What's Breaking News Tonight?

John and all,

Sorry, but the facts on the ground don't jive with the ubiquitous forecasts of liquidity crisis, cash crunch, impending doom, etc. [like Y2K?] In retrospect, the "intelligence" on this is going to make the pre-2003 forecasts on Iraq look prescient.

If the conventional wisdom is true and the banks don't have money to lend, why is JPMChase sending out solicitations to its customers BEGGING us to BORROW MORE money at close to zero interest rates???

Why are we not reading lots of sob stories in the newspapers [and seeing them on tv] of all the unfortuantes trying unsuccessfully to buy houses because they can't get mortgages???

BEACUSE THE GOV'T AND MEDIA ARE DIVORCED FROM REALITY. [and of course the BANKS WANT the bailout, so they are not going to tell us otherwise]

If the government is involved you can bet your ass they will F%$# it up. The only thing the government does with any degree of efficiency is collect taxes and send out welfare checks.

If Teddy Roosevelt said he was standing at Armageddon, then he was wrong, right?

John:

I agree that McCain is well positioned on the "bailout deal," "Paulson plan," whatever, both politically and on the merits. However, judging by his debate performance, McCain doesn't seem to know how to press home this important advantage. To wit, having spent all that time in DC on the bailout issue and with all that attendant publicity, Mac could easily have used it as a club to slam away at Obama's substandard performance on the same issue. Instead, he hardly mentioned it and dealt with the issue as if he'd never spent a minute in DC working on it.

In contrast, real "straight talk" by Mac here could make his opposition to the Paulson plan a devastating trifecta -- creating more of that distance from G. Bush he says he wants while portraying BamBam and the Democrats as the ones "voting with Bush" on this hottest of issues; arguing that the Democrats have helped bring on this crisis and now are the ones blocking a "deal" by playing their same old games; reinforcing his populist/tribune credentials by opposing the Goldman Sachs mafia and the corrupt and incompetent Washington DC usual suspects, and boosting GOP chances in congressional races all at the same time. It could be the most effective McCain political parlay since his choice of Sarah Palin for VP. Despite the debate, it's not too late for Mac to adopt this strategy.

Ooopps! Sorry guys, but being in church all Sunday morning I didn't get the latest word on another alleged bailout "deal" that McCain is evidently ready to support even though House Republicans have not yet signaled their approval. An inital reaction, but it looks like a replay of the Democrat-Paulson-Bush power play of declaring a "deal" where none exists. It also looks like the basic logic is to double-down on the very same toxic mortgages that have sunk us by betting on their future appreciation to a value sufficient to repay We the People for providing $700 billion in taxpayer money for all this mess. How can McCain support such a bad gamble while undermining his new conservative allies amongst the House GOP? Grrr-rr-rr!!

Good news: Just back form Capitol Hill. Nothing on paper. No bill exists. The Democrats do not have the votes. The House GOP is not saluting. Whenever you hear a senator say anything, remind yourself that this is a powerless TV cameo actor. The House GOP is remaining silent and patient. Let Mrs. P bring a piece of paper to the members. Then the fireworks begin, because the Dem members will blow it up with firepower. Pass a bank bailout and November 4 is your retirement party. Mike Pence and Thaddeus McCotter do not speak alone. Newt Gingrich says fire Paulson and that this deal is unAmerican. The real fearful crowd is the Dem leadership, because the coups in the Dem caucus have started. The GOP hears you. All emmbers are being harangued now to support a piece of paper that does not exist. The correct response is, "We're making progress," and smile. The WHite House may have figured out the terrain on the Hill. When Mrs. P knocked the Bush-Paulson plan as needing Dem improvement, the White House smoked out the tricks. But I don't mind about the WH. It is a bystander. And the two candidates are supercilious, aimless, preening barbie dolls. This is about the House. Where are your votes, Mrs. P? Show me your votes. Whip them! What votes? You want this bill, deliver 200 plus votes. And John Boehner. Cool as the flight leader on Torpedo 8 diving on the Japanese fleet at Midway.

JB - thanks for the insights and re-assurances. So hard to filter out the truths from alll the preening. Please keep'em coming this afternoon - bc, as you have noted, the current news cycle can be measured in minutes...not days.

JB thanks for the updates you are true a patriot.

There is movement now. Neither the GOP nor the Dem leadership has the votes. GOP House conference at 4 pm. Update at 7 live.

A BAILOUT FOR PEOPLE WHO SHOULD BE PUT IN JAIL?

The CDOs are basically worthless. Isn't selling fraudulent securities still a crime? Instead of talking about compensation packages for the heads of these firms, we should be discussing prison time.

The best bailout plan I heard yet is for the gov't to copy what Warren Buffet got. Now that would be profitable for the taxpayers.

Thank you, John, for being one honest voice we can depend on. I can't wait to hear what you have to say tonight -- and I agree w/one of the comment writers who suggested you speak and give your opinion for, at least, one segment. Your voice needs to be heard.

ARE FOREIGN BANKS PART OF THE BAILOUT?

The Wall Street bankers have destroyed our financial reputation abroad. Foreign banks have been duped by Wall Street. But I would certainly hate to see off-shore tax haven banks, like those in the Cayman Islands, get bailed out by Congress. That would be a clear signal that Wall Streeters, including Paulson, are looking out for their own.

This is why I went thru almost 2 years of withdrawal waiting for John Batchelor to return to radio.

This guy is simply the BEST of them all.

John, do you believe markets will crater if a deal collapses? Is so, how does that help McCain get elected? McCain needs this economic story to get off the front pages and not be topic A on cable news day after day. He needs to get back to the cultural issues on which Obama doesn't connect. How does a continuation of economic uncertainty help McCain tactically? It seems to me he needs this bailout to put this story to bed for the next four weeks. Explain to us how no deal helps him regain momentum against Obama? Thanks.

Here is your bill: http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/28/news/pdf/index.htm

McCain will have a hell of a time making any gains in the polls on this issue until he stops blaiming greed on Wall St. That may be a common populist theme, but it just isn't true.

"The banks didn't create this mess - Congress did, when they mandated, set quotas on how many sub-prime loans were required from the banks. I tried to reform Fannie Mae three years ago, but Congress did not act - they were too busy taking contributions from from peope at Fannie, the chief among the recipients being Sen Obama. This is why I wrote campaign finance reform!"

If we were to hear this from Sen McCain he would be able to position himself as the reformer, and Sen Obama as the corrupt insider.

McCain will have a hell of a time making any gains in the polls on this issue until he stops blaiming greed on Wall St. That may be a common populist theme, but it just isn't true.

"The banks didn't create this mess - Congress did, when they mandated, set quotas on how many sub-prime loans were required from the banks. I tried to reform Fannie Mae three years ago, but Congress did not act - they were too busy taking contributions from from peope at Fannie, the chief among the recipients being Sen Obama. This is why I wrote campaign finance reform!"

If we were to hear this from Sen McCain he would be able to position himself as the reformer, and Sen Obama as the corrupt insider.

