Free money! Why won't they vote to give away free money! Whaaaaaaa

Full text (so you can search on it)

Madam speaker, when was the last time anyone ever asked you for $700 billion? It’s a staggering figure. And many questions have arisen from that request. And we have been hearing, I think, a very informed debate on all sides — of — of this issue here today. I’m proud of the debate.

$700 billion. A staggering number. But only a part of the cost of the failed Bush economic policies to our country. Policies that were built on budget recklessness. When President Bush took office, he inherited President Clinton’s surpluses — four years in a row, budget surpluses, on a trajectory of $5.6 trillion in surplus. And with his reckless economic policies, within two years, he had turned that around.

And now eight years later, the foundation of that fiscal irresponsibility, combined with an anything goes economic policy, has taken us to where we are today. They claim to be free market advocates, when it’s really an anything goes mentality. No regulation, no supervision, no discipline. And if you fail, you will have a golden parachute, and the taxpayer will bail you out.

Those days are over. The party is over in that respect. Democrats believe in a free market. We know that it can create jobs, it can create wealth, it can create many good things in our economy. But in this case, in its unbridled form, as encouraged, supported, by the Republicans — some in the Republican Party, not all — it has created not jobs, not capital, it has created chaos.

And it is that chaos that the secretary of the Treasury and the chairman of the Fed came to see us just about a week and a half ago — seems like an eternity, doesn’t it, so much has happened, the news was so bad. They described a very, very dismal situation. A dismal situation describing the state of our economy, the fragility of our financial institutions and the instability of our markets, our equity markets, our credit markets, our bond market.

And here we were listening to people who knew of what they spoke. Secretary of the Treasury brings long credentials and knowledge of the markets. More fearful, though, to me, more scary, was the statement — were the statements of Chairman Bernanke [Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve], because Chairman Bernanke is probably one of the foremost authorities in America on the subject of the Great Depression. I don’t know what was so great about the Depression, but that’s the name they give it. And we heard the secretary and the chairman tell us that this was a once in a hundred year phenomenon, this fiscal crisis was so drastic. Certainly once in 50 years, probably once in a hundred years.

And how did it sneak up on us? So silently, almost on little cat feet. That they would come in on that day — and they didn’t actually ask for the money, that much money that night. It took two days until we saw the legislation that they were proposing to help calm the markets. And it was on that day that we learned of a $700 billion request.

But it wasn’t just the money that was alarming. It was the nature of the legislation. It gave the secretary of the Treasury czar-like powers, unlimited powers, latitude to do all kinds of things and specifically prohibited judicial review or review of any other federal administrative agency to review their actions.

Another aspect of it that was alarming is it gave the secretary the power to use any money that came back from these infusions of cash to be used at the discretion of the secretary. Not to reduce the deficit, not to go into the general funds so that we could afford other priorities. To be used at the discretion of the secretary. It was shocking. Working together in a bipartisan way, we were able to make major improvements on that proposal, even though its fundamental basis was almost arrogant and insulting.

The American people responded almost immediately. Overwhelmingly, they said they know that something needs to be done. Say 78 percent of the American people said Congress must act. Fifty-eight-some percent said, but not to accept the Bush proposal. And so here we are today, a week later and a couple of days later, coming to the floor with a product — not a bill that I would have written, one that has major disappointments with me, beginning with the fact that it does not have bankruptcy in this bill — and we will continue to persist and work to achieve that.

It’s interesting, though, to me that when they describe this, the magnitude of the challenge and the precipice that we were on and how we had to act quickly and we had to act boldly and we had to act now, that it never occurred to them that the consequences of this market were being felt well in advance by the American people. And unemployment is up, and therefore we need unemployment insurance. That jobs are lacking, and therefore we need a stimulus package. So how can on the one hand could this be so urgent at the moment, and yet so unnecessary for us to address the effects of this poor economy in the households of America across our country?

We’ll come back to that in a moment. Working together, we put together some standards — and I am really proud of what Barney Frank did in this regard. The first night, that night, that Thursday night, when we got the very, very dismal news, he immediately said, if we’re going to do this — and Spencer Bachus was a part of this as well — in terms of if we’re going to do this, we must have equity for the American people. We’re putting up $700 billion, we want the American people to get some of the upside. So equity, fairness for the American people.

Secondly, if they were describing the root of the problem as the mortgage-backed securities, Barney insisted that we would have forbearance on foreclosure. If we’re now going to own that paper, that we would then have forbearance to help responsible homeowners stay in their home.

In addition to that, we have to have strong, strong oversight. We didn’t even have to see the $700 billion or the full extent of their bill to know that we needed equity and upside for the taxpayer, forbearance for the homeowner, oversight of the government on what they were doing, and something that the American people understand full well, an end to the golden parachutes and the — a — review and reform of the compensation for C.E.O.’s.

Let’s get this straight. We have a situation where on Wall Street people are flying high, they are making unconscionable amounts of money. They make a lot of money, they privatize the gain, the minute things go tough, they nationalize the risk. They get a golden parachute as they drive their firm into the ground, and the American people have to pick up the tab. Something is very, very wrong with this picture.

So just on first blush, that Thursday night, we made it clear, meeting much resistance on the part of the administration, that those four things, equity, forbearance, oversight, and reform of compensation. Overriding all of this is a protection of the taxpayer. We need to stabilize the markets. In doing so, we need to protect the taxpayers.

And that’s why I’m so glad that this bill contains a suggestion made by Mr. Tanner [Representative John Tanner, Democrat of Tennessee] that if at the end of the day, say in five years, when we can take a review of the success or whatever of this initiative, that if there is a shortfall and we don’t get our whole $700 billion back that we have invested, that there will be an initiative to have the financial institutions that benefited from this program to make up that shortfall.

But not one penny of this should be carried by the American people. People asked, and Mr. Spratt [Representative John M. Spratt Jr., Democrat of South Carolina] spoke with great knowledge and eloquence on the budget and aspects of the budget. $700 billion, what is the impact, what is the opportunity cost for our country of the investments that we would want to make?

O.K., now we have it in place where the taxpayer is going to be made whole and that was very important for us. But why on the drop of a hat can they ask us for $700 billion, and we couldn’t get any support from the administration on a stimulus package that would also help grow the economy?

People tell me all over the world that the biggest emerging market, economic market in the world, is rebuilding the infrastructure of America. Roads, bridges, waterways, water systems in addition to waterways. The grid, broadband, schools, housing, certain schools. We are trillions of dollars in deficit there.

We know what we need to do to do it in a fiscally sound way, in a fiscally sound way that creates good-paying jobs in America immediately. Brings money into the treasury by doing so, and again does all of this in an all-American way. Good-paying jobs here in America.

We can’t get the time of day for 25, $35 billion for that, which we know guarantees jobs, et cetera, but $700 billion. So make no mistake, when this Congress adjourns today to observe Rosh Hashanah and have members go home for a bit, we are doing so at the call of the chair. Because this subject is not over, this discussion about how we save our economy.

And we must insulate Main Street from Wall Street. And as Congresswoman Waters [Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat of California] said, Martin Luther King Drive, in my district Martin Luther King Drive, and Cedar Chavez Road and all of the manifestations of community and small businesses in our community. We must insulate them from that. And so we have difficult choices, and so many of the things that were said on both sides of this issue in terms of its criticisms of the bill we have and the bill that we had at first, and the very size of this, I share. You want to go home, so I’m not going to list all of my concerns that I have with it.

But it just comes down to one simple thing. They have described a precipice. We are on the brink of doing something that might pull us back from that precipice. I think we have a responsibility. We have worked in a bipartisan way. I want to acknowledge Mr. Blunt and Mr. Boehner, the work that we have done together, trying to find as much common ground as possible on this.

