Congratulations, Corporate Crime Fighters! Coup Averted for Three Days! ...From Michael Moore
Friends,
Everyone said the bill would pass. The masters of the universe were already making celebratory dinner reservations at Manhattan's finest restaurants. Personal shoppers in Dallas and Atlanta were dispatched to do the early Christmas gifting. Mad Men of Chicago and Miami were popping corks and toasting each other long before the morning latte run.
But what they didn't know was that hundreds of thousands of Americans woke up yesterday morning and decided it was time for revolt. The politicians never saw it coming. Millions of phone calls and emails hit Congress so hard it was as if Marshall Dillon, Elliot Ness and Dog the Bounty Hunter had descended on D.C. to stop the looting and arrest the thieves.
The Corporate Crime of the Century was halted by a vote of 228 to 205. It was rare and historic; no one could remember a time when a bill supported by the president and the leadership of both parties went down in defeat. That just never happens.
A lot of people are wondering why the right wing of the Republican Party joined with the left wing of the Democratic Party in voting down the thievery. Forty percent of Democrats and two-thirds of Republicans voted against the bill.
Here's what happened:
The presidential race may still be close in the polls, but the Congressional races are pointing toward a landslide for the Democrats. Few dispute the prediction that the Republicans are in for a whoopin' on November 4th. Up to 30 Republican House seats could be lost in what would be a stunning repudiation of their agenda.
The Republican reps are so scared of losing their seats, when this "financial crisis" reared its head two weeks ago, they realized they had just been handed their one and only chance to separate themselves from Bush before the election, while doing something that would make them look like they were on the side of "the people."
Watching C-Span yesterday morning was one of the best comedy shows I'd seen in ages. There they were, one Republican after another who had backed the war and sunk the country into record debt, who had voted to kill every regulation that would have kept Wall Street in check -- there they were, now crying foul and standing up for the little guy! One after another, they stood at the microphone on the House floor and threw Bush under the bus, under the train (even though they had voted to kill off our nation's trains, too), heck, they would've thrown him under the rising waters of the Lower Ninth Ward if they could've conjured up another hurricane. You know how your dog acts when sprayed by a skunk? He howls and runs around trying to shake it off, rubbing and rolling himself on every piece of your carpet, trying to get rid of the stench. That's what it looked like on the Republican side of the aisle yesterday, and it was a sight to behold.
The 95 brave Dems who broke with Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were the real heroes, just like those few who stood up and voted against the war in October of 2002. Watch the remarks from yesterday of Reps. Marcy Kaptur, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Dennis Kucinich. They spoke the truth.
The Dems who voted for the giveaway did so mostly because they were scared by the threats of Wall Street, that if the rich didn't get their handout, the market would go nuts and then it's bye-bye stock-based pension and retirement funds.
And guess what? That's exactly what Wall Street did! The largest, single-day drop in the Dow in the history of the New York Stock exchange. The news anchors last night screamed it out: Americans just lost 1.2 trillion dollars in the stock market!! It's a financial Pearl Harbor! The sky is falling! Bird flu! Killer Bees!
Of course, sane people know that nobody "lost" anything yesterday, that stocks go up and down and this too shall pass because the rich will now buy low, hold, then sell off, then buy low again.
But for now, Wall Street and its propaganda arm (the networks and media it owns) will continue to try and scare the bejesus out of you. It will be harder to get a loan. Some people will lose their jobs. A weak nation of wimps won't last long under this torture. Or will we? Is this our line in the sand?
Here's my guess: The Democratic leadership in the House secretly hoped all along that this lousy bill would go down. With Bush's proposals shredded, the Dems knew they could then write their own bill that favors the average American, not the upper 10% who were hoping for another kegger of gold.
So the ball is in the Democrats' hands. The gun from Wall Street remains at their head. Before they make their next move, let me tell you what the media kept silent about while this bill was being debated:
1. The bailout bill had NO enforcement provisions for the so-called oversight group that was going to monitor Wall Street's spending of the $700 billion;
2. It had NO penalties, fines or imprisonment for any executive who might steal any of the people's money;
3. It did NOTHING to force banks and lenders to rewrite people's mortgages to avoid foreclosures -- this bill would not have stopped ONE foreclosure!;
4. It had NO teeth anywhere in the entire piece of legislation, using words like "suggested" when referring to the government being paid back for the bailout;
5. Over 200 economists wrote to Congress and said this bill might actually WORSEN the "financial crisis" and cause even MORE of a meltdown.