I hear the Dems have sent out the caucus "Court Jester" Dennis Kucinich to denounce the plan roundly. He and they have nothing to lose by floating such a trial balloon. <grin>. He says he'll vote "not only 'no' but 'Hell no!'"

John, hadn't heard you since they took you off the radio. Been reading "What's New Tonight" just recently. Thank You. Let your powerful voice get stronger and be heard throughout the land. Then let us all stand tall and say no more to the greedy scoundruls and yes to right and reason. Hold fast patriots!

John,

Sorry to change the topic...Did you hear anything about this?

A tense standoff has developed in waters off Somalia over an Iranian merchant ship laden with a mysterious cargo that was hijacked by pirates.

Somali pirates suffered skin burns, lost hair and fell gravely ill "within days" of boarding the MV Iran Deyanat. Some of them died.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2008/09/mystery_surrounds_hi.php

http://www.thetimes.co.za/PrintEdition/Article.aspx?id=851953

Now Bill Clinton blames the dems for the alleged financial collapse. Which side is he on? Between his comments regarding McCain and now this, you have to wonder. The answer is, his. http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/09/bill-clinton-bl.html

JBS forgot to ask about Al daeda in Syria bombing hopefully talk to Malocolm and Aaron tonight.

Why is no one seeing this as "The Producers" selling a Ponzi scheme where we bailed out Freddie and Fannie as max Bialystok because the GSE was our supposedly lovable Scghmucks but we are ditching on all the Leo Bloom's In Bear Sterns , Lehman, WAMU. After all they went viral. The Chinese are tryiing to extract their pound of flesh for being taken but what can they do. Causing a massive depression here closes all the factories there. Is not globalization grand.

I'm watching Nancy Pelosi say they hope to pass this thing, which isn't finished apparently, but they're acting as if they just passed something. Man, what a bunch of lies.

I have a simple but effective idea going forward on loans every individual must pass a standardized test on mortgage information which will no longer allow the left to scream foul to the lenders while the government was forcing them to make high risk loans. A simple idea that will steer this country away from from the back door socialism that the liberals intends to promote. This must be the next step to protect the tax payer.

Intrade has the proposal down to 25% chance of being passed by Congress before Monday things are breaking down.

Message to all interested parties who want this bailout - go pound sand. Let the chips fall where they may and learn to live like the rest of Americans. We have to balance a checkbook, maybe/maybe not take a vacation, decide if we can afford to go out to diner, put a child in a private school, etc. We have no sympathy for politicians and bankers who agreed to lend a mortgage to illegal aliens, welfare recipients and others who could not afford their mortgage. How do you sleep at night? Have you no shame?

John, Good to see you back......

W H E R E . A R E . O U R . C O N S E R V A T I V E S ? ? . V A N I S H E D? Where is our Republican Leadership....... W H A T . A R E . W E . S U P P O S E D . T O . D O ? ? ? ? We have know way to speak out!!!!!!!! God help us! I . F E E L . S O . H E L P L E S S !!!!!!!!! The Republican Congress Knew That Everyone here In FlyOver Country Was Apposed to This Bill Franks and Dodd should be indicted.

Thadious,,,,,,'

Why Cant You Just Walk Out?????????

Please,,,,Don't Let This Happen............

God Help us...

Gingrich, Romney, Thompson, and Huckabee should JOIN WITH YOU!!!!!

Hold a press Conference together Urging The Republican Congress to Walk Out Of this Socialist Vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dont Vote! Dont Vote,,,,,,,! I am from Michigan,,,,,,,Thadious.......PLEASE WALK OUT!!!!!!!!!!!

Dont Vote! Dont Vote,,,,,,,! I am from Michigan,,,,,,,Thadious.......PLEASE WALK OUT!!!!!!!!!!!

G . O . D . . H . E . L . P . . . U . S . !!!!!!

Please someone Give us a Sign that we are not as doomed as we believe we are......... The Sense Of Loathing I have For this plan Is shared by so Many!!!!!

Why is God Letting this happen????? Our Markets, Our Courts, Our Rights, Our Unborn, Our Christian Ideals, Our Conservative Beliefs, .......

Are All Under Attack By THE ELITIST LEFT and Their Leader 0-Bama Who as Far as we know is NOT Even An American Citizen,,,, A man Who was Taught in a M . U . S . L . I . M. . SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The members received the draft proposal after the House GOP conference began at 430. After. Smile. The likelihood of a vote tomorrow is minimal. A vote this week? They haven't been whipped yet. John Boehner would not tell the members how many votes wants. Gues is 100 votes from GOP. Right now, there are not more than two dozen GOP votes. How many Democratic votes? Unknown. But both leaderships are aware that this may be a train coming at them. If this wasn't important, it wouldn't be so exciting and edgy.

The Dems created this problem over the last 20 years starting with Carter and then the Clinton, lets not forget Franks and Dodd.....

Let the Dems solve it themselves, they have votes in both houses....

The GOP should boygot the whole process.....

The Dems created this problem over the last 20 years starting with Carter and then the Clinton, lets not forget Franks and Dodd.....

Let the Dems solve it themselves, they have votes in both houses....

The GOP should boygot the whole process.....

"Damn it, if you think you need $700 billion right away you better tell us," Sen. Schumer told Mr. Paulson

The point being: These guys in charge ARE CLUELESS ! They parade their "pet poodle" Paulsen out to give us the "used-car-salesman-pitch" just to save their own butts...not ours!

"I'm doing this for you as much as for me," Mr. Paulson shot back. "If we don't do this, it's coming down on all our heads."

It's not coming down on my head..how about you people? I purchased a home Aug. 7,2008. Seven years post-divorce still paying child support. I waited...bit the bullet when I had to....macaroni & cheese, courtesy of the NY Divorce Laws and the "out-of-touch-discriminatory court system".

But I'm back on track.

Remember the "Smith-Barney Commercial"...yeah, that's right..the old fashioned way:I EARNED IT

For sure foreclosures ARE on the rise....seen mostly in neighborhoods where "investment-housing" was sold...as risky as the stock market.

Or the fools (for a fool and his momey are soon parted) who overextended themselves.

Foolishly..needlessly...GREEDILY... BUY NOW PAY LATER!

Let's get back to the basics people.

Seems the only people yelling "FIRE" in the movie house are the people who stand the most to gain from this bailout..the "financial False Alarmists" .

Guys like SCHUMER,DODD, OBAMA and company. All the politicos with "stock options" and perks given under the table....We will find them out.

God Bless the Congressman (a Republican ) from Cobb County Georgia who stated on Fox News that he was "leaning" toward a NO vote.

Jamie Garelik ...you screwed up National Security and the 911 Hearings...YOU profited from this mess. WE ARE COMING FOR YOU!

Stand Fast Good Fellows in Congress. Keep the Faith. The PEOPLE are behind you. The fiscally prudent will survive and prosper. We've done this before...We will survive.

Take your children to a soup kitchen this week and teach them about "SERVICE" and true compassion.

What's the parable about the rich man fitting through the eye of a needle versus entering the Kingdom of Heaven?