But we insisted the taxpayer be covered. We all insisted that we have a party-is-over message to Wall Street. And we insisted that, that taxpayers at risk must recover — that any risk must be recovered. I told you that already. So, my colleagues, let’s recognize that this Congressional — this legislation is not the end of the line.

Mr. Waxman [Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California] will be having vigorous oversight this week, hearings this week on regulatory reform and other aspects of it. I hope you will pursue fraud and mismanagement and the rest. Mr. Frank and his committee will continue to pursue other avenues that we can stabilize the markets and protect the taxpayer. For too long, this government, in eight years, has followed a right-wing ideology of anything goes, no supervision, no discipline, no regulation.

Again, all of us are believers in free markets, but we have to do it right. Now, let me again acknowledge the extraordinary leadership of Mr. Frank. He has been an exceptional leader in the Congress, but never has his knowledge and his experience and his judgment been more needed than now. And I thank you, Mr. Frank, for your exceptional leadership, Mr. Chairman.

I also — so many people worked on this, but I also want to acknowledge the distinguished chair of our caucus, Mr. Emanuel. His knowledge of the markets, the respect he commands on those subjects, and his boundless energy on the subjects served us well in these negotiations. But this, this is a bipartisan initiative that we are bringing to the floor. We have to have a bipartisan vote on this. That is the only message that will send a message of confidence to the markets.

So I hope that — I know that we will be able to live up to our side of the bargain. I hope the Republicans will, too.

But my colleagues, as you go home and see your families and observe the holiday and the rest, don’t get settled in too far, because as long as the American — this challenge is there for the American people, the threat of losing their jobs, the credit, their credit, their jobs, their savings, their retirement, the opportunity for them to send their children to college.

As long as in the households of America, this crisis is being felt very immediately and being addressed at a different level, we must come back, and we will come back as soon and as often as it is necessary to make the change that is necessary. And before long we will have a new Congress, a new president of the United States, and we will be able to take our country in a new direction.

call the wambulance!

How can money be owed on money that never existed (except on balance sheets)? I say, they broke it, they buy it. If a bailout is expected, then I say give the money to main street and let wall street eat cake!

And while we're at it, Fuck Joe Scarborough.

+Pelosi's a lying slag.

This crisis has been looming, and people with slightly more brains than a sea-cucumber have been warning against the possibility for at LEAST 5 years.

Kevin Phillips, for one.

These people can't even ionsult one another without lying about it...

I never knew Crooks and Liars were shills for the Democratic party.

Sad to see that lately theyve been trying to spread propaganda about the bailout

These fucking cowards prematurely tried to credit Grandpa's "leadership" for getting the bill passed and now they're scapegoating Pelosi despite the fact that they couldn't even persuade or intimidate the representatives in their own party.

Hmmmm. So what about the 95 Democratic children who could have voted with their majority party to pass the bill regardless of what the Republican kiddies are doing?

Pelosi is worse then Bush

The US economy is built on "debt."

It rests on no frim foundation of concrete activity or productivity anymore.

Just debt.

All these 'instruments' are nothing but debt counters.

Thom Hartmann used a scary figure the other day: there's over ONE THOUSAND TRILLION DOLLARS of debt circulating in those "derivatives" and only about 60 Trillion dollars of "real wealth" in ALL the economies of the globe.

Can you say "Goat-fucked?"

So it’s all Pelosi's fault. Hey, how about the Republican nominee who spent the day accusing Obama & the democrats for causing the failure. Am I in the Twi-light Zone? I'm waiting for McCain to get up and say, 'who ya gonna believe, me or your eyes?'

L.A. Confidential @ 22:

Seriously Pelosi has to be shown the door.

There comes a time when you have to set aside the image and bullsh*t and scrutinize the RESULTS.

She's an old rich broad now her time has come and gone.

Well just being an old rich broad isn't good enough reason to show someone the door. Her acceptance of the Bush regime is. There was a time when she tacitly stood by, now just helping him lube up the washington monument...Bend over America

LA Confidential@18
"Pelosi is worse than bush" You are so full of shit, LA. You know full well that that is a bullshit, baseless comment. The trolls make more sense than you.

Bullwinkle Moose @ 23:

So it’s all Pelosi's fault. Hey, how about the Republican nominee who spent the day accusing Obama & the democrats for causing the failure. Am I in the Twi-light Zone? I'm waiting for McCain to get up and say, 'who ya gonna believe, me or your eyes?'

This next election is the ultimate test to see if the United States intends to progress and lead or continue it’s slink back into the Dark Ages and irrelevancy.

My point, BTW, was not support for Pelosi. I was just commenting on the fact that if you're such a spineless cretin that that speech made you cry like a wee child, you need to be publicly ridiculed with much frequency.

I can understand the outrage, but I would much rather see solutions. There needs to be time to put a bill that is worthy of the American people in which all the crooks that made this happen see punishment.

I wonder what do all these people rushing to blame someone plan to do when there's no solution on the table and we're headed toward a depression?

Left&Left @ 27:

LA Confidential@18
"Pelosi is worse than bush" You are so full of shit, LA. You know full well that that is a bullshit, baseless comment. The trolls make more sense than you.

She never comes through. She's a condescending self centered all about me blabber mouth.

Her word is worth ZERO.

L.A. Confidential @ 35:

Left&Left @ 27:

LA Confidential@18
"Pelosi is worse than bush" You are so full of shit, LA. You know full well that that is a bullshit, baseless comment. The trolls make more sense than you.

She never comes through. She's a condescending self centered all about me blabber mouth.

Her word is worth ZERO.

agreeeed again.

She is a toothless, spineless, power junkie. STOP BEING SHILLS FOR DEMOCRACIC PARTY. THEY HAVE BROUGHT US TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY.

I agree with LA Confidential, Nancy is a zero that has helped this country in this position. Regardless, as a progressive, I also called my reps and asked them to vote no on this bill. The market tanked by record amounts, but the stock markets are not the true indicators of the crisis. Today there is a rebound in the stock markets, and banks will still issue credit. Do not allow panic crazed, fearful individuals to sway you into giving away 100's of billions of dollars. It is not necessary as all noteworthy economists are advising. Until legislation fixes the original problem, I will always call and ask that my rep or senator vote no to giveaways.

The Bailout Swindle is a piece of CRAP!

Here watch Kucinich.

It is correct to say that this post shills for the Democrats Republicrats.

Yesterday the gamblers on Wall Street saw their free money go a-glimmering and the market tanked.

Today they are right back in the saddle.

If the Democrats were a party of the people, they would DO SOMETHING for the people and not the Fat Cats.

Do something about the 10,000 mortgages per month going into default!

Hey, Nancy. Where were you when you kept capitulating to Bush's demands for more money for Iraq? You should have kept impeachment on the table. You can justly blame a lot on Republican obstructionism, but you need to take your share of the blame. Cindy Sheehan may not win, but she may very well keep you from being reelected.

You do have an opportunity to do the right thing, but buying taxpayers the deck chairs on the Titanic ain't it.

Pawn @ 39:

I agree with LA Confidential, Nancy is a zero that has helped this country in this position. Regardless, as a progressive, I also called my reps and asked them to vote no on this bill. The market tanked by record amounts, but the stock markets are not the true indicators of the crisis. Today there is a rebound in the stock markets, and banks will still issue credit. Do not allow panic crazed, fearful individuals to sway you into giving away 100's of billions of dollars. It is not necessary as all noteworthy economists are advising. Until legislation fixes the original problem, I will always call and ask that my rep or senator vote no to giveaways.