Put a fork in this slab of pork. It's over. Now it is time for our side to state very clearly the laws WE want passed. I will send you my proposals later today. We've bought ourselves less than 72 hours.
Yours,Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
96 Comments so far
Show AllIt was in this context that I asked the rhetorical question on exactly what Mr. Nader could do. (correction)
rosemarie jackowski October 1st, 2008 1:33 pm
"Nader has already changed things."
I agree with you 100% as to the above statement. I personally believe that there is no one in the (developed) world who has not benefited from the advocacy of Mr. Nader. My question was centered around the comprises required to win the White House. It was in this context that I asked the rhetorical question on exactly Mr. Nader could do.
Hey Michael,
How about an in-depth documentary about Warren Buffett, the world's richest man?
I'm sure it would be eye-opening about who pulls the RepubliKrats and DemiKrats strings...
Or is it against your orders?
peace and love
all is illusion...there is no government
OK,maybe I am wrong.
I think the political elite wants this bill very much. I think many of them don't know what else to do. It's like a guy dying from cancer who wants to try anything.
There is a chance the House will vote it down again if we overwhelm them with calls - like twice as many as before. Why not try if it worked once, it might work again.
The thing is convincing people that it won't really help and it might actually do harm. Also, convince them that there is still time for a rational, just response to the crisis, one that might actually help.
Kucinich rocks, I agree. But he is not taken very seriously by the masses or, for good reasons, the corporate press. Kucinich or Nader would stick it to the corporations.
Nevertheless, the BBC polls suggest that worldwide, 80% of the people want Obama to win. I doubt the world even knows who Nader or Kucinich are.
For America to elect someone that popular and a minority who (even if only slightly) favors worker's rights over corporate profits, this is a huge step forward for the country. Why can so few "progressives" see this?
Nader has already changed things. If you have a seat belt in your car, thank Nader. He has done many things that no one ever hears about - such as preventing a floating nuclear power plant from being built off the coast of Atlantic City. He predicted the current crisis and warned about it a long time ago.
Also - about limiting pay for CEOs. Just do the "Ben & Jerry's" plan. They had a policy of not paying any employee more than 6 times (I think) the pay of the lowest paid employee. It can be done. OR, just place a 100% tax on all income above 6 times the minimum wage. (I bet the minimum wage would increase to a 'livable wage' overnight. End poverty overnight.)
"The system is rigged so that there is almost no way for the little guy to win. Think about it. Nader could change things, but the system is rigged. They will not even allow him to debate. Think about it."(rosemarie jackowski October 1st, 2008 10:08 am)
I agree that the system is rigged but what I don't understand is how Mr. Nader could change things. (Like many of the commenters on this site I have a lot of respect for Mr. Nader)
"I will send you my proposals later today." (Michael Moore)
Thank the gods above that Michael will be guiding us throught this "crisis".
BEWARE BAILOUT RD 11, NEW SHADE OF LIPSTICK
By David Swanson
SNIP:
I want a bill immediately to ban predatory mortgage lending, ban states
from preventing cities from restricting predatory lending, and commit
the federal government to allowing states full freedom to restrict
predatory lending.
I want a bill establishing a maximum wage at 10 times the minimum wage,
and including all forms of income in that calculation (and raising the
minimum wage how ever much required to pass the bill). I want the tax
system created by that bill to pay for any necessary bailouts, and want
such bailouts enacted and overseen by Congress.
I also want a Tobin tax on all transactions in finance, insurance, and
real estate, including currency transactions.
I want Congress to haul fraudulent bankers into Washington and force
them to testify, fire them without compensation as part of any bailouts,
and refer them to the Justice Department for prosecution.
I want serious regulation of Wall Street.
I want a five-year moratorium on foreclosures, and a bailout of
homeowners equal to any bailout of bankers.