God Bles Us All

Hi I'm Dutch and something struck me as odd about all this, although I'm the first to admit I'm not an economics-wiz.

Isn't basically the danger we're getting warned about that people might demand their banksavings back all at one time, like after the Wall Street crash in 1928 (or smth), and banks by their very nature can't cope whith that?

Over here our laws make government guarantee +/- $30.000 of your bank-savings, PER BANK (that has been screened beforehand). This basically means 'Mary Poppins-scenes' don't happen (those whith larger savings usually spread their savings over several banks), and banks almost never collapse.

My question: are banksavings guarenteed in the US, and wouldn't the 'bailout-money' not be better spend on e.g. such a guarentee on savings & perhaps on transferral of stocks/assets (not on the value but the stock/asset itself) to a more secure bank?

That way no money is pumped into sinking ships and people will not dash to the bank for their savings en masse, which would create the panic that's so dangerous.

Speaking of Huckabee, I've never seen him so pissed off.

(email from Huck PAC)

http://www.huckpac.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=1899 Mike Huckabee Sept. 24, 2008 "Frankly, I'm disappointed and disgusted with my own Republican party as I watch them attempt to strong-arm a bailout of some of America's biggest corporations by asking the taxpayers to suck up the staggering results of the hubris, greed, and arrogance of those who sought to make a quick buck by throwing the dice. They lost, but want the rest of us to cover their bets so they won't be effected in their lavish lifestyles as they figure out how to spend their tens of millions and in some cases, hundreds of millions in bonuses and compensation which was their reward for not only sinking their companies, but basically doing the same to the entire American economy. It's especially disconcerting to see the very people who pilloried me during the Presidential campaign for being a "populist" and not "understanding Wall Street" to now line up like thirsty dogs at the Washington, D.C. water dish, otherwise known as Congress, and plead for help. I thought these guys were the smartest people in America! I thought that taxpayers like you and I were similar to the people at the U. N. who have no translator speaking into their headset - that we just needed to trust those that I called the power bunch in the "Wall Street to Washington axis of power." The idea of a government bailout in which we'd entrust $700 billion to one man without Congressional oversight or accountability is absurd. My party or not, that is insanity, and I believe unconstitutional. Will there be far-reaching consequences without some intervention? Probably, but we honestly don't know since we've really never seen this level of greed and stupidity all rolled into one massive move. But may I suggest that letting "Uncle Sugar" step in and bail out the billionaires who made the mess will be far worse and will start a long line of companies and individuals who will demand the same of the government---which last time I checked means that they will be demanding it out of YOU and ME. This is not money that Congress is risking from THEIR pockets or future, but ours.

Many if not most of us have already experienced lost value on our homes, retirement accounts, and pensions. Now they'd like for us to assume some further risks so they won't have to. What happened to the "free market" idea? Is that only our view when we WIN, and when we LOSE we ask the government to come in and take away the pain?

If you are a small business owner, is this the way it works at your place? When you have a bad month, a bad year, or face having to close, can you go up to Congress and get them to write YOU a fat check to take away your risk?

Some of what contributed to this disaster is too much government in the form of Sarbanes/Oxley. Some is due to the tax structure that created the hunger for companies to "game" the system. Some is the common sense that was ignored like loaning money to people who can't pay it back.

Wall Street has become Las Vegas east, but at least in Vegas, people KNOW they are gambling and they don't expect the government to cover their losses at the tables. In Wall Street, they do. And the American taxpayer burdens the responsibility.

If Congress wants to do something, here are some suggestions:

1. Eliminate ALL capital gains taxes and taxes on savings and dividends right now. Free up the capital and encourage investment. This is the kind of economic stimulus the Fair Tax would bring and if Congress is going to lose money, let them lose it with lower taxes, not with public dollar bailouts of private market mistakes.

2. Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley. It has failed. It was supposed to prevent this. It didn't. Kill it. 3. Demand that the executives who steered their ships into the ground be forced to pay back the losses of their companies. Of course, they can't, so let them work and give back to the government and they can live like the people they put on the streets or kept there. It makes no sense to put them in jail--that's just more they will cost you and me. I'd rather them go out and earn money--just not get to keep so much of it this time. I'm not talking about limiting CEO salaries---just those of the people who now are up in Washington begging for help because they ruined their companies. Attempts by Democrats and Republicans to blame each other is nonsense. They are both guilty and ought to own up and admit it. They all lived off big campaign contributions and the swill of the lobbyists who strong-armed them into permission to steal. Enough of blame. Fix it! This would be a start. If we don't hold these guys responsible, we are all finished." .

(corrected)

Speaking of Huckabee, I've never seen him so pissed off.

(email from Huck PAC)

http://www.huckpac.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=1899

Mike Huckabee Sept. 24, 2008

"Frankly, I'm disappointed and disgusted with my own Republican party as I watch them attempt to strong-arm a bailout of some of America's biggest corporations by asking the taxpayers to suck up the staggering results of the hubris, greed, and arrogance of those who sought to make a quick buck by throwing the dice. They lost, but want the rest of us to cover their bets so they won't be effected in their lavish lifestyles as they figure out how to spend their tens of millions and in some cases, hundreds of millions in bonuses and compensation which was their reward for not only sinking their companies, but basically doing the same to the entire American economy. It's especially disconcerting to see the very people who pilloried me during the Presidential campaign for being a "populist" and not "understanding Wall Street" to now line up like thirsty dogs at the Washington, D.C. water dish, otherwise known as Congress, and plead for help. I thought these guys were the smartest people in America! I thought that taxpayers like you and I were similar to the people at the U.N. who have no translator speaking into their headset - that we just needed to trust those that I called the power bunch in the "Wall Street to Washington axis of power." The idea of a government bailout in which we'd entrust $700 billion to one man without Congressional oversight or accountability is absurd. My party or not, that is insanity and I believe unconstitutional. Will there be far-reaching consequences without some intervention? Probably, but we honestly don't know since we've really never seen this level of greed and stupidity all rolled into one massive move. But may I suggest that letting "Uncle Sugar" step in and bail out the billionaires who made the mess will be far worse and will start a long line of companies and individuals who will demand the same of the government---which last time I checked means that they will be demanding it out of YOU and ME. This is not money that Congress is risking from THEIR pockets or future, but ours. Many if not most of us have already experienced lost value on our homes, retirement accounts, and pensions. Now they'd like for us to assume some further risks so they won't have to. What happened to the "free market" idea? Is that only our view when we WIN, and when we LOSE we ask the government to come in and take away the pain?

If you are a small business owner, is this the way it works at your place? When you have a bad month, a bad year, or face having to close, can you go up to Congress and get them to write YOU a fat check to take away your risk? Some of what contributed to this disaster is too much government in the form of Sarbanes/Oxley. Some is due to the tax structure that created the hunger for companies to "game" the system. Some is the common sense that was ignored like loaning money to people who can't pay it back.

