Re: Election 2008

As much as I'm supporting (and voting) for John McCain, this idea on the debate delay is not a good decision (IMO). This race is one of the most followed ever in our history (especially overseas). The candidates should be willing to stick to scheduled commitments - and viewers want to know their views/policy leanings, willingness to answer specific questions, and frankly how well they look in a public 'competition' (so to speak).

Experts saying that McCain is 'rolling the dice' again with a 'hail Mary' type play in wanting to suspend his campaign immediately and attend the Washington hearings on the 'bail-out' plan. I think he can still do this, and also get the debate done THIS WEEKEND (whether it's on Friday, Saturday, or Sunday night) - surely he can get with Obama's staff and arrange this.

To me, it doesn't look good for my candidate, when Obama has been looking 'presidential' lately, getting much air time LIVE in speaking about the economy (his strongest issue, by the way), and answering questions from reporters. McCain needs to get on TV more and do the same.

By the way, my local Houston Chronicle has an incredible, revealing article (below) about what's actually going on in Washington right now, and the poitical power plays that Wall Street is hoping to achieve by getting Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke to convince Congress to pass the current, shortly-worded, bailout-out plan. I have reproduced it below, and bolded or underlined important parts to read. This "fast-acting" plan doesn't pass the smell test. I hoping that Dems Schumer and Dodd (who are long qualified in serving on the banking and finance committees) will provide leadership here, and with bipartisan Republican support as well.

This is so totally worth reading...

~ WHY THE BAILOUT IS A STRIKEOUT ~

The Treasury Department's sweeping bailout effort is feeling like a $700 billion shakedown.

Congressional testimony continued this week, with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson urging rapid approval for their plan to buy up bad debt from financial firms and restore stability to the market.

Paulson's hurry-up offense isn't playing well with members of Congress, and it isn't faring any better with folks like Ed Schipul, who runs a Web design company in Houston. Schipul, who's raised a family, paid bills on time and made monthly mortgage payments for about 15 years, said he's outraged that his tax dollars will go to bail out the irresponsible lending on Wall Street.

"They're proposing that we pay for someone else's mistake, and at the same time they're not holding those people accountable," he said, reflecting an anger many Americans are feeling toward the bailout.

Fairness, though, was an early victim of this crisis. Taxpayers will get stuck with the bill because the cost of doing nothing outweighs the need for punishment.

"I believe if the credit markets are not functioning, that jobs will be lost, the unemployment rate will rise, more houses will be foreclosed upon, GDP will contract, that the economy will just not be able to recover," Bernanke told the Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday. "My interest is solely for the strength and recovery of the U.S. economy."

Too-powerful Paulson?
The Beltway Bailout Brigade says we have to move quickly because the markets won't wait. But as I noted on Sunday, several poor policy decisions helped get us into this mess, and before we make any more, we need to take a hard look at what Paulson and his posse are planning.

For starters, the proposal — which runs about 850 words — is short on specifics about what we'll be buying or how much we'll pay. Instead, it gives Paulson unlimited power to decide all that later:

"Decisions by the secretary pursuant to the authority of this act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

If approved as stated, Paulson would preside over the biggest federal spending binge in history like some financial demigod, unanswerable and unassailable.

All hail King Henry.

"That's absolutely unacceptable," Schipul said. "I didn't elect Henry Paulson."

Changing the rules...
Paulson's power grab, already under fire in Congress, probably won't survive. Lawmakers also hope to add some relief for homeowners, such as returning bankruptcy provisions for homeowners that were eliminated in the "reform" bill passed a few years ago at the behest of the credit industry.

But this bailout has to be about more than money, more than just sopping up the swill that is choking the financial sector. It has to be about changing the rules. This crisis grew to such large proportions because of the financial instruments that allowed risk from mortgages and other debt to be borne by one party, while giving the rewards to another.

That undermines the basic risk-reward principle of capitalism. Yet the Paulson Plan does the same thing, shifting the risk to U.S. taxpayers while rewarding the perpetrators on Wall Street.

In other words, we are rushing toward a system in which Wall Street, or what's left of it, has no accountability, where it could foist hundreds of billions of dollars of bad decisions on us, then go merrily on its way.