I love what you said!

This site is scaring me though. How quickly it turns into a mouthpiece for propaganda. Just cause MSNBC says it doesnt make it true. Just because Bareny Franks and Pelosi tell you to believe something doesnt make it so. These are the same people who sold us the war.

THIS ISNT A PARTISAN ISSUE THIS IS AN AMERICAN ISSUE.

FUCK PELOSI
FUCK BARNEY FRANKS
FUCK ALL REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRACTS WHO VOTED FOR A BAILOUT.

Wall Street called the American Public indirectly"idiots", for not bailing them out. So it all came to this: after all the razzle dazzles and fireworks on display by George walker Bush, this is Bush 's parting gift to the very people who had elected him. Any more scare tactics? It was the Republicans who had the guts to vote "no". And the Democrats can always rely on other wedge issues to camouflage their sellout.

NOBAIL@12 In the upper left hand corner is an item: Commenting Policy

If you had bothered to read this, you would have seen words to the effect that C&L is NOT a neutral site.

Mmmkay?

NOBAILOUT @ 7:

You all are shills for the Democratic party. We have no money to bailout anyone. You cannot use debt to bail out a system of debt.

Pelosi is a vapid retard. She knows nothing about the economy.

DONT TRUST THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.

What the hell are you talking about? They've been using debt to run the economy since the gold standard was abolished in 1971. Just print more money.

Pelosi is not a retard, she is a politician playing for personal gain at the expense of citizens (just like nearly all politicians). If this legislation was so flawed, as she describes in her speech, why did she vote FOR it? Politics ... and cronyism. Gotta protect those campaign donors and lobbyists! Fuck the citizens ...

Finally, get it through your head once and for all there is no "mainstream" media, it is a CORPORATE MEDIA, and they represent their own interests, and support politicians who will represent those interests. They would love for you to believe they are mainstream as it masks their true intent.

Let the buggers fail. We don't need a bailout - letting it fail will hurt our ballooned economy shortly but in the long run it will be better for all of us. Living as we did in a "never-never-land" economy made us all soft.

NOBAILOUT @ 13:

Brendan @ 11:

NOBAILOUT @ 7:

You all are shills for the Democratic party. We have no money to bailout anyone. You cannot use debt to bail out a system of debt.

Pelosi is a vapid retard. She knows nothing about the economy.

DONT TRUST THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.

Uh, I don't think many people on this site are for the bailout. But, you know, don't let the facts interrupt a good freak-out.

then why this post? It basically is supporting pelosi who is for the BAILOUT....

Yeah, I was surprised to see the site (or at least this post) supporting the bailout. If you are not for the bailout, then why are you so critical of the members of Congress who voted against the bill? This is probably the first time I'm glad the Democrats did not have full control of the House because then they would have approved the bill.

LA Confidential@35
Who has Pelosi murdered? Has she pissed on the constitution, destroyed the Justice dept., fucked up the Nation's economic structure, obliterated our reputation worldwide? Where was Nancy supposed to be during Katrina or 9-11? Hey Nancy, where's OBL, MWD? I could keep going, but WTF are you talking about, LA?

Sept. 24, 2008

HONG KONG (MarketWatch) -- Chinese regulators have asked domestic banks to stop lending to U.S. financial institutions in the interbank money markets to prevent possible losses during the financial crisis, the South China Morning Post reported Thursday. The China Banking Regulatory Commission's ban on interbank lending of all currencies applied to U.S. banks, but not to lenders from other countries, the report added, citing a source.

Rain on the Parade @ 52:

While the Republican Party is a bonafide tool of Satan, in this particular instance a good number of House members of both parties saw which way the wind was blowing and actually did the right thing in voting against the bill. Naturally the GOP leadership couldn't just say the truth - i.e., the bill was a massive give-away of taxpayer money to a handful of wealthy criminals whose chicanery had come home to roost. So they made up their ridiculous "Nancy hurt our feelings" excuse.

But the fact is that millions of ordinary Americans threatened to tar and feather their representative if he/she voted for the bill. It may be populism but this time the populists are absolutely right. Leaders of both parties are selling out the American people in the service of their corporate masters.

If C&L is truly a progressive site then why not post Kucinich's critique of the bill? He's not alone. Hundreds of economists of all political stripes are opposed to it.

Hmmm... Honest question: Did they do the right thing, or were they just putting space between themselves and Bush, and doing what their constituents wanted them to do (which, you could definitely argue, is the right thing) in order to win back waffling votes. It seems to me that the Republicans managed to play this one for maximum profit...

Kucinich throws a lot of fire for someone so dang tiny...

A little of topic but maybe now is a good time to send a note to NBC about Brokow's Meet the Press “Fairness” Facts Pulled Out Of Thin Air To Make McCain Look Better"

I agree with the fact that Nancy Pelosi laid all the cards on the table in regards of this speech. She didn't do anything wrong in this stance. She told it like it was.

As for the bill, it was bad, yes. But I still ask what people plan to do when there's no bill and they are wasting their time being angry without thinking with practicality and pragmaticism?

When we're in bread-lines, are people still going to be ranting about this bill? Or are they going to wish for a solution to this crisis?

C&L seems to be on the wrong side here... or actually taking sides, which in this instance is the wrong one. We should not be passing this bailout until there has been plenty of time and investigation. Massive recession is inevitable, don't let Bush's "old boys club" pull the usual scare and secure power ploy that they have repeatably done in the past.

We can't avoid a big problem, but we can make it worse and let some of those responsible off the hook. Let's get some oversight into the whitehouse and see what the hell they have been doing with this money, and then make our decision.

When you are the leader of the supposed "opposition party" your job is to represent those who are being screwed by the regime and stand in opposition to their crimes. You are not supposed to be a loyal enabler to that regime.

The Democrats were given a majority in Congress expressly to end the Iraq War. Under Speaker Pelosi we are still at war 3 years later and Bush-fed conflicts continue to spread through other parts of the Middle East. Pelosi sat in meetings with Bush regime members where they admitted to engaging in torture, in violation of the Geneva Convention, U.S. law and common moral decency. She said and did nothing about it.

The Republicans who perpetrated these crimes will hopefully get what they deserve. But there is something particularly despicable about a toady who goes along to get along, putting her own career and the political interests of her party over the good of the country and the world. There's a special circle of hell reserved for her and her fellow-travelers.

How could have Pelosi's speech caused this bill to be defeated??

133 Republicans voted Nay. Almost as many Democrats voted Yea. Hmmmm...

They way Boehner was talking, Pelosi had mind control over the lawmakers and was using it unfairly. WTF?!

John @ 3:

The speech as written was not the speech as delivered. Pelosi specifically mentioned "Republicans -- some not all" as being responsible for the crisis. Whether this actually caused some Republicans to vote no is another question.

Now -- Speaker Pelosi is not so stupid as some suggest so I'm wondering just why she said what she did at this time. Was she trying to help scuttle the bill to get one more favorable to the Democrats later this week that the Senate would have to pass or else have the Senate Republicans labelled as the party that killed the bailout?

I don't know, but I find this situation very curious.

And yes, LA, I am very familiar with PDD 51.

NOBAILOUT @ 7:

You all are shills for the Democratic party. We have no money to bailout anyone. You cannot use debt to bail out a system of debt.

Sure you can. Mr A has a debt he can't pay. His friend Mr B has a much better credit rating. B takes a loan and pays off A's debt. A gives B an IOU slip.

Pelosi is a vapid retard. She knows nothing about the economy.

Funny, I got the same impression from you.

DONT TRUST THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.