And, finally, I want $700 billion invested in green energy jobs
immediately, to be paid for by a tax on carbon emissions.
In fact, I would like to see all of these steps included in a single
bill called the "Honest Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008."
Somebody explain to me why that wouldn't be a good move for our economy
and a smart political step for those who propose it.
I cannot explain how your list of 'wants' would not help any candidate for office. Perhaps someone with a defective brain might.
It's a little too late for you to throw your hat in the presidential election ring. Too bad. You'd certainly get my vote....and I never figured myself to be a one issue person. Well, extreme times call for extreme measures.
I read somewhere that in ancient Greece, the philosophers agreed that the elites should never earn more than five times the working class, so as to avoid injustices.
That would put the top salary at 100,000 dollars per year. Can't exactly own your own jet or yaught with that kind of dough. But if a couple both earned 100k and maybe took on other odd jobs, they could bring in as much as 300k per year. And if they saved money for 10 years they could afford a small yaught.
Could you imagine how many "whiners" there would be in the GOP if this law were passed?
Great post.
Many good comments here...about who has marched in a Protest. I have. I have been arrested for protesting the war. Glad I did it, BUT more than protesting is now needed. If protesting would change anything, they would not let us do it. If voting would change anything, they would not allow voting.
The system is rigged so that there is almost no way for the little guy to win. Think about it. Nader could change things, but the system is rigged. They will not even allow him to debate. Think about it.
Shut down Wall Street. Guard families and homes that are being foreclosed. Expose "Speculators" and hold them responsible for endangering lives. Deaths from freezing have been predicted (Congressional Oil Hearing Testimony) in New England this winter. Demand a Single Payer health care system. Place a 100% tax on all income that is above 6 times the minimum wage. That's just a start........
Think we have democracy here. I am a candidate for Vermont Attorney General. It appears that the local newspaper is trying to keep my candidacy a secret because I am not a repub/dem. The Press is a big part of the problem, but in the end, IT IS ALWAYS THE VOTERS WHO MUST ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY.
Someone on the citizen's side ... Rep Marcy Kaptur
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S27yitK32ds
z
If you want to give up go ahead. Your defeated attitude is classic neo/con I almost was waiting for you to type "resistance is futile". Since I have asked several times on this site and others WHO OF YOU HAS EVEN BEEN ON A PROTEST MARCH? Well the answer was 2 people on the whole site. I ask people to phone, write E mail and I get people like you saying give up they don't listen don't bother. I ask people to get away from the keyboard and support a local candindate if you are pissed off. Get out in the street and help. OK PLEASE TELL US ALL what would YOU do? That is if you are against the bail out is the first place is the question to you. Come on enlighten us all with your political knowledge and this isn't posted a web site use your own words?
still waiting z
I have organized protest marches.
"WHO OF YOU HAS EVEN BEEN ON A PROTEST MARCH?"
I've been to a few. Stood on corners holding signs and candles too. Not one of those who made it out every week though - mostly at major milestones. I saw the tricks the media use to make huge marches look smaller - close-ups of individuals (street people if they could find them) instead of long shots that would show block upon block of protestors. Equals time given to the five counter protestors as given to people in a march of tens of thousands. Numerical estimates given of the crowd size that were consistently less than half the actual size. And if anybody tussled with cops or broke windows, well that dominated the march coverage, even if it occurred after the march was over. As public opinion toward the Iraq war changed, the coverage became more realistic, although I've yet to see a long shot down a city street filled with people as far as the eye can see.
At one march I went up to a reporter/cameraman team who were interviewing a counter-protestor. "Why are you interviewing him?" I gestured at the crowd filling the streets, "There are thousands of people here."
The reporter replied, "It's freedom of the press."
"No," I said, "It's bias."
Our interaction had no effect on the evening coverage of the march.
