democrats who contributed many dollars to Obama’s campaign.
Somebody set this whole thing in motion in mid-September and Paulson reacted. It does look like a setup.
This would be a great story for an investigative journalist of the right persuasion. Who knew what when and what did they do about it.
This thread isn’t military related but I wanted to ping you to it anyway.
I find the thought of “Commander-in-Chief Barack Hussein Obama” downright bone-chilling.
The richest in our country are in bed with the Democrats. They run new programs, such as green projects, cheap housing, and medical care, get money from the government to run them, then the richest give money back to our representatives. The American middle class and newly rich are taxed for the profit of the Democrats and super-rich who vote for them. Meanwhile they do it out of the tyranny of being “nice” to the unfortunate of the country. Kleptocracy with a friendly face. More and more Republicans are falling under this corruption, too. I have to say I think Warren Buffett is in on this scheme and trust the SOB as far as I could throw him.
Agreed. How could it NOT be? I swear, I'm sitting here two months later and wondering what the hell is going on?
The timing of this "crisis" wasn't just a little bit suspicious to anybody??
This story sounds like something that would be up Jack Cashill's alley.
Good blog. Thanks for the link.
I’ve been saying that .. asking that all along.
How could a catastrophe of such humongous
magnitude have escaped the experts ..no one
saw the brink coming .. and then it erupts
suddenly ..BOOM ... just in time for the
Next up: the UAW. They need their Viagra, don’t you know.
In the end, everybody will be bailed out except for hardworking, taxpaying, traditional American familes - - they will be bent over.
Soros, Kerry, Pelosi, Schumer,etc., plus international leftists like Gordon Brown, Gorbachev, etc.
Oh...and Al Gore.
yep it reeks.
McCain was summoned; Obama issued a ‘I approve this bailout’ statement and his now infamous ‘call me if you need me’ dismissal of the crisis as he conveniently disappeared to hover, or ascend, or whatever it is artificial messiahs do when they disappear from public view.
Thank goodness that McCain DID return to Washington, for he found, that in spite of the calamitous ‘financial catastrophe’, Frank and Pelosi still managed to find precious time to include a $3B windfall for ACORN - amazing I know, but shows where their heads were at (and remain). In fact, they were so intent on porking up the bailout bill, they neglected to add any mandates or rules defining how banks were to handle the billions in cash they were being ‘rescued’ with.
McCain exposed the windfall (leading to Frank's snitty remark on the House Floor) and McCain also exposed the fact that Republicans were being locked out and BARRED from meetings concerning said bailout - McCain's presence gave weight to Boehner’s demand to get those doors open for Republicans to participate, albeit under conditions of confiscated blackberries and cellphones (which made it very difficult for republicans to communicate to leadership).
Blackberries and cellphones were collected in trashcans, under the pretense ‘leaks’ would be ‘harmful’ to the passage of the bailout bill (with, of course, the implicit insinuation that the ‘leaks’ would only be possible from the republican side).
Without McCain, the original ‘bailout’ would have been nothing more than a Windfall Factory for the Dems.
Unfortunately, in the Senate Version, Dodd STILL didn't put any rules in the bailout bill, but he DID include an illegal and artifical loophole that benefits the banks by enabling billion-dollar windfalls for themselves, which has lead to an even bigger mess.
McCain is one of the unsung heroes of the bailout - exposing once again the hypocrisy of the dem party - and deserves acknowledgment as such.
McCain deserves no criticism on this. I have tried to support President Bush through thick and thin. But finding an economic meltdown weeks before the presidential election? It’s irrefutable Bush’s administration is the author of McCain’s defeat.
I keep thinking of the movie scene in which Jose Ferrer toasts “Here’s to the real author of the Caine Mutiny!” and tosses his drink in Fred McMurry’s face.
Here’s to the real author of Obama’s victory! I’m just not sure whether the drink is for Paulson, Bush, or both.
Don’t forget Josh Bolton came from Goldman Sacs and he and Chuck Schumer wanted Pulson for the job; then keep in mind that it was Schumer who’s big mouth led to the IndyMac mess... and, yes Fannie, Freddie and all it entails.
I know many people who are better off than they were in 2000 but almost no one better off than they were in 06.
When they allowed Lehman to fail and said they were not going to bail anyone out it was a matter of a day and they decided to bail out AIG. IT turned out later that the only non-government person involved in this meeting was a person from Goldman Sacs and Goldman was on he hook to AIG for $20 billion dollars... and then there is the aforementioned Goldman link.
That happens to be one thing really sticking in my craw: the announcement this week they would only be receiving 40% if they had not received this bailout and now everyone would get at least 70%... WE TAXPAYERS are paying these crooks bonuses while many of us do not get a bonus due to the economy.