Okay. I'll trust what I witnessed myself, in the early 90's in Sweden. Which was a governmental bailout of a highly similar finance crisis, of a similar magnitude (4% of their GDP against 5% of ours now) in exchange for ownership of banks. That bailout cost their taxpayers next to nothing - it might even turn a profit as their gov't is still holding on to some small stakes.
I've seen a highly similar situation. I've seen a similar remedy applied. I saw results that work. And I have better things to do than listen to ignorant hysterics with far-flung theories who assume that just because it hasn't happened in the US-of-A, it hasn't happened.

"The truth hurts. Unfortunately, House Republicans are children" So True.

Like the Obama stump speech.

Too close to the election or the lobbyists would win.

At least Americans stopped trusting them.

They blamed boner for when it stalled so they blamed pelosi when it failed.

Politics as usual.

Looks like the 630 billion worked.

Back to business as usual.

Then, we have to listen to depressing ideas like this from the other "experts".

"What can I do about it?" The answer is, except for getting camping gear, figuring out a way to heat your home so the pipes don't freeze this winter if there's no oil or gas to be had, not much. We're doing our last-minute topping off of our propane tank this week. A couple of 50-pound sacks of rice, some vitamins, cases of beans, and toilet paper, are certainly still available, but for how long is anyone's guess.

Oh man how inspiring huh? What a future!!!!

I honestly do not know what to think; I'm not trolling.

I read the posts on C&L in an effort to better understand these events.

It is my understanding that if there is no bailout : Numerous pension funds will be destroyed. Credit will be non-existant = massive layoffs as corporations readjust to protect their bottom line. People will lose their lives savings. Elderly and disabled people will lose everything. Maybe your own parents.

That list goes on.

But the Wall Street Whiners want three quarters of a trillion WITHOUT OVERSITE.

Bullshit, isn't it?

That's why they want this scam expedited.

What about buying these bad loans and giving it to the people who are about to lose their homes?

What about having enough oversight to begin investigating these CEOs like Carly Fiorina and many others who have destroyed their own corporations. Seize their assets and make them bail out the situation that they have caused?

A snowball's chance in hell, right?

I hate the bailout. If it doesn't happen, innocent people will be ground under the wheel.

Damned if we do; damned if we don't.

the truth DOES hurt. and the truth is that pelosi has been an abject failure. the mess were in is bad but it didnt' have to be like this. we could have had a TRUE oppostion party that didn't crumble everytime the worst fucking president in the world asked them for something.

republicans suck this is much is true. but don't leave the enabling democrats out, they are just as bad, if not worse. meaning, we expect republicans to cater to the rich, corporate elite. the democrats were supposed to represent the people and they failed magnificently.

Mick Piobr @ 87:

What about having enough oversight to begin investigating these CEOs like Carly Fiorina and many others who have destroyed their own corporations. Seize their assets and make them bail out the situation that they have caused?

Now your talking.

The Very Bitter Ceci Hussein @ 33:

I can understand the outrage, but I would much rather see solutions. There needs to be time to put a bill that is worthy of the American people in which all the crooks that made this happen see punishment.

I wonder what do all these people rushing to blame someone plan to do when there's no solution on the table and we're headed toward a depression?

Oh Lord, please don't point the finger of blame at us neo cons or we'll run away crying.

So!? It was those damn cats on their little cat-feet who messed everything up!?

Look, I'm not a Pelosi fan, but she is hardly the most responsible person in this fiasco - she didn't cause it, she can't fix it, and she's just trying to point out where the real blame lies.

And, that would be with the Republicans and their fascist corporate buds who've
lied us into wars and wasted billions, spied on us and stolen our civil liberties, and deregulated everything financial so they can now complete the job and rob us blind.

Sooner or later this whole Ponzi scheme of an international financial cabal has to come tumbling down. Passing this $700 billion bill will only forestall that for a while - like, just enough time for Cheney and Bush to try and get out of town.

Our real crsis is not financial, it's a failure to abide by the law and a failure to bring those who've blatantly shredded our system of laws to justice - according to those laws.
I think there's still time to consider Kucinich's articles of IMPEACHMENT.

45 seconds of a 6 min speech, and every gas bag on tv was saying how it ruined everything! As some suggested, this clip should be shown over and over and let the people watching decide if this is the cause for the ruination of the economy.
Considering the effort the repugs put into this and the importance of this issue I would think the media could show the clip fully.Then show the responses to the speech from each party.
Since every working american has to deal with this type of shit at there job sites each and every day for there entire working lives... I kinda know how it will be viewed. -except outside the 24%?!!! Who the frick are these people?-
I wonder if 700 billion could buy us all a windmill or sloar power for our homes, so we can say Fuck the man.....

Pelosi is a typical Democrat. Just didn't know when to shut up.

As for impeachable offenses, the Democrat controlled do nothing Congress should be investigated.

just two points ---- did we not have a shit load of hearings about drugs in baseball??? so why not any now. and #2, the democrats call the fucking vote not the repubs...so either pelosi is fucking stupid or someone lied. Why call the vote if you do not have the votes yet. The democrats fucked this sucker up. So much of the Wall Street mess should be blamed on the republicans, yet the dems get themselves blamed more----what a talent.

Good for the Republicans and 40% or so of the Democrats who actually bailed on this flaccid turkey.

I can't believe I'm saying this but ... Jesus... here it goes... Ben Stein (there I said it) on Larry King Live last night hit the nail right on the head. The help should start at the bottom and work its way up and not vice versa. In other words, give 700 billion to the people in trouble and let the boon "trickle" up. If there's 700 billion laying around for the fat cats, then it's just as easily given to the people. And then you can legislate the rest.

I couldn't bloody well agree more. Think I'll watch CNN today to see if Ali Velshi's head actually blew up overnight. Fear fear fear fear. Soak, rinse and repeat. Revolting.

Screw the Democrats - 2 years of nothing but status quo.

Can I add that whenever a politician is being sworn into office (or a higher position) if they are grinning like a Cheshire cat then they're just damn well happy to be there and you can expect NOTHING to come from it (i.e. - it's not about the people but themselves). Look to Pelosi as a prime example.

I'm shocked, shocked to find politics killed the bailout bill! No wonder the approval rating for Congress is so low. They are not leaders, they are Drama Queens!

Not enough brokers have defenestrated yet--that is, none--to convince me this is a REAL crisis.

When the wealthy start diving out their hi-rises, then I'll start getting worried...

Amitola Says: "spied on us and stolen our civil liberties"

I'm having a hard time with this, because liberals will continously use this. Can someone please cite an example of this (NOT what you have heard or been told about), but what YOU have actually experienced?

How dare Pelosi make these remarks when she was not only for the bill, but allowed the current administration to get away with so much else prior to this.

Both sides (Dems and Reps) are full of traitors to the constitution and sicken me. I am embarrassed that they lead our country.

John @ 3:

Full text (so you can search on it)

Madam speaker, when was the last time anyone ever asked you for $700 billion? It’s a staggering figure. And many questions have arisen from that request. And we have been hearing, I think, a very informed debate on all sides — of — of this issue here today. I’m proud of the debate.
and where is the smoking gun in this. oh where she put the blame where it belongs.
$700 billion. A staggering number. But only a part of the cost of the failed Bush economic policies to our country. Policies that were built on budget recklessness. When President Bush took office, he inherited President Clinton’s surpluses — four years in a row, budget surpluses, on a trajectory of $5.6 trillion in surplus. And with his reckless economic policies, within two years, he had turned that around.

And now eight years later, the foundation of that fiscal irresponsibility, combined with an anything goes economic policy, has taken us to where we are today. They claim to be free market advocates, when it’s really an anything goes mentality. No regulation, no supervision, no discipline. And if you fail, you will have a golden parachute, and the taxpayer will bail you out.