Wall Street has become Las Vegas east, but at least in Vegas, people KNOW they are gambling and they don't expect the government to cover their losses at the tables. In Wall Street, they do. And the American taxpayer burdens the responsibility.

If Congress wants to do something, here are some suggestions:

1. Eliminate ALL capital gains taxes and taxes on savings and dividends right now. Free up the capital and encourage investment. This is the kind of economic stimulus the Fair Tax would bring and if Congress is going to lose money, let them lose it with lower taxes, not with public dollar bailouts of private market mistakes.

2. Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley. It has failed. It was supposed to prevent this. It didn't. Kill it.

3. Demand that the executives who steered their ships into the ground be forced to pay back the losses of their companies. Of course, they can't, so let them work and give back to the government and they can live like the people they put on the streets or kept there. It makes no sense to put them in jail--that's just more they will cost you and me. I'd rather them go out and earn money--just not get to keep so much of it this time. I'm not talking about limiting CEO salaries---just those of the people who now are up in Washington begging for help because they ruined their companies. Attempts by Democrats and Republicans to blame each other is nonsense. They are both guilty and ought to own up and admit it. They all lived off big campaign contributions and the swill of the lobbyists who strong armed them into permission to steal. Enough of blame. Fix it! This would be a start. If we don't hold these guys responsible, we are all finished."

Everyone claims to be shocked, shocked at the mortgage mess, yet all have heard the terms 'sub-prime loans' and 'housing bubble!'

For decades I've heard rumors of a U.S. financial collapse. So must have financiers and politicians.

See this excellent 11 minute video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU6fuFrdCJY

'BURNING DOWN THE HOUSE'

Lee Cary September 28, 2008

An eleven-minute video that gives historical perspective to the current financial crisis is now available on YouTube entitled "Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis?" It moves fast and covers a lot of historical ground.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/09/burning_down_the_house.html

And Senator Gregg from New Hampshire, the "Live Free or Die" State, said "If we don't pass it, we shouldn't be a Congress." So much for a stalwart for the cause. I wonder if the GOP will fall into line now that Bush has blown the shofar...

Thank goodness rationality has returned and it looks like the bill will be passed today. It is preferable to have the "do nothing" crowd walk away disappointed than for us all to have to endure a painful object lesson.

When the planes hit the Twin Towers on 9/11 everyone ran around like chickens with their heads cut off, yelling, "We gotta do something!" Bush invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. Shortly after that he became the "worst guy on the planet".

Then, Al Gore released his movie fiction and peddled it as fact - and everyone still runs around like chickens with their heads cut off and yells, "We gotta do something!" And Al Gore wins a Nobel Prize. Now, investors, banks and Bush are predicting doomsday in financial markets (if we don't give in to their demands) and everyone is running around like chickens with their heads cut off, yelling, "We gotta do something!"

Does anyone see a pattern here? The outcome is already quite obvious. Isn't it?

This has been a dynamic situation and I think the major shift here is that GOP House members now understand the potential ramifications of sinking the bailout and they do not want ownership of that outcome.

What is the obvious outcome, Petre?

Dave - No matter what happens, Bush (and Republicans) will get blamed. Democrats are never at fault. Democrats have been casting themselves as victims (of Republican policies). Victims are never at fault. That's the template as I see it. That's how everything gets sorted out and reported (and taught in schools).

McCain in Ohio- End to Pork Barrel spending and when it comes to the desk for signing... he will veto

Reaches into his coat and pulls out a... yep, it's a Sharpei!!

Getting BamBam's goat good!!

SHARPIE!!!

After suffering through speech after speech of Congressmen reading statements they clearly don't fully understand, Rep. Bacchus was a breath of fresh air. Can't make the argument any simpler.

Make that Rep. Bachus.

The investigation into how many of these failed mortgages are held by the dead in Chicago's cemetaries hasn't even started yet. Can you imagine what will happen once all these people gather up their bones and head out to the polling stations?

Here we go, voting begins...

BAILOUT FAILS.

Dow down 700 points.

40% Demos voted against

Geraldine Ferraro on Fox and Friends this a.m. made a statement that : "Most people just don't understand" alluding to this BAILOUT BILL's necessity.

Same Geraldine....same B.S.

Hey Geraldine: Remember living in Newburgh,NY? What was your name then? FITZGERALD?

What kind of mess did the Dems "bury"? You know..the one about your hubbie? Mr. FERRARO ?!!

GERALDINE,: Don't you DARE to tell US WE DON"T UNDERSTAND! Don't you DARE ASSUME we have all FORGOTTEN? NO GERRY...We remember. Let your reps know..we will remember! This Bill is more B.S.

Give the $$$ to the people, each man woman and young adult 18 years old and up.

The Feds will tax approx 40%= their payoff.

The people will payoff their mortgages,especially the ones who have used their heads these past years= our payoff.

Whatever is left will be used to inject cash flow into Commerce, local economy,business investment,etc.

And it'll all cost a helluva lot less than these traitors are asking for...that's right...TRAITORS!!!!

Anyone who approves this is a TRAITOR!

God Save the REPUBLIC! Screw the Socialists ! POWER to the PEOPLE!!

Danton- Do you really support the Birk deal? The internet mailer bill?

Truth is that the bill rejection was a bipartisan effort, but right or wrong, if something bad happens in the next few weeks the American people are going to blame John McCain.

By making a grand show of going to Washington and helping to kill the original deal, in the public's view McCain will own this, for better or worse.

But then again, I like having sex with farm animals, do what the hell do I know? :)

Someone is making posts using 'david" now there seems to be some sabotage going on---

The original "david" does not post these things:

But then again, I like having sex with farm animals, do what the hell do I know? :)

Now we'll see if my nightmare scenario comes true. It will be electorally irrelevant that Pelosi couldn't whip her majority into passing this bill without the Republicans. It is irrelevant that the electorate is economically ignorant and therefore couldn't understand how they benefited from this complex bill. No representative is going to go back to their voters and tell them "You're too dumb to get it so trust me to take care of you." Nobody.

The Democrats and their propaganda arm, the mainstream media, will hang this failure on Republicans and Republicans will suffer at the polls. The only thing that can save the Republicans at this point is if the predicted Armageddon in the stock market and the credit markets fails to materialize. So far, the impact of the failure on the market is not horrible. But it remains to be seen.

This impostor/ second "david" must be ultra left wing and must not like the things I write that defend our Great Nation!!!

Hey impostor!!! Is this is how they do it on Daily Kos ?

IMHO McCain won big. However, what lots of the "Experts" don't get is that Obama burned lots of bridges with Hillary supporters & this will show on election day no matter what happens in the debates.

If that line chart that CNN was running was accurate, Obama had the ears of the Independents most of the time.

When the spinning stops, whomever wins the Independents wins the election.

CNN, CBS has flash polls that say Obama won big. You know, I have seen the same polls for Kerry in 2004 and Gore in 2000. Same thing every time.

Game. Set. Match.