Amen. Any company that receives bailout money and hands out bonus money should call a stockholders meeting—pronto.
There is a great deal that has bothered me the last four years, I finally was able to put some of the pieces of the puzzle together in reading The Failure Factory, Gertz explains who are the players around Bush really are, basically the liberal Republicans took over after he was re-elected and that is what forced Rove out. I was bothered by Paulson’s nomination and I remain troubled to this day about Paulson.
Except that earlier in your post you admitted:
...Pelosi instructed Josh Bolton that if McCain did not sign off on the Frank/Paulsen House bill, she would kill it...
McCain had an opportunity to call Pelosi's bluff and he did not.
And now look where he is.
Don’t forget that after re-election Bush also threw the great General Peter Pace under the bus.
Yep, those two for sure, but I believe there were plenty of other hands in this mess.
McCains biggest problem was that he had to campaign on change, just like the other guy. And why would people choose OLD change with McCain when they could choose NEW change with Obama?
The reason McCain had to campaign on change is because George Bush sat there like a punching bag for eight years, never having the guts to stand up and defend himself as lie after lie after lie from the rats and their newsrooms went left unanswered. Bushs unwillingness to stand up and fight was an eight-year slap in the face to his bewildered supporters, including me.
The result was that the Democrat candidate could successfully tie his opponent to the easily-smeared punching bag, Bush, while the Republican candidate had little choice but to distance himself from Bush. What? McCain was supposed to defend a man who refused for eight years to defend himself? This situation left McCain between a rock and a hard place.
Throw in the “October surprise” and McCain never stood a chance in hell.
So yes, the November 4th Republican slaughter was Bushs fault. No joke.
It is truly ironic that Bush defeated McCain in 2000 and then again in 2008.
Nothing that happens in politics is coincidence...
At that time, I was perplexed by Pelosi's intransigence on gasoline prices.
I think it's becoming clear what was going on, and why the Democrats went on vacation for five weeks, and flipped off the rube Republicans in the well of the darkened House over their smarmy little drilling protest.
What did McCain tell the audience: Obama is a good man, nothing to worry about. That comment went viral all over the net. I believe it played no small part in so many people staying home on election day.. and those people staying home not only affected the outcome of the Presidential race, it could well be the difference in some of the congressional and senate races we lost.
What I am saying is in this equation, McCain does not get off scott free, he had a very dysfunctional campaign.... and, for a man who wanted to win, you don't let your staff -- on either team -- start leaking like a sieve to the media dissing your Veep candidate.
“when reality bites the nation in the rear-end and masses of people are threatened with the loss of their homes and savings - - our elected representatives will wake the hell up.”
No. They will rub their hands with glee, and nationalize everything they can. It’s the “New, New Deal”.
And it’s gonna be a bad, bad deal.
Thanks for your reply. Your points are excellent, and I couldn’t agree more. In the final analysis, McCain lost because of McCain. The solitary good decision he made was his selection of Palin, a selection I suspect he was dragged into by his team. I remain convinced his first choice was Lieberman.
I will never forget that day b/c although McCain had run such an anemic campaign to that point, I still hoped he was saving his fire for the last part of the campaign where it could not be ignored. Yet, by shutting down every supporter who (correctly) believed that there is LOTS to fear from an Obama presidency, McCain destroyed any reason for people wavering to support him, and any reason for conservatives to be enthusiastic about turning out to vote.
If McCain cannot articulate the severe flaws and weaknesses in Obama as a potential President, then why would people (who were not already closely attuned to the radicalism of Obama) think there was any reason to be concerned about the election of Obama? McCain cut the legs out from under his own campaign, despite Sarah Palin’s efforts to salvage something from the mess.
Bush seems curiously happy to be handing the keys to the family car over to the Kenyan manboy, doesn’t he?
I've wondered about this for eight years. How can a President just ignore all the vituperative and never set the record straight? Clearly his unwillingness to fight back hurt himself, his party and even the country. McCain was no better. Yes, he is known for his little temper tantrums and name-calling in the Senate; but he acted like he never really wanted to win the election. Don't we have any tough guys? The toughest candidate was Palin. Is there something in the water?
From early on I got the sense that McCain pledged an “honorable campaign” (eg., none of this mean-spirited talk about the Reverend Wright) because he didn’t want to lose his share the black vote. (!) How bizarre was that?
I think McCain kept that mindset of being afraid to criticize Obama in anything close to harsh terms throughout his campaign lest his old Democrat media chums call their old “maverick” a racist. I will never forget hearing Rush play those clips of McCain trying to calm down the audience at his rally and the surprised audience barely stifling boos in response. Rush admitted that he had to bite his tongue, but you could hear the disgust in Rush’s voice, plain as day.