Those days are over. The party is over in that respect. Democrats believe in a free market. We know that it can create jobs, it can create wealth, it can create many good things in our economy. But in this case, in its unbridled form, as encouraged, supported, by the Republicans — some in the Republican Party, not all — it has created not jobs, not capital, it has created chaos.

And it is that chaos that the secretary of the Treasury and the chairman of the Fed came to see us just about a week and a half ago — seems like an eternity, doesn’t it, so much has happened, the news was so bad. They described a very, very dismal situation. A dismal situation describing the state of our economy, the fragility of our financial institutions and the instability of our markets, our equity markets, our credit markets, our bond market.

And here we were listening to people who knew of what they spoke. Secretary of the Treasury brings long credentials and knowledge of the markets. More fearful, though, to me, more scary, was the statement — were the statements of Chairman Bernanke [Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve], because Chairman Bernanke is probably one of the foremost authorities in America on the subject of the Great Depression. I don’t know what was so great about the Depression, but that’s the name they give it. And we heard the secretary and the chairman tell us that this was a once in a hundred year phenomenon, this fiscal crisis was so drastic. Certainly once in 50 years, probably once in a hundred years.

And how did it sneak up on us? So silently, almost on little cat feet. That they would come in on that day — and they didn’t actually ask for the money, that much money that night. It took two days until we saw the legislation that they were proposing to help calm the markets. And it was on that day that we learned of a $700 billion request.

But it wasn’t just the money that was alarming. It was the nature of the legislation. It gave the secretary of the Treasury czar-like powers, unlimited powers, latitude to do all kinds of things and specifically prohibited judicial review or review of any other federal administrative agency to review their actions.

Another aspect of it that was alarming is it gave the secretary the power to use any money that came back from these infusions of cash to be used at the discretion of the secretary. Not to reduce the deficit, not to go into the general funds so that we could afford other priorities. To be used at the discretion of the secretary. It was shocking. Working together in a bipartisan way, we were able to make major improvements on that proposal, even though its fundamental basis was almost arrogant and insulting.

The American people responded almost immediately. Overwhelmingly, they said they know that something needs to be done. Say 78 percent of the American people said Congress must act. Fifty-eight-some percent said, but not to accept the Bush proposal. And so here we are today, a week later and a couple of days later, coming to the floor with a product — not a bill that I would have written, one that has major disappointments with me, beginning with the fact that it does not have bankruptcy in this bill — and we will continue to persist and work to achieve that.

It’s interesting, though, to me that when they describe this, the magnitude of the challenge and the precipice that we were on and how we had to act quickly and we had to act boldly and we had to act now, that it never occurred to them that the consequences of this market were being felt well in advance by the American people. And unemployment is up, and therefore we need unemployment insurance. That jobs are lacking, and therefore we need a stimulus package. So how can on the one hand could this be so urgent at the moment, and yet so unnecessary for us to address the effects of this poor economy in the households of America across our country?

We’ll come back to that in a moment. Working together, we put together some standards — and I am really proud of what Barney Frank did in this regard. The first night, that night, that Thursday night, when we got the very, very dismal news, he immediately said, if we’re going to do this — and Spencer Bachus was a part of this as well — in terms of if we’re going to do this, we must have equity for the American people. We’re putting up $700 billion, we want the American people to get some of the upside. So equity, fairness for the American people.

Secondly, if they were describing the root of the problem as the mortgage-backed securities, Barney insisted that we would have forbearance on foreclosure. If we’re now going to own that paper, that we would then have forbearance to help responsible homeowners stay in their home.

In addition to that, we have to have strong, strong oversight. We didn’t even have to see the $700 billion or the full extent of their bill to know that we needed equity and upside for the taxpayer, forbearance for the homeowner, oversight of the government on what they were doing, and something that the American people understand full well, an end to the golden parachutes and the — a — review and reform of the compensation for C.E.O.’s.

Let’s get this straight. We have a situation where on Wall Street people are flying high, they are making unconscionable amounts of money. They make a lot of money, they privatize the gain, the minute things go tough, they nationalize the risk. They get a golden parachute as they drive their firm into the ground, and the American people have to pick up the tab. Something is very, very wrong with this picture.

So just on first blush, that Thursday night, we made it clear, meeting much resistance on the part of the administration, that those four things, equity, forbearance, oversight, and reform of compensation. Overriding all of this is a protection of the taxpayer. We need to stabilize the markets. In doing so, we need to protect the taxpayers.

And that’s why I’m so glad that this bill contains a suggestion made by Mr. Tanner [Representative John Tanner, Democrat of Tennessee] that if at the end of the day, say in five years, when we can take a review of the success or whatever of this initiative, that if there is a shortfall and we don’t get our whole $700 billion back that we have invested, that there will be an initiative to have the financial institutions that benefited from this program to make up that shortfall.

But not one penny of this should be carried by the American people. People asked, and Mr. Spratt [Representative John M. Spratt Jr., Democrat of South Carolina] spoke with great knowledge and eloquence on the budget and aspects of the budget. $700 billion, what is the impact, what is the opportunity cost for our country of the investments that we would want to make?

O.K., now we have it in place where the taxpayer is going to be made whole and that was very important for us. But why on the drop of a hat can they ask us for $700 billion, and we couldn’t get any support from the administration on a stimulus package that would also help grow the economy?

People tell me all over the world that the biggest emerging market, economic market in the world, is rebuilding the infrastructure of America. Roads, bridges, waterways, water systems in addition to waterways. The grid, broadband, schools, housing, certain schools. We are trillions of dollars in deficit there.

We know what we need to do to do it in a fiscally sound way, in a fiscally sound way that creates good-paying jobs in America immediately. Brings money into the treasury by doing so, and again does all of this in an all-American way. Good-paying jobs here in America.

We can’t get the time of day for 25, $35 billion for that, which we know guarantees jobs, et cetera, but $700 billion. So make no mistake, when this Congress adjourns today to observe Rosh Hashanah and have members go home for a bit, we are doing so at the call of the chair. Because this subject is not over, this discussion about how we save our economy.

And we must insulate Main Street from Wall Street. And as Congresswoman Waters [Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat of California] said, Martin Luther King Drive, in my district Martin Luther King Drive, and Cedar Chavez Road and all of the manifestations of community and small businesses in our community. We must insulate them from that. And so we have difficult choices, and so many of the things that were said on both sides of this issue in terms of its criticisms of the bill we have and the bill that we had at first, and the very size of this, I share. You want to go home, so I’m not going to list all of my concerns that I have with it.

But it just comes down to one simple thing. They have described a precipice. We are on the brink of doing something that might pull us back from that precipice. I think we have a responsibility. We have worked in a bipartisan way. I want to acknowledge Mr. Blunt and Mr. Boehner, the work that we have done together, trying to find as much common ground as possible on this.

But we insisted the taxpayer be covered. We all insisted that we have a party-is-over message to Wall Street. And we insisted that, that taxpayers at risk must recover — that any risk must be recovered. I told you that already. So, my colleagues, let’s recognize that this Congressional — this legislation is not the end of the line.

Mr. Waxman [Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California] will be having vigorous oversight this week, hearings this week on regulatory reform and other aspects of it. I hope you will pursue fraud and mismanagement and the rest. Mr. Frank and his committee will continue to pursue other avenues that we can stabilize the markets and protect the taxpayer. For too long, this government, in eight years, has followed a right-wing ideology of anything goes, no supervision, no discipline, no regulation.