Spoke with my mother in Massachusetts after the debate. Lifelong Catholic Democrat. Socially Conservative but never voted Republican. She is voting GOP the first time in her life on 11/4 - would have backed HRC if she didn't get "a raw deal" from other Dems. Was thrilled with McCain's performance - said Obama seemed like "a snotty college kid".

JBS - last moving lines by McCain in tonight's debate: "I know how to heal the wounds of war, I know how to deal with our adversaries and I know how to deal with our friends."

If that line chart that CNN was running was accurate...Are you serious...CNN...Obama lovefest CNN...

You just make want to....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL9xOLpwI0I&feature=related

End result =

repubs = less gov and more accountabilty and engaging the nations

demos= taxes and isolation from the world

Same old stuff... where's change we need?

Bring on the Vice Prez nominees...

momb-- last line was the night

thank you

And it comes down to leadership... ho hum

david:

You are correct. The real show is going to be the Vice Presidential debate. While I thought McCain won tonight, I think he let some opportunities to really do damage to Obama pass him by. Obama's retort that he had a bracelet too was so lame and "me too" that it made him look feckless. I can't wait for Saracuda.

- not sure i believe McCain took it all the way I think it was strong but I didn't get sense the Jr. Senator of Illinois was thrashed... i agree McCains finest line was at the end of the night. The coverage was entertaining... CNN on the right FOX on the left... Frankly i am a little disappointed McCain didn't take the honorable Senator Obama to the woodshed regarding the hatchet comment...Quite honestly I think overall McCain's campaign has been very underwhelming

Meanwhile, Somali pirates happen to accost a Russian transport en route to somewhere not totally clear, with 33 Armored tanks as cargo. Chavez back to the Kremlin again for some more good stuff to be delivered at a later date. Ahmeni- me comes and goes as he please. And Pakistan kills their militants in the hinterlands.

How's my 401K? Yeh, let's make whoopee and kisskiss

GREAT AD.... I only wish John M would have hammered home the point and difference in his parties bail out plan.

Pointing out that Barack O Wall St plan is a TAX PAYER bail out, which as you have reported earlier is not at all popular with the general public.

And instead it should be a loan, thus forcing all the funds to be repayed from future profits along with new strong oversight regulations.

John B... LQQK forward to your Sunday Night Show, and once again I wish you were on more often. But, I do realize with a family, every night would be tough and very unfair to them... Boy, I miss the good old days!

I know, no one gets to really speak their mind, but, come on, are we not men? Bracelets are so nice to wear, but, cruise missiles tell the resolve to destroy them before they destroy US.

And the young ones who personify the policy, Don't Tread on Me, write messages to them that will receive the investment we make in security for US and our friends. They are our grandest patriots.

Ask them to take up the mantra, ask them to spoil the tyrants, but, above all, never ask them to venture into missions that you don't believe in wholeheartedly yourself.

America the Beautiful... be preserved.

'It is overwhelmingly odd to watch the junior senator from Illinois call the senior senator from Arizona, "John." '

Inappropriate, not just odd. If etiquette were observed any more, such faux collegiality would be deemed rudely, disrespectfully familiar, an attempt to create an impression of equality, something akin to John Riggins calling Justice O'Connor "Sandy baby."

It is a sad day when a graduate of the National War College does not know the definitions of "tactical" and "strategic." It is about the same as an honors law school grad not knowing the difference between "torts " and "contracts."

The bogie is still on his 6 and he has McCain in his sights. Can McCain shake him?

Asked Jodi Schneider the same question re Bush. We have no reason to believe it is other than accident of history. And the Barney Frank hysteria in the meeting yesterday is confirmed. Table-pounding, shouting, accusing. John Boehner swallowed the goldfish. John McCain at the last moment joins with the young toughs of his party, the future of the party. All of them with more savvy and cunning than the Obama-Biden team put together with the McCain-Palin team.

I am wealthy and have lost a lot of money this year having owned shares of FNM, C, AIG and MER. I will certainly lose more if a solution is not produced. Unfortunately, it will be worth every dollar I lose if the Barneys and Chrises who engineered this debacle, and the party they represent, are fully exposed. Prudent and proper regulation and oversight is required for capitalism to work, and the Democrat party has been neither prudent or proper with regulations or oversight. I urge the house Republicans to stand fast against a "bailout", and I also suggest they use their new found "minority" power to expose the real culprits, once and for all. The administration is responsible for attempting to solve the problem, and the Democrat party knows it. So they can get away with disparaging the administration, and Republicans, at the same time they claim to be working with them to find a solution. Politics is a blood sport, and it is time for the Democrat party to bleed too. They don't need the House Repubs to pass a bailout; they need a "bipartisan" solution so they can not be held solely responsible for the results. The Repubs need to get a good deal for us, force the socialists to go it alone, or face the consequences of doing nothing. A no deal situation is potentially painful, but now and then capitalism is painful, when it is not properly managed.

ric

ric- you are a patriot... thank you for being strong! Have fun watching the debate!!!

I look for them to take some action, but, there is no need for a speedily produced one hit wonder with a clause that stipulates that the decision of the author judge is final and can't be disputed. Want to see the Wizard? "Not no way, not no how"

"If I were King of the Forrressst" Tralalalalalalala

"Go Away!!!"

Yes, that part of the deal has a strange shopmark on it and is sort of eerie to look at. Who crafted this?

I am not wealthy, and as a 62 year-old lecturer at a university in Southeast Asia, never will be.

It pains me to repeatedly witness so many people caught in a "capitalism vs. socialism" mind trap.

There is a perspective from outside that box. Our first Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton termed it the American System of political economy.

That system is what allowed us to pay off the debt from the Revolutionary War and grow. That system, under the Lincoln administration gave us the first continental nation impervious to military takeover by a foreign power.

That system was being exported in the late 19th century, as intended by the founders of the United States, to Japan, Russia, China and elsewhere.

That system was (correctly) perceived as a threat to the hegemony of the British system which had ruled most of the world.

Had the British system not been overtaken by the establishment of the Constitution and Hamilton's Bank of the United States, there would have been no American Republic, and thus no roadblock to the global British imperium.

Had President Lincoln not correctly perceived that the first priority was to preserve the union against the British imperium's efforts to divide us, the nation would not exist today.

It is still a battle between the usurious "free trade" doctrine and the proponents of the General Welfare. And proponents of the General Welfare need not be "socialists" nor need proponents of entrepreneurialism be "capitalists."

John,

Is the Obama hysteria of last night confirmed yet?

The bailout and the ban have been both lost by Pelosi and Reid.

Rule of thumb, don't play poker with Bill Clinton, James Baker, John Boehner or Roy Blunt.

Hi, John:

With the insanity of what our Congress is considering in Washington, I can't think of a more appropriate time to remind Congress, remind the President, remind staffers, remind the voters, and remind the press of comments made by Davy Crockett. Were it possible, I'd love for you to introduce your show this Sunday with the reading of these remarks.

http://patriotpost.us/histdocs/crockett_not_yours_to_give.asp

Excerpts from the good Congressman's remarks are provided below.

One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:

"Mr. Speaker --- I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this house, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him."

Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and, if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."

