Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pompsander who wrote (768149)	9/24/2008 4:06:13 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 769670

Bush Bailout Plan drawn-up Months ago: White House Dispatches Team to Push Economic Bill September 23, 2008, 10:42 a.m. By Keith Koffler Roll Call Staff rollcall.com The White House today is drumming up extraordinary pressure on Congress to approve its plan to enact a $700 billion mortgage bailout fund, suggesting the markets cannot wait much longer and dispatching Vice President Cheney and other top officials up Pennsylvania Avenue to jawbone lawmakers. Cheney, White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and presidential adviser Ed Gillespie are meeting this morning with House Republican conservatives, where a rebellion is brewing against the size and questionable free market credentials of the administration proposal. Cheney will later gather with GOP Senators at the regular Tuesday lunch. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who collaborated in drawing up the proposal, are testifying this morning on Capitol Hill in an effort to defend their handiwork. But Bush himself continues to do little to explain his plan, and he has refused to be questioned about it. Asked during a telephone briefing for reporters today whether Bush was speaking with lawmakers, White House Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto said the president is aware of their concerns but that Paulson is the salesman. Paulson said Congress and the administration must move rapidly. “We must do so in order to avoid a continuing series of financial institution failures and frozen credit markets that threaten American families' financial well-being, the viability of businesses both small and large, and the very health of our economy,” Paulson said in remarks as prepared for delivery. “The market turmoil we are experiencing today poses great risk to U.S. taxpayers.” Fratto said it would be “unthinkable” for Congress not to pass legislation this week, asserting the result would be a “very, very serious situation” for the U.S. economy. “It shouldn’t take much analysis to remember what happened last week, which was a very serious freeze-up in our credit markets,” Fratto said. “Our financial markets right now do not need uncertainty, they need increased certainty as to how this rescue plan is going to go forward — and that they can be sure that there is a plan to go forward — and that will begin the correction in our financial markets.” Fratto insisted that the plan was not slapped together and had been drawn up as a contingency over previous months and weeks by administration officials. He acknowledged lawmakers were getting only days to peruse it, but he said this should be enough. Amid growing criticism of the initiative from multiple quarters, Fratto sought to defend its key principles and argue against changes. He argued that the proposal is being unfairly characterized as a boon to Wall Street at the expense of Main Street, since credit market difficulties also squeeze average consumers. He minimized the need to help homeowners as part of the package — a key demand of Democrats — saying aiding the credit markets will help on its own and noting that Congress just approved a housing bill that includes assistance. And Fratto sought to beat back efforts to limit the pay of CEOs whose companies would draw assistance under the legislation, saying it would make it difficult for the plan to work “If you provide disincentives for companies and firms out there that are holding mortgage-backed securities and other securities from participating in the program.” Fratto noted that some firms holding troubled securities are otherwise successful. “They were not necessarily irresponsible players, and so you have to be careful how you deal with them,” he said. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved.

To: pompsander who wrote (768149)	9/24/2008 4:07:27 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 769670