Again, all of us are believers in free markets, but we have to do it right. Now, let me again acknowledge the extraordinary leadership of Mr. Frank. He has been an exceptional leader in the Congress, but never has his knowledge and his experience and his judgment been more needed than now. And I thank you, Mr. Frank, for your exceptional leadership, Mr. Chairman.

I also — so many people worked on this, but I also want to acknowledge the distinguished chair of our caucus, Mr. Emanuel. His knowledge of the markets, the respect he commands on those subjects, and his boundless energy on the subjects served us well in these negotiations. But this, this is a bipartisan initiative that we are bringing to the floor. We have to have a bipartisan vote on this. That is the only message that will send a message of confidence to the markets.

So I hope that — I know that we will be able to live up to our side of the bargain. I hope the Republicans will, too.

But my colleagues, as you go home and see your families and observe the holiday and the rest, don’t get settled in too far, because as long as the American — this challenge is there for the American people, the threat of losing their jobs, the credit, their credit, their jobs, their savings, their retirement, the opportunity for them to send their children to college.

As long as in the households of America, this crisis is being felt very immediately and being addressed at a different level, we must come back, and we will come back as soon and as often as it is necessary to make the change that is necessary. And before long we will have a new Congress, a new president of the United States, and we will be able to take our country in a new direction.

John @ 3:

Full text (so you can search on it)

Madam speaker, when was the last time anyone ever asked you for $700 billion? It’s a staggering figure. And many questions have arisen from that request. And we have been hearing, I think, a very informed debate on all sides — of — of this issue here today. I’m proud of the debate.

$700 billion. A staggering number. But only a part of the cost of the failed Bush economic policies to our country. Policies that were built on budget recklessness. When President Bush took office, he inherited President Clinton’s surpluses — four years in a row, budget surpluses, on a trajectory of $5.6 trillion in surplus. And with his reckless economic policies, within two years, he had turned that around.

And now eight years later, the foundation of that fiscal irresponsibility, combined with an anything goes economic policy, has taken us to where we are today. They claim to be free market advocates, when it’s really an anything goes mentality. No regulation, no supervision, no discipline. And if you fail, you will have a golden parachute, and the taxpayer will bail you out.

Those days are over. The party is over in that respect. Democrats believe in a free market. We know that it can create jobs, it can create wealth, it can create many good things in our economy. But in this case, in its unbridled form, as encouraged, supported, by the Republicans — some in the Republican Party, not all — it has created not jobs, not capital, it has created chaos.

And it is that chaos that the secretary of the Treasury and the chairman of the Fed came to see us just about a week and a half ago — seems like an eternity, doesn’t it, so much has happened, the news was so bad. They described a very, very dismal situation. A dismal situation describing the state of our economy, the fragility of our financial institutions and the instability of our markets, our equity markets, our credit markets, our bond market.

And here we were listening to people who knew of what they spoke. Secretary of the Treasury brings long credentials and knowledge of the markets. More fearful, though, to me, more scary, was the statement — were the statements of Chairman Bernanke [Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve], because Chairman Bernanke is probably one of the foremost authorities in America on the subject of the Great Depression. I don’t know what was so great about the Depression, but that’s the name they give it. And we heard the secretary and the chairman tell us that this was a once in a hundred year phenomenon, this fiscal crisis was so drastic. Certainly once in 50 years, probably once in a hundred years.

And how did it sneak up on us? So silently, almost on little cat feet. That they would come in on that day — and they didn’t actually ask for the money, that much money that night. It took two days until we saw the legislation that they were proposing to help calm the markets. And it was on that day that we learned of a $700 billion request.

But it wasn’t just the money that was alarming. It was the nature of the legislation. It gave the secretary of the Treasury czar-like powers, unlimited powers, latitude to do all kinds of things and specifically prohibited judicial review or review of any other federal administrative agency to review their actions.

Another aspect of it that was alarming is it gave the secretary the power to use any money that came back from these infusions of cash to be used at the discretion of the secretary. Not to reduce the deficit, not to go into the general funds so that we could afford other priorities. To be used at the discretion of the secretary. It was shocking. Working together in a bipartisan way, we were able to make major improvements on that proposal, even though its fundamental basis was almost arrogant and insulting.

The American people responded almost immediately. Overwhelmingly, they said they know that something needs to be done. Say 78 percent of the American people said Congress must act. Fifty-eight-some percent said, but not to accept the Bush proposal. And so here we are today, a week later and a couple of days later, coming to the floor with a product — not a bill that I would have written, one that has major disappointments with me, beginning with the fact that it does not have bankruptcy in this bill — and we will continue to persist and work to achieve that.

It’s interesting, though, to me that when they describe this, the magnitude of the challenge and the precipice that we were on and how we had to act quickly and we had to act boldly and we had to act now, that it never occurred to them that the consequences of this market were being felt well in advance by the American people. And unemployment is up, and therefore we need unemployment insurance. That jobs are lacking, and therefore we need a stimulus package. So how can on the one hand could this be so urgent at the moment, and yet so unnecessary for us to address the effects of this poor economy in the households of America across our country?

We’ll come back to that in a moment. Working together, we put together some standards — and I am really proud of what Barney Frank did in this regard. The first night, that night, that Thursday night, when we got the very, very dismal news, he immediately said, if we’re going to do this — and Spencer Bachus was a part of this as well — in terms of if we’re going to do this, we must have equity for the American people. We’re putting up $700 billion, we want the American people to get some of the upside. So equity, fairness for the American people.

Secondly, if they were describing the root of the problem as the mortgage-backed securities, Barney insisted that we would have forbearance on foreclosure. If we’re now going to own that paper, that we would then have forbearance to help responsible homeowners stay in their home.

In addition to that, we have to have strong, strong oversight. We didn’t even have to see the $700 billion or the full extent of their bill to know that we needed equity and upside for the taxpayer, forbearance for the homeowner, oversight of the government on what they were doing, and something that the American people understand full well, an end to the golden parachutes and the — a — review and reform of the compensation for C.E.O.’s.

Let’s get this straight. We have a situation where on Wall Street people are flying high, they are making unconscionable amounts of money. They make a lot of money, they privatize the gain, the minute things go tough, they nationalize the risk. They get a golden parachute as they drive their firm into the ground, and the American people have to pick up the tab. Something is very, very wrong with this picture.

So just on first blush, that Thursday night, we made it clear, meeting much resistance on the part of the administration, that those four things, equity, forbearance, oversight, and reform of compensation. Overriding all of this is a protection of the taxpayer. We need to stabilize the markets. In doing so, we need to protect the taxpayers.

And that’s why I’m so glad that this bill contains a suggestion made by Mr. Tanner [Representative John Tanner, Democrat of Tennessee] that if at the end of the day, say in five years, when we can take a review of the success or whatever of this initiative, that if there is a shortfall and we don’t get our whole $700 billion back that we have invested, that there will be an initiative to have the financial institutions that benefited from this program to make up that shortfall.

But not one penny of this should be carried by the American people. People asked, and Mr. Spratt [Representative John M. Spratt Jr., Democrat of South Carolina] spoke with great knowledge and eloquence on the budget and aspects of the budget. $700 billion, what is the impact, what is the opportunity cost for our country of the investments that we would want to make?

O.K., now we have it in place where the taxpayer is going to be made whole and that was very important for us. But why on the drop of a hat can they ask us for $700 billion, and we couldn’t get any support from the administration on a stimulus package that would also help grow the economy?

People tell me all over the world that the biggest emerging market, economic market in the world, is rebuilding the infrastructure of America. Roads, bridges, waterways, water systems in addition to waterways. The grid, broadband, schools, housing, certain schools. We are trillions of dollars in deficit there.