He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt it would but for that speech, it received but few votes and of course, was lost.

Later when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett gave this explanation:

"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.

The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what might turn up. When riding one day in part of my district in which I was more of a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the road. I gauged my gait so that I should meet as he came to the fence. As he came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but as I thought, rather coldly.

I began, 'Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates, and-'

'Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett, I have seen you once before and voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out electioneering right now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not vote for you again.'

This was a sockdolager, I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

'Well, Colonel, it is hardly worth while to waste time or words upon it. I do not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you.

I intend by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should not have said that I believe you to be honest. But an understanding of the Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook because the Constitution, to be worth anything, must be held sacred and rigidly observed in all its provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it, is the more dangerous the more honest he is.'

'I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any constitutional questions.'

'No, Colonel, there is no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings in Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?'

'Well, my friend, I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant amount of $20,000 to relive its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.'

'It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of, it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be intrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be and the poorer he is, the more he pays in proportion to his means.

What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000.

If you had the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all and as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity.

Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this country as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought to appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life.

The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports to be true, some of them spend not very credibly; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation and a violation of the Constitution.

So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger for the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned and you see that I cannot vote for you.'

'I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man should go talking, he would set others to talking and in that district I was a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him and the fact is, I was so fully convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him and I said to him:

Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I had not sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by it and thought I had studied it fully. I have head many speeches in Congress about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire before I would have given that vote; and if you will forgive me and vote for me again, if I ever vote for another unconstitutional law, I wish I may be shot.'

He haughtingly replied: 'Yes, Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating you for it. If, as you go around the district, you will tell people about this vote and that you are satisfied it was wrong, I will not only vote for you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and perhaps, I may exert some little influence in that way.'

'If I don't, I said, I wish I may be shot, and to convince you that I am in earnest in what I say, I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a barbeque and I will pay for it.'

No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of provisions to contribute for a barbeque and some to spare for those who have none. The push of crops will be over in a few days and we can afford a day for a barbeque. This is Thursday. I will see to getting up on Saturday week. Come to my house on Friday and we will go together and I promise you a very respectable crowd to see and hear you.'

'Well, I will be there. But one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know your name.'

'My name is Bunce.'

'Not Horatio Bunce?'

'Yes.'

'Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before though you say you have seen me, but I know you very well. I am glad I have met you and very proud that I may hope to have you for my friend.'

It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and incorruptible integrity and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have had opposition, and have been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now stand up in that district under such a vote.

At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen manifested before. Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house, and under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept up until midnight talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before.

I have known and seen much of him since, for I respect him - no, that is not the world - I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two or three times every year; and I will tell you, sir, if every one who professes to be a Christian lived and acted and enjoyed as he does, the religion of Christ would take the world by storm.

But, to return to my story. The next morning I went to the barbeque and to my surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty well acquainted - at least, they all knew me. In due time notice was given that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been erected. I opened by speech by saying:

Fellow-citizens - I present myself before you today feeling like a new man. My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both, had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to see your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.

I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

And now, fellow citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that most of the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error. It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up here and tell you so. He came upon the stand and said:

'Fellow citizens, it affords me great pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will faithfully perform all that he has promised to you today.'

He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett as his name never called forth before. I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they produced, is worth more to me than all the reputation I have ever made, or ever shall make, as a member of Congress."

"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday."

Gary- I too live (part-time) in South East Asia. I agree with your assessment of American history. What many people here (in the US) don't yet quite understand (though they may have a sense of it) and the people in the rest of the world don't have a clue about, is that we (here in the US) are engaged in a great culture war. We stand divided. On one hand you have the ones who have caused this latest (economic) debacle (I think, knowingly) and on the other, you have the patriots who have refused ton fall for the ploy. The hysterical threats of doomsday are simply rhetorical points by the other side in order to force their agenda (which happens to be the religion of socialism). These same people have been undermining the institutions of this great nation since the late 60's, early seventies. It's taken a long time, but the people along our proverbial main streets seem to be waking up to it. And they're siding with the patriots.

i must take a moment here thank all you including our gracious host Mr.Batchelor. you can not imagine the vast wealth knowledge you have provided in the past few weeks... i am so very thankful.

Now, i do not hail my self as a staunch supporter of either party I lean to more conservative ideals but frankly i have tired of the same old rhetoric and red meat soundbites I would like to harken back to a time where true leaders took less notice of aisles and lines but looked for what was the correct direction to go and to hell w/ those who will feel slighted by the failure to achieve a consensus.

If this doesn't frame it, nothing will: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o

Very interesting video. I went to a seminar covering the housing crisis a couple of months ago and the mechanics of how loans are packaged and securitized was discussed in detail. I spoke with one of the presenters afterwards as things were breaking up and asked him if litigation against banks by 'unqualified' lenders (and groups representing them) was exacerbating this problem and he said most definitely. vsk

Here's how I see the bailout as it stands: A man walks into the Emergency Room of a hospital with a gunshot wound. The doctor takes a look, hands him a gun and says, "Finish the job."

Peter - Who are the patriots you refer to? Please give me some names of their leaders. What do they propose we do to get out of this mess? I can only guess as to what group you might be referring to, I don't know names, and I'm even farther from seeing a proposed solution. A little help here, please.

some of the items that have been bandied about: having the treasury purchasing only the worst of the debt at .20 on the $1. and having the banks retain the higher grade loans. the treasury will hten retain ownership until the value of the property has risen above purchase price... all monies stay in the treasury to pay down the debt. another option play would be the insured loans securities aspect where the government would set up shop to and sell off debt at a higher rate but guarantee liquidity. now this far above my pay grade BUT i know one thing... the government is not a banking system and has a bad pattern of seeing monies disappear into the aether of DC... there must a resolution to the mess it is and i don't believe any plan is going to be the magic bullet... some economists are saying just stabilizing the market will help to keep the credit flow on the roll... larry kudlow had a decent show this morning regarding more defining points but again it mentioned the treasury putting the monies into a trust & that is something i have less than zero faith in

Gary, I like you. But you don't understand what's happening here. Read today's entries on the John Batchelor Show web site. There are no leaders here. The battle against victimhood is fought within each individual heart. It's a revolution from the ground up. It says, "We refuse to buckle under and onslaught of thug and media pressure; we refuse to fall victim to the greedy, the powerful; the corrupt; the empty political suits who have forgotten their calling." It is the weakest link in any system that comes closest to the essence of religion. Ironically, no matter how hard socialists try to stamp it out, it appears in the form of a new avatar. This one is called liberty. The Democrats (and, yes, Senate country club Republicans) now want House Republicans to endorse their folly. (Keep in mind that they do not need Republican support to pass the bail-out.) These are holding firm and will not support it. They have heard from the folks back home (500 to 1 against the bailout) who say, "Enough is enough! No taxation without representation."