What a nightmare.
I think McCain was afraid he would be smeared as a “racist” if he got tough on Obama, Jeremiah Wright, etc.
Also, until 2 weeks before the election he was probably strongly hoping to win Colin Powell’s endorsement. IN fact, I would not be at all surprised if there was a nasty game going on behind the scenes with Powell surrogates telling McCain’s camp that Powell was strongly considering endorsing McCain but would be turned away by any strong attacks on Obama, etc.
From Powell’s actual comments on MTP it became clear that Powell doesn’t even qualify as a RINO, but until then I’ll bet that McCain was hoping for support from his “dear friend” Colin Powell.
I'VE BEEN QUESTIONING THIS FOR WEEKS NOW, HERE AND OTHER PLACES.
WHY OH WHY, DID W NOT SIT ON THIS (AND ON PAULSON) FOR A FEW MORE WEEKS?
Bush may not be the brightest buld, but he's been around politics all his life and for him not to realize the implications for mccain is beyond credulity.
At the start of this "meltdown," mccain was surging (thanks to palin) and now had a decent shot of winning.
Of course he shot himself in the foot by going to dc and getting sucked into that whole supporting effort, and if he had opposed the bailout, would have won it going away.
I lay a lot of the blame on bush. He could have stopped that nonsense and postponed it for a few weeks, but no he was in the forefront (leading the charge vociferously) of all the other chicken littles.
Something stinks here to high heaven !!!
Well just who in hell is CIC and POTUS???
He many not have "orchestrated" this call for a bailout, but I seem to remember him shrilling the loudest of we need to do something NOW or we are all doomed.
That posture doomed McCain!!!
IMHO, he could have quashed it and ordered Paulson to do the same for a few weeks.
Wasn't it stinky Harry that phone called McCain that he was needed in WDC.... I do not think it was President Bush on the phone. McCain got set up by his FRIENDS and he took the bait....
Oh, and remember that naming names part, ha never once did I hear Chuckie, Dodddd, or Barney for their roll in the financial melt down ... McCain ran his campaign on 'earmarks' and evil wicked 'Wall Street'. It is just plain ridiculous to continue blaming President Bush for everything.
McCain sat for how many years on the 'Commerce' committee and like a doofus he proudly claims in a primary debate he does not know economy. H E L L O!!! The real question is did McCain really want to win???
It was orchestrated, Lancey, and the real question (my tin foil hat, please) is whether MCCAIN was in on it.
His campaign response throughout, including this, was so inept as to be carefully planned. I don’t think anyone let Palin in on the secret, though.
The “must happen by Monday” has reached out to weeks later, and STILL the banks are having trouble deciding where to send that money, and Congress is wondering if they shouldn’t siphon some off for the car companies.
700 BILLION ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL DOLLARS THAT HAD TO BE IN THEIR HANDS BY MONDAY!
And they still don’t know what to do with it?????
“It is truly ironic that Bush defeated McCain in 2000 and then again in 2008.
He will never say it, but I believe when it is all said and done McCain thinks the same.
“Somebody set this whole thing in motion in mid-September and Paulson reacted. It does look like a setup.”
I don’t see why many comments are limited to soros. Nation-states like Russia and China have a great vested interest in the outcome of this election and certainly had the resources to knock down some dominos in the already-fragile US financial system. You have to imagine both countries are laughing themselves silly over the DNC/Obama taking over the white house. Independent foreign policy/strategic posture from the US is over for the next 4 years.
I found it most curious in retrospect that the russian market absolutely has died since the US crisis started 2 months ago.
Please correct any misperceptions here (not a great background in economics!): I’ve been questioning all along exactly what our situation is, because initially I didn’t see indications at all of the widespread financial meltdown. It’s largely a matter of confidence, right? And I just didn’t see evidence of lagging retail sales, for example. It seems to me that we believed we were in recession only because we were TOLD we were n recession. No I guess there’s downturn regardless of how we started out. Was it manufactured?
****I dont think President Bush was in on it.****
Both Bush and McPain said that they told everyone that this was coming. They said that they introduced bills about it, and were shot down. And then they popped this big emergency out just before the election.
Both were “ in on it”
"Thank you for throwing the election to the Democrats for me,
and for throwing several trillion unaccountable dollars to my friends at AIG and Goldman Sachs."
Why hasn’t Bush fired Paulson???
That has been a burning question on my mind. I would have fired Paulson, given this crisis that just popped in all of a sudden.
The conversation would have went like this if I were the president.
PAULSON: Mr. President We have a serious problem, I need 700 billion dollars in the next 48 hours !!!
PRESIDENT: Mr. Paulson, your fired !!!