Americans Don't Favor the Bush Bailout by Jonathan Singer, Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 02:40:18 PM EST mydd.com The numbers are not good for the Bush bailout plan: The more voters learn about the proposed $700 billion federal bailout plan for the U.S. economy, the more they don't like it, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey taken Monday night. Now 44% oppose the taxpayer-backed plan, up seven points from 37% yesterday. Twenty-five percent (25%) support it now, versus 28% in the earlier poll. Thirty-five percent (35%) were undecided before; now 31% are (demographic crosstabs available for Premium Members). While 35% think the bailout plan will help the economy, nearly as many (30%) say it will hurt, and 13% believe it will have no impact at all. But, despite their concerns, 74% of voters also believe it is at least somewhat likely to be approved by Congress this week. The way this bailout has been discussed in the establishment media, it would seem as though the Bush plan enjoyed the overwhelming support of the American people, that voters strongly endorsed the idea of throwing $700 billion to the financial sector, whose policies and actions were in many ways a leading cause of the current economic downturn. Yet this is clearly not the case. A scant quarter of likely voters favor the Bush bailout, with a plurality opposing the plan. While there may be a political price to be paid if nothing is passed, it's not clear to me that there is much of a political price to be paid if this pan is not passed. There are other options out there that Congress needs to pay heed to. One is to take time, and use an abundance of caution. The Bush administration has not made a compelling argument that a plan must be jammed through Congress and signed into law immediately. Another is to try the plan in chunks. Chuck Schumer today noted that the Treasury plan would spend about $50 billion per month for buybacks of bad debt, so why couldn't $150 billion -- a huge amount of money still, but not one that would lead to the greatest deficit in several decades -- be allocated for a trial of program, with Congress coming back in January to consider expanding the expenditures? I'm sure there are other choices as well, and though I am not sufficiently schooled in economics to gauge the efficacy of such plans, what I do know is that on a political level there is a real willingness within the public to consider plans in addition to the one put forward by the Bush administration -- and it would be in the interest of Democrats, as well as (and more importantly) the country as a whole, for Congress to consider all of its options. Update [2008-9-23 15:24:11 by Jonathan Singer]: Reuters -- "Resentment grows over Wall Street bailout plan"

To: pompsander who wrote (768149)	9/25/2008 12:19:35 AM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

typical leftist BBBBBBBBBS. You did not address the post at all. BDS has eaten you up. take a break, lefty.

To: pompsander who wrote (768149)	9/25/2008 12:40:09 AM
From: PROLIFE	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Barney Frank and the Law of Unintended Consequences - Again Chuckmorse.com ^ \| 09/24/2008 \| Chuck Morse Posted on Wednesday, September 24, 2008 10:21:00 PM by Chuckmorse During the course of my campaign for Congress against Rep. Barney Frank in 2004, I learned that the liberal icon had authored a law that struck down the exclusion clause to the immigration act. According to Clinton Administration director of the CIA James Woolsey, this law "had made it illegal to deny visas to members of terrorist groups." Frank had thrown open the floodgates to anti-American Islamic extremists who proceeded to recruit terrorists, raise funds for foreign terrorist organizations, and eventually blow up the twin towers on 9/11. I asked Frank why he created this law, one of the stupidest in modern American history, during one of our debates and he replied that he wanted to help Gabriel Garcia Marquez, the left-wing Columbian author of "Memories of my Melancholy Whores" come to the US to tour American Colleges. Well it looks like Frank has done it again. Apparently President Bush, along with reformers in Congress, had repeatedly tried to reign in the taxpayer subsidized mortgages that were being handed out by Fannie May and Freddie Mack, mortgages that were handed over to people who would not otherwise qualify. Frank worked to keep the mortgages flowing and stopped any attempt to interfere while pressuring banks to lower their standards regarding who would qualify for a mortgage. In 2002, Frank told the Wall Street Journal " I do not regard Fannie May and Freddie Mack as problems." Frank expressed no concern over whether the recipients might default, whether the subsidies were artificially inflating property values, or whether his actions was placing the entire economy at risk. Frank viewed the mortgages as a back door to welfare. Now Frank wants the taxpayers to bail out the mortgage mess that he and his liberal cohorts created to the tune of 75 billion and he wants the mortgages to keep flowing along with more taxpayer funded welfare guarantees. With a long legislative record of coming up with ways to attach welfare benefits to existing structures such as social security, healthcare, and housing, Frank has weakened the economy and by doing so has not actually helped those he intended to help. Frank turned the tables by criticizing the Bush Administration support of the Patriot Act which was sadly needed due to the destructive consequences of the Frank amendment. Now, Frank is turning the tables on Republicans again by criticizing the banks for giving the mortgages that he had coerced them to give in the first place. The rest of us are left picking up the pieces after the incineration of the twin towers, the loss of freedom, and the weakening of the value of the workingman's dollar. What public policy area will Frank dabble in next?