Hi Peter, I think I understand what's happening in the US and the world from much the same perspective you explain (for which I thank you -- replying). But I'm new here at this "place" and haven't read anything by you before (as far as I know). I hope I will not offend our host or others by offering a link to my blatherings elsewhere (I don't like the place, I use it fairly rarely in hope of influencing some minds. My handle there is "We hold these Truths.") Please be assured I am not trying to promote myself or the web site below.

http://www.dailykos.com/user/We%20hold%20these%20truths

I shall now go read John Batchelor's 28th... I've been coming back, but when I did, hadn't seen any thing new posted yet. I hope we will talk again. Thanks for your reply.

Obama wasn't asking Franklin Raines how to fix this? It's the fault of speculators and regulators! It is Bush's fault for not being more careful to oversee Clinton's "risky schemes"

I've got to say as an observer, that this room full of patriots looked rather edgy. I know they give the news people some select time to get some shots, but man, these peeps better watch their backs... there is some real trouble here.

Can't help but think that Mr Ob looked/ was fairly uncomfortable. And the McCagey glare (must be a Navy Aviator thing) down the length of the table didn't seem exactly like he was looking at the President, but, maybe his real target, sitting a few chairs down. There for a second, I thought... Mr M sure may be somewhat offended by some of the things that have been going on the past few weeks.

And while on this... do you think Mr Ob feels at ease around all these fellows? I wondered this when he kind of indicated that he was hesitant at changing his plans after learning that his plans had already been changed for him on 9/24 while he was running his campaign.

At any rate, one has to be amazed.

Great work, Mr Batchelor

Thank you!!

Sweet irony: The spectacle of Bush pushing the junk wagon with the Democrats. It puts one in mind of the concept of "good cop/bad cop" to explain what's been happening in Washington for the past eight years and bolsters the belief that there's not a dime's worth of difference between the parties. At last, the ploy has been brilliantly exposed. Only the House Republican patriots stand in the way of their grand scheme to socialize the economy. Will the line hold?

- while i certainly appreciate the irony of the whole situation & whole heartily agree in principle to refuse to bailout the wall-street crowd. the crushing truth as i have come to understand it is w/out something in place almost immediately will crush our economy ( picture renegade asteroid hurling it's way past the moon on direct collision course the world) Crisis management dictates... sovle the problem and then deal the blame and punishment...

If we don't fix this as rapidly as the DC gang can... credit will be gone... for home loans, college loans personal & business... it would be funny/ strange to examine how trickle down economics works when the economy is collapsing Mr. Batchelor... have you listened to mayor Bloombergs explanation and opinion It really does make sound sense.

Steady, steady, hold, hold, waIT, WAIT... NOW we go!

Sure don't want another slapped together Serpent of a Bill to slither from the Well and out to the Street to wander freely. Once on the loose, they seem to want to move free and unfettered, coming and going wherever they please.

Steady, be careful how you contend with the Well.

Years of attorneys micromanaging our economy and here we are, between a rock and a hard place. Is it reasonable to believe that the people that broke it can now fix it? Welcome to the U.S.S.A.

Yeh, ain't it grrreat!!!

Amazing what difference a little communication makes.

The phone call from BamBam to the McCagey camp about an idea for a joint statement; the subsequent return call, hmm several hours later saying, "Sure, let's do that... Ok, seeeeyaaaa later!"; the call to the leaders to say "I'm available" and the silence at the other end; the call from the Prez, more or less saying,"Get your "self" up here muey pronto"; the light discussions of indicating there may be a communication breakdown; well, you get the point...

It all started with a phone call. Better think before you, ummm, Ring some Bell (9dingalinglinglingling) and start something that can't be controlled.l

I have just one question: in the 'no deal' scenario, how do Republicans avoid blame for the problem in the first place. It does little good for a small cadre of well-informed people who listen to John Batchelor's show to know the facts, when the MSM affords their team, the Democrats, ample time and column space to bury Republicans, and their strategy is working according to polls which show the public blames Republicans by an overwhelming majority. How likely is it that the public will suddenly credit Republicans for tanking the deal? Considering the imbalance in communications assets between the two parties, I think the likelihood is between slim and none.

DEBATE ON. Many maneuvers today. McCain has the young House GOP on his team now, and they oppose the Paulson bailout. Oppose. If Pelosi wants this deal, she can pass it. The GOP stands on this line. No Paulson deal, no rescue for plutocrats. McCain will hammer Obama on this. Obama is with Pelosi and Paulson?? The world turned upsie down still. And the louder Barney and Harry scream, the better. November 4 is not the end of the GOP. The GOP fights on. The Paulson deal is socialism for the super rich. Paulson is a plutocrat diva. Negative to it.

Well said, p.brown.

It may prove to be a fleeting feel-good moment to win this battle against Paulson and crew because there will be nowhere to hide when the banks start failing en masse.

If we don't fix this as rapidly as the DC gang can... credit will be gone... for home loans, college loans personal & business... ...I'm a regular "Joe", have seen my ups'n'downs financially these past years . I've disciplined myself financially using tried and true behavior passed onto me from dear old Dad. Bless his soul. Perhaps we need to reset our entire financial outlook,I mean, how many years have we ignored the trade deficit, warnings about NAFTA and the like. It's time to "bite the bullet" and "do the right thing"...a tenet exemplified many times by McCain, (and my old man..a WWII air corps veteran) "The road less traveled?"...Go for it boys!

Hmm... I'm not hearing/ seeing anything about there NOT being a comprehensive package moving forward.

Have you heard this CRB or pb brown?

John,

Rush Limbaugh is reporting that Obama was brought in by Paulson to save the day and that he came to the meeting uninformed. There was no deal and he blasted the House GOP position as he was made the representative for the Democrats, and then a hockey game broke out. Reid is lying about McCain, it was Obama's incompetence that broke things up. He forgot his teleprompter. I knew something smelled funny about this,

OK, FastForward to a 'no Bailout' next few months. Assume the worst - a bunch of big and medium sized bank failures. What happens - a few big banks being a quasi-regulated quasi-monopoly or a the network of small strong-balance-sheet-banks that didn't get too involved in the mortgage snake oil? What happens to the thousands out fo work, ... I mean the country doesn't seem to make anything any more.

FastForward to a 'yes Bailout' next few months. Me and my mba are still confused about the results- do things stabilize and we all learn a good lesson and go forward and the government hangs out a bunch of "For Sale by US Govt" signs and life improves for all or in a few more months ... as Roy Scheider would have put it -> "You're gonna need a bigger bailout" cue the Jaws music.

vsk

All: in war, the first three reports are wrong. Whatever you read in the pool reports or on the cable sites is spin. The Dems are using the TV to get out their folly. If they want the deal, pass it. Why do the Dems need the minority in the House for a deal? Obama is way way way outside. McCain knows exactly where the deal is. And Paulson will sign on with what the House GOP says. House is not collapsing. No. Why? The House GOP knows its votes are not needed to pass anything. The House GOP will not sign on to the Paulson deal and get killed Nov 4 by its own voters. No deal tonight. McCain has in his power to go populist tonight and defend principles and Main Street and conservatism. Obama stands with the House Majority and the plutocrats on his team, Summers, Rubin, Volcker and Buffet. Role reversal. Did Bush set this up? Did Paulson play along? Will not know until we see how McCain plays it. But for those with doubts about McCain and the economy, he has all the facts tonight, all the anecdotes, and the power in the House is with him if he wants to use it. McCain will not sign on to the Bush/Paulson deal. Let Obama attack his own support. "Senator Obama, you were against the deal before you were for it before you were against it... and now you don't know what the deal is that you are for and against..." How many votes out there for a blank check for Hank Paulson's ex-partners. Are they going to put up their multiple houses and their retirement funds as collateral? After Nov 4, the GOP goes on a stronger party. On principle. No deals for plutocrats and their scheming pals. Don't tread on me.