Need for transparency...
For years, we've heard the cry from Paulson and his cronies that regulation kills competition and ultimately growth. Yet the absence of regulation did little more than give Wall Street a long rope with which it now strangles our economy.

No one knows if $700 billion will be enough to restore stability to the markets, but we can't put this crisis behind us until we adopt the checks and balances that allow the market to move forward with confidence.

In exchange for our "investment," as Paulson described it on Capitol Hill, we deserve accountability and transparency. The lack of those two elements were major contributors to the current crisis.

If the big banks want our help, we should demand stricter oversight, particularly of the unregulated derivatives markets. Our cash should come with a bright light. Otherwise, we'll just have more of the same: hundreds of billions of dollars passed in darkness.

That's not a bailout, and it's not an investment. It's a gift.
__________________
Loren Steffy is the Chronicle's business columnist. His commentary appears Sundays, Wednesdays and Fridays. Contact him at loren.steffy @ chron.com. His blog is at http://blogs.chron.com/lorensteffy/

I think McCain is doing the right thing by minding the store. A temp hold on debates is in order. Both McCain and Obama shold be in Washington for this crisis.

IMPORTANT NEWS FLASH: WE NEED BUSH OUT OF THE WHITEHOUSE NOW!!!!

Well... I don't think you can blame all of the Wall Street mortgage mess on President Bush. Those bankers, investment houses/brokerages, unqualified homeowners, etc are equally DEMOCRAT and REPUBLICAN. Obviously more regulation was needed, since so much in the 'business marketplace' was abused for profits and gain by everyone involved.

-JOE- (Love Hendrix!)

on election day, we should all vote "present".

The BIBLE talks of this sort of thing...and it was also predicted by NOSTRODOMUS (or however you spell it) Yeah, the BIBLE says something about the final ANTICHRIST pulling the wool over our eyes and basicly "possessing" us into following in his footsteps. Well weve been following him now for EIGHT years...Maybe it IS over?

---

[Post edited by bladerunner1 on Sep 25, 2008 - CDT 2:21 PM]

Bush Jr. should have never made it to the White House.

I can't believe any rational person would want another Republican administration. How much more has to be lost before people see the writing on the wall? The country has been broken with their help and on their watch.

Hey Eddie or Joe, got any $1 bills that I can use, toilet paper is too expensive.

Blade... if you knew what the Bible says about the Anti-christ, you'd realize how foolish it would be to claim Bush as 'him'. The A-C will be no friend to Israel (unlike Bush, who's a major supporter of Israel), but will succeed in deceiving the world (and even Israel) for a time, but not the truly faithful who are living at that time. He will come on the scene around a worldwide crises, and provide the 'answers' to solve it... that doesn't sound like Bush now, does it?

But maybe Obama? Probably not, as most theologians/analysts think the A-C will arise either out of Europe or the Middle East. But no one knows 'when', whether in the coming years, decades, or hundreds of years from now.

-JOE- (Love Hendrix!)

Who's to say Israel won't come down as a byproduct of Bush's warped mind? Ahhh, how the devil loves "TRICKERY".

regardless joe..you have to admit that things arent looking good in the world these days. and if we crumble too, considering that we are the worlds policeman, well..then what?

EDIT:
"He will come on the scene around a worldwide crises, and provide the 'answers' to solve it... that doesn't sound like Bush now, does it?"

yeah..it does. 9/11? solution..war. this was his answer. reprocussions from that decision? yet to be determined on a "long term future scale". short term outlook? not good.

---

[Post edited by bladerunner1 on Sep 24, 2008 - CDT 11:26 PM]

blade said -

Quote:"if we crumble too, considering that we are the worlds policeman, well..then what?"

Well, as the song says... DON'T GIVE UP (sung by Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush - no relation to the Prez)

"Don't Give Up" is a duet recorded by Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush for Gabriel's album So. The single version spent eleven weeks in the UK Top 75 chart in 1986, peaking at number nine. It describes the despair of a man who feels that the economic system has no place for him, and the support and wise counsel sung in the refrain by Bush.

-JOE- (Love Hendrix!)