We know what we need to do to do it in a fiscally sound way, in a fiscally sound way that creates good-paying jobs in America immediately. Brings money into the treasury by doing so, and again does all of this in an all-American way. Good-paying jobs here in America.

We can’t get the time of day for 25, $35 billion for that, which we know guarantees jobs, et cetera, but $700 billion. So make no mistake, when this Congress adjourns today to observe Rosh Hashanah and have members go home for a bit, we are doing so at the call of the chair. Because this subject is not over, this discussion about how we save our economy.

And we must insulate Main Street from Wall Street. And as Congresswoman Waters [Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat of California] said, Martin Luther King Drive, in my district Martin Luther King Drive, and Cedar Chavez Road and all of the manifestations of community and small businesses in our community. We must insulate them from that. And so we have difficult choices, and so many of the things that were said on both sides of this issue in terms of its criticisms of the bill we have and the bill that we had at first, and the very size of this, I share. You want to go home, so I’m not going to list all of my concerns that I have with it.

But it just comes down to one simple thing. They have described a precipice. We are on the brink of doing something that might pull us back from that precipice. I think we have a responsibility. We have worked in a bipartisan way. I want to acknowledge Mr. Blunt and Mr. Boehner, the work that we have done together, trying to find as much common ground as possible on this.

But we insisted the taxpayer be covered. We all insisted that we have a party-is-over message to Wall Street. And we insisted that, that taxpayers at risk must recover — that any risk must be recovered. I told you that already. So, my colleagues, let’s recognize that this Congressional — this legislation is not the end of the line.

Mr. Waxman [Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California] will be having vigorous oversight this week, hearings this week on regulatory reform and other aspects of it. I hope you will pursue fraud and mismanagement and the rest. Mr. Frank and his committee will continue to pursue other avenues that we can stabilize the markets and protect the taxpayer. For too long, this government, in eight years, has followed a right-wing ideology of anything goes, no supervision, no discipline, no regulation.

Again, all of us are believers in free markets, but we have to do it right. Now, let me again acknowledge the extraordinary leadership of Mr. Frank. He has been an exceptional leader in the Congress, but never has his knowledge and his experience and his judgment been more needed than now. And I thank you, Mr. Frank, for your exceptional leadership, Mr. Chairman.

I also — so many people worked on this, but I also want to acknowledge the distinguished chair of our caucus, Mr. Emanuel. His knowledge of the markets, the respect he commands on those subjects, and his boundless energy on the subjects served us well in these negotiations. But this, this is a bipartisan initiative that we are bringing to the floor. We have to have a bipartisan vote on this. That is the only message that will send a message of confidence to the markets.

So I hope that — I know that we will be able to live up to our side of the bargain. I hope the Republicans will, too.

But my colleagues, as you go home and see your families and observe the holiday and the rest, don’t get settled in too far, because as long as the American — this challenge is there for the American people, the threat of losing their jobs, the credit, their credit, their jobs, their savings, their retirement, the opportunity for them to send their children to college.

As long as in the households of America, this crisis is being felt very immediately and being addressed at a different level, we must come back, and we will come back as soon and as often as it is necessary to make the change that is necessary. And before long we will have a new Congress, a new president of the United States, and we will be able to take our country in a new direction.

At first, I thought that the House should pass some kind of bailout. Now, the more that I read about this, the more that I learn. Yes, it will be painful, for Wall Street and for some on Main Street if there is no bailout. Having said that, small banks are thriving in this "crisis". Now I'm glad that this bailout failed in Congress.

Dear Mr. Boner:

You and all of the other republiKKKans are whiney ass titty babies, traitors, criminals, racists, and liars.

I invite you to come down to Tampa where you can come, open your lying mouth, and get your ass thouroughly kicked by my boot.

Go fuck yourselves conservative liars

brando@102 Don't forget - the Democratic Party has the slimmest of majorities and the Republicans have literally set the record for filibusters in the last two years.

I'm not really happy at all with the spineless Democrats, but there are some mitigating circumstances.

And LA is correct, I think.

Nancy Pelosi is almost as bad as Bush; she's covered his back every step of the way.

Republican ticket is floundering, bailout is failing, and republican party is in disarray and appears to be splitting in two. Newt is fanning the flames and leading an insurrection, but leading them where - to the McCain/Palin ticket? I doubt it. I see mitosis here, one organism splitting in two. This split would be useless, though, without somewhere to go. How about Libertarian? Weaken the republicans (and democrats) with the bailout crisis and throw new strength and energy at Bob Barr's bid. Newt and Barr have worked together in the past.
With a three-way race, you can win with as little as 35-40% of the vote. Voila! From marginal losers to majority party in six short weeks. Sounds like a Newt play to me.

Wait....wait wait wait

McCain constantly talks to Obama with condescension during the presidential debates, but Democrats let it go.

Then, Pelosi "insults" the Republicans and they go crying to mommy?

Which of the two parties is more mature?

I will admit that I'm glad the bill didn't pass. I'm against doing anything in such a knee-jerk fashion. Especially at the request of our current criminal administration. Every time we've followed Georgie boy's lead, we've wound up getting fucked.

I know the only reason the whining republicans voted against it is it didn't coddle the upper echelon of financiers enough for them, but I'm glad they voted it down. And I'm glad they showed themselves for the whining little bitches that they are. If you're going to vote against it, stand up and give an honest to god reason for it. Don't cry over a fucking speech. Pansies.

I want to see a lot more done for the regular working American. You know those of us that just plummet to our deaths because we don't have a golden parachute.

I'd like to see an end to the golden parachutes for that matter.

There's plenty of work to be done. The Democrats need to fight to help out the middle class and tell GW to go fuck himself, and the republicans need to find their spines, hitch up their panties and get to work.

And McCain? He just needs to stay the hell out of it.

diamondmc @ 101:

I don't know if the bill would work or not, but I would ask all you people who are so against it what is your solution? If business can't get loans and then can't get meet payroll and people start losing their jobs, what then? If you are a student and can't get money for school what are you going to do? You sure as hell aren't going to go out and get a job thats not there. These are just some questions I have for all you people who are against this bill, but I don't hear any answers from any of you.

this is the facade of credit, betting on something that was going to happen anyway and turned it into betting on the likelyhood of something happening. Now we get to slow down and do our jobs right and not have some asshole driving everything into the ground because they have money to push all the buttons and grease all the skids. I am sick of businesses that do not have real vested intetrest in what is being produced, forcing everyone to work sloppier and faster because they have cheap money to play with and everything is a financial instrument.

O'Reilly @ 98:

Pelosi is a typical Democrat. Just didn't know when to shut up.

As for impeachable offenses, the Democrat controlled do nothing Congress should be investigated.

Hold on there, BillO. There's a queue starting with Cheney, Bush and a line of of rubber-stamping, obstructionist, butt fucking republican congressman like Boehner, Graham, McCain, etc. After that, then we can go after the blue dogs.

brando @ 102:

The help should start at the bottom and work its way up and not vice versa. In other words, give 700 billion to the people in trouble and let the boon "trickle" up.

But you can't give it to them - those people don't have any money!

McPants @ 122:

Wait....wait wait wait

McCain constantly talks to Obama with condescension during the presidential debates, but Democrats let it go.

Then, Pelosi "insults" the Republicans and they go crying to mommy?

Which of the two parties is more mature?

You REALLY think it matters?
It's all political kabuki: carefully choreographed moves, in elaborate costumes.

if any of 'em were really serious, there'd be some provision in the bill to restore Glass-Steagall and repeal Gramm, et al.

To the extent that that AIN'T on the table, you can measure the seriousness of the 'reforms' proposals....