JB - for those of you who were watching Fox News right after the Harry and Chris Show, 'Campaign Carl' Cameron said ON CAMERA that the statement by Reid that there was a deal yesterday before McCain arrived is FALSE. Cameron inasmuch called Reid a liar. It is true that the Dems have more of the media pulpit than the GOP - but now, as you JB have written, the GOP needs to make its case that IT is looking out for the MAIN STREET 'little guy' in this bailout. THAT is the message that needs to get out now.

NO deal is the best deal. JPMorgan aquires WaMu, cost to tax payers $0.00 allowing the incompentent to fail and having the compentnet aquire them will resolve the current crisis quicker, and preserve the capitalist system.

NO deal is the best deal. JPMorgan aquires WaMu, cost to tax payers $0.00 allowing the incompentent to fail and having the compentnet aquire them will resolve the current crisis quicker, and preserve the capitalist system.

Charles, you stole my thunder. It bears mentioning AGAIN that as soon as Obama opened his mouth at the White House meeting yesterday, it dissolved into chaos. Hmmm...

Look! It's not a matter of "deal or no deal". What matters here is "what kind of deal". For too long Washington Democrats have set the agenda and made the rules (often with the traitorous help of Republicans like McCain). And look what's happened! Isn't it reasonable to expect Republican conservatives to have some input with regard to any solution? Let's try a new way! Covering for Obama's mistakes and telling McCain to get out of town, Mr. Schumer, just doesn't cut it anymore.

Limbaugh is also reporting, and playing the sound bytes, of Reid, and almost every other Dem blaming McCain for no results last night,saying that is was " his fault". Schumer is actually telling McCain to leave Washington, meanwhile other sources as well as Limbaugh are saying the deal/meeting at The White House was put into Obamas hands, he was uninformed and he could not lead, and it all fell apart there. Though we get the " alternative universe" story from Reid, Schumer, and Pelosi. What I would like to know, is .... ~ Where are the Republicans who should come out today and defend McCain, against the Democrats , who are obviously trying to push this as an Election issue in favor of Obama, this has bothered me about the Republican Party for the last FOUR years!~ Reid and Pelosi?......send them to Hades! Will some Republican please stand up now ! and set the record straight to defend Mccain against these election motivated usual suspect liars!

blair, we don't know what the cost to taxpayers is because the deal to sell WaMu assets to JP Morgan has yet to be finalized and approved. All that has happened is the FDIC seizure.

All - Brit Hume on Fox saying again THERE WAS NO DEAL YESTERDAY before McCain came - but that there may have been an attempt by Dems to SAY at 1pm that there was one to head off any likelihood by the McCain camp that his appearance was helpful in bringing the deal to closure.

OK, I get it, the bailout is bad. Democrats want to continue the plan that led us to this point. Some kind of Marshall Plan for America, "every one gets a house, and you don't really have to pay for it!" Larry Kudlow and his professionals pointed out that the cause of this was the "Community Reinvestment Act" back in 1995, for some reason Jerry Bowyer sticks out in my head as the one who really drove it home back in March or April. We know the Democrats prevented any kind of reform back in 2003 and 2005, but as Humphrey Bogart said in "The Big Sleep", "We're passed that".

Now the real question is what do the House Republicans plan to do? If the Pualson Plan is really the wreck that it is where do we go form here? If the House Republicans think they have a better idea I sure love to hear. Does anyone have any ideas for that matter?

It was quite disgusting yesterday to hear Buddy Hackett, I mean Barney Frank garble out his tirade against McCain. We can see through this but the people who are relying on sound bites from a slanted media get the wrong idea... consistently.

I hope there is a good debate tonight.

vsk

No surprises from the Demo ns on this... they are proficient subliminalists Stygian stuff shirts and skirts.

Get out of town Schumer, freaking liars speaking bunk... and they get paid for it really well??

To Peter Koelliker:

More like Monty Python's Holy Grail with the dead wagon. "Bring out your dead...I'm not dead yet...he will be soon".

Unfortunately, Sarah Palin imploded in a soft-ball interview with Katie Couric, with even Kathleen Parker echoing Gary Wills's prescient call for Palin to drop out made the day after her acceptance.

Meanwhile, the deal ain't done but McCain declares that it is alright to resume the campaign and do the debate, which Obama had said was the proper course of action to begin with.

Sen. McCain still has a bogie on his 6 and is showing no sign of shaking him.

House Republicans are missing the point that if there were a private sector approach, it would have been the first option. They could do a great service by getting this story out and allowing the rest of us to see our exposure.

This election is still close, but the matrix is hardening.

Thanks John, again for insight. You are right again, the first reports are always the wrong reports. I knew sonething was wrong when the co-conspirators of this mess, Dodd, Frank, and Reid were fighting over camera time.

Now the Obama camp is taunting McCain the he needs that he is desparare for a debate win. Arrogance?

John M-- McCain was right in coming to DC to bolster the down trodden who were getting kicked in the teeth by the Demo ns leadership and minions. Now that they are stabilized by him showing the confidence he has in their judgment, he's journeying to the other debate that really is secondary to the main one going on in DC, believe it or not... Leadership or stunt? WSY?

BamBam was wrong for trying to sit on the sidelines with his "helmet" in his hand and offing off. Then, as the "leader" of his Party, choosing to just make stale BamBam speak suggesting how much he was put out by answering the call to come to DC while he was running his campaign. For some reason, they aren't saying, but, it doesn't seem that the leaders or himself felt that he should be there during the Biggest Crisis Since the Great Depression. Leadership or stumped? WSY?

Which man TRULY accomplished something for their Party? WSY?

OK, I get it, the bailout is bad. Democrats want to continue the plan that led us to this point. Some kind of Marshall Plan for America, "every one gets a house, and you don't really have to pay for it!" Larry Kudlow and his professionals pointed out that the cause of this was the "Community Reinvestment Act" back in 1995, for some reason Jerry Bowyer sticks out in my head as the one who really drove it home back in March or April. We know the Democrats prevented any kind of reform back in 2003 and 2005, but as Humphrey Bogart said in "The Big Sleep", "We're passed that".

Now the real question is what do the House Republicans plan to do? If the Pualson Plan is really the wreck that it is where do we go form here? If the House Republicans think they have a better idea I sure love to hear. Does anyone have any ideas for that matter?