That is to say, their lack of seriousness...

If things were really bad, Gramm-Leach-Bliley'd be on the dissection table...

Mick Piobr @ 87:

I honestly do not know what to think; I'm not trolling.

I read the posts on C&L in an effort to better understand these events.

It is my understanding that if there is no bailout : Numerous pension funds will be destroyed. Credit will be non-existant = massive layoffs as corporations readjust to protect their bottom line. People will lose their lives savings. Elderly and disabled people will lose everything. Maybe your own parents.

That list goes on.

But the Wall Street Whiners want three quarters of a trillion WITHOUT OVERSITE.

Bullshit, isn't it?

That's why they want this scam expedited.

What about buying these bad loans and giving it to the people who are about to lose their homes?

What about having enough oversight to begin investigating these CEOs like Carly Fiorina and many others who have destroyed their own corporations. Seize their assets and make them bail out the situation that they have caused?

A snowball's chance in hell, right?

I hate the bailout. If it doesn't happen, innocent people will be ground under the wheel.

Damned if we do; damned if we don't.

Well put. I just wonder why people are going toward this "rush to judgment". Like I've said before, the anger is understandable. I'm angry. I feel that Bush and his cronies have gang-raped America and robbed all her assets to boot.

But, there needs to be clear explanations of what is happening to the American people.

There needs to be time given to the legislators to craft a bill that is practical in nature.

The the Rovian agents provacateurs need to be chased out the room. Instead, this is a time for people in the know to break it down for the rest of us what is needed to be done in order to find a solution in this mess. This is a time to be calm.

Otherwise, this is big ploy to stir the passion of the masses so much so that they sway toward McCain by splitting the Democratic party and the Left so that Palin and her Evangelicals can come in and steal the show. I would certainly hope that this situation is deeper than that.

Remember those Visa commercials they've been showing that makes the guy that uses cash look like a fool?

These were designed to get us to get used to the idea of not using currency.

I wonder if they will keep showing them since the banks collapses are showing us what those visa cards really are: a meaningless piece of plastic.

Shameless. You Democratic shills try to spin everything to make it look like its all the Republican's fault, that the Democratic Party is the righteous party, that they haven't supported Bush's dirty wars (they have) or the advancing of the police state (with enthusiasm because they know they will need it to protect themselves later) or the "deregulation" of the derivatives markets (they have had their campaigns financed by the financial classes too.) Never mind that calls to Congress were thousands against vs a few in support of the Bailout rescue, still, the Democratic House leadership and the majority of Democratic Congressmen voted FOR THE BILL!! This robbery of the American soul has been fully supported by the DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

But the people of this country saw through this economic 911 being thrust upon them and said no, hell no! And finally Congress stood up and did something significant, and it was hard not to notice it was two thirds of the Republican caucus that voted against this immoral, illegal and unconstitutional "legislation". We may have more Republicans elected than many were imagining. This could be a huge swing issue. This election being what it is, all Congressmen who voted for this legislation could find themselves unelectable and thrown out of office. And a great many of those who voted for this are Democrats. The American people have begun to awaken. They are beginning to see that the emperor has no clothes. Can you say Democrat self destruct?

McCain is likewise a walking corpse. You telling me this is the best of the best America has? This whole election, and everything else about the political system, is a fraud, just like the markets.

Obama is in the back pocket of men like Soros, Rockafeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski, and notice that he has raised more from Wall Street than any other candidate. Of course he would have to support the robbery bill, and he does, and again against the wishes of the vast majority of people. He also supports more war in Afghanistan, and possibly wars in Iran -- "No option is off the table" -- and even, God forbid, Pakistan, transforming the Democratic Party into the war party. Again against the wishes of the majority of Americans. Hilarious. Anyone who thinks Obama represents change is an idiot.

Ya, the Democrats have really hurt Bush, like they promised when they wanted everyone to elect them in 2006. They can't give Bush what he wants fast enough.

It is time to take back this country from a small group of global interests that needs us more than we need them. It is even possible that Monday's crash was manipulated to soften us up a little more, that these guys are trying to accomplish an economic coup de tat for the real prize that all this war and destruction of the last seven years: the conquest of corporate interests of America proper, just as they have done with Argintina, the Asian Tigers and even Russia at the fall of the Soviet Union. Ask Naomi Klein about that one. They want to own everything, drop living standards through the floor and rape the land for thier own benefit.

This is literally about the future of humanity. And if enough of us wake up hold these criminals accountable and start demanding these guys do what the American public wants and not their pimps on Wall Street want, this country could recover very quickly. I note that Ron Paul is proving somewhat prophetic in his predictions about what might happen. The truth has a funny way of doing that sometimes, and while I don't subscribe to all his solutions, his primary motivation was freedom and liberty. It is time to reclaim our birthright before it is taken from us forever.

The problem is our dependence on credit. What ever happened to the idea that you actually earn enough $$$ to support your lifestyle? It wasn't that long ago that almost no American had a credit card - that a small business was run on the seeming "old-fashioned" ideas of profit and loss. Now the TV pundits whine about the freezing up of the credit martkets - about how this will royally fuck the average American. NEWSFLASH: we're already fucked - well fucked. And we've been getting fucked for quite some time now (ever heard of trickle down economics?). There was a time in the country where there were no HMOs, where one could afford to at least attend a State College, where most Americans ONLY debt was their house, where you were guaranteed a pension - no some bullshit 401K. But nooooo, "We need the bailout!", conservative and liberal cry - "Give us more credit to hang ourselves!!!". This whole house of cards NEEDS to come down before it can be rebuilt. We need a society that values work and compensates fairly. Remember FDR's 1933 speech?

"Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money; it lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort. The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits. These dark days will be worth all they cost us if they teach us that our true destiny is not to be ministered unto but to minister to ourselves and to our fellow men."

Imagine Pelosi or even Obama saying that.

douglas in oklahoma @ 100:

just two points ---- did we not have a shit load of hearings about drugs in baseball??? so why not any now. and #2, the democrats call the fucking vote not the repubs...so either pelosi is fucking stupid or someone lied. Why call the vote if you do not have the votes yet. The democrats fucked this sucker up. So much of the Wall Street mess should be blamed on the republicans, yet the dems get themselves blamed more----what a talent.

OK fine. Let the Democrats sit back and see what the Republicans can do. Its their bill. Its Bush's deal. If the Republicans and McSame can't get the Republicans on board then fuck em. The Republicans who run these banks and investment houses and Wall Street are the ones who want this thing. If they can't get their pals to do this thing fine.

Cadaquues Spain @ 1:

Free money! Why won't they vote to give away free money! Whaaaaaaa

Really all that needs to be said about this. C&L needs to do some research and realize why this is all bogus. Maybe you guys should read something other than your own blog sometimes, like all the great articles on Common Dreams.org right now about why this is a GOOD thing.

David- And what does the American public want? From what I can tell they don't have a clue what they want. I asked a few simple questions and no one can answer. If the bail out was bad for America, what is your solution? What happens if Your employer can't make payroll and you lose your job? How you gonna make your house payment or rent? What if you can't get money for school? I hear the public bitching, but I don't hear the public giving any solutions. So whats your solution?

diamondmc @ 146:

David- And what does the American public want? From what I can tell they don't have a clue what they want. I asked a few simple questions and no one can answer. If the bail out was bad for America, what is your solution? What happens if Your employer can't make payroll and you lose your job? How you gonna make your house payment or rent? What if you can't get money for school? I hear the public bitching, but I don't hear the public giving any solutions. So whats your solution?

There are other alternatives, but they don't mention them to you do they? No, they only tell you what bush says.. be scared!