Another time I was in a small town on a street corner protesting the war with about a hundred other people. A photographer for the local paper came and took a bunch of photos. For one picture he knelt in front of a single protestor with a sign and shot upward. That's the photo that appeared in the paper. A photo of one person holding a sign. And the icing on the cake? The paper's website carried all the stories in Section A of the paper - with the notable exception of the story about the protest. It made me wonder how many protests happened that were invisible online.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
A few points:
Every time Michael Moore posts on this site there is all this sturm und drang, overwrought pit vipering about what a Democratic Party shill he is even though he criticizes the DLC leadership and most of their policies. Same thing with Dennis Kucinich. To all you 'all Democrats are fools' and 'anyone who tolerates Dems or some of their ideas is an apologist' progressives bashing Moore and Kucinich: GET A MORE ACTIVIST LIFE! Pick smarter targets for one thing. If you folks spent as much time contacting Nader's people, the Greens and the other progressive sub-party to urge them to unite into ONE EFFECTIVE PROGRESSIVE PARTY as you do bashing small "d" Democrats trying earnestly to reform the Democratic Party from within you might actually accomplish something worthwhile.
The Democratic Party needs to be more effectively pushed to the Left from within and without. I wrote Cindy Sheehan about urging the little progressive parties to unite and never got a response. I still love and respect her; I just figure she's got a lot on her plate and not much money with which to do it. I don't repetitiously and tediously bash her or Moore or Kucinich because I don't agree with every little policy idea they have that isn't perfectly simpatico with mine.
Imperfect though they are, they have ALL done more to scathingly and publicly indict the fascists running our country into the slit trench, and to educate the public about better ideas for governance than any of the so-called progressives who whine and bitch about them on this site. You people are what constipate progressivism in this country.
The Democratic and Republican Parties have been obsolete to deal with the nation's and the world's true problems for over 25 years. But until progressives unite under one banner, the DLC and GOP will rule the political roost. So do something meaningful to unite progressives or quit your 'true progressives hate liberals' bitching. You are only repeatedly slashing at your own micro-partisan throats and will die unaccomplished and embittered like old Queen Elizabeth II--stalking the halls of her palace at night done up armor slashing at unseen assassins with her daddy's over-large sword.
While Big Media, Wall Street parasites and the pol powers that be are still stupidly touting the "bailout" as a workable solution to the inevitable economic collapse of our economy, this half-assed bailout is doomed to FAIL within two weeks of its passing in anything like its current lobotomized incarnation. It's stated goal is to help re-capitalize the banks--like putting a little band-aide on two or three major severed arteries--but it is about one-tenth of the capitalization necessary to that task and all but ignores regulatory and programmatic changes. It is about the worst idea regarding recapitalization. The "bailout" is just the bare beginning of a train wreck-a-thon of legislative nightmares that will extend well into next year regardless of who gains the White House.
Don't expect Congress or the White House--this year or next--to be capable, informed and willing enough to put our economy back on an even keel AND include ideas for social and economic justice. Consider the clowns we have to work with and their nervous supply-side economic advisers. While an FDR could do much in his first 100 days we don't have people of the intellectual and ethical caliber of him and his "Brain Trust" anywhere near Congress now and we won't early next year either. It's YOYO time. You are on your own. Unless you are already wealthy, have good relationships with wealthy family members or friends willing to help you out. If you haven't--you better prepare to survive like a survivalist as best ye may.
Now is the time for all good progressives who can still stand up, lift up a telephone or type on a computer keyboard, host a political gathering, organize an event, etc. to start ORGANIZING all progressives under one Progressive Party banner. One Progressive Party can effectively hold both the Democratic Party's and Congress' feet to the fire. It can serve as an idea generator, national political educator, grooming ground for better Progressive candidates, weeding implement for better Democratic Party candidates, the core of the green sustainable economy and Constitutional reformation movements. Progressives need to organize FIRST, then build allies within the Democratic Party and the few remaining liberals in the corporate press. I, for one, am sick of seeing Katrina Vandenheuval (SP?) as the only progressive on some few news round table discussions.
Folks, please do not EVER pay long distance fees to call millionaire Senators and Representatives in Congress as some posters have suggested. You are only rewarding the companies surveilling you illegally for the gubermint and financing their campaigns.
GOOGLE: current toll free number Washington Capitol switchboard.
Then write down all the toll free numbers you see and go down the row testing them 'till you find the ones that work and call the Capitol switchboard and ask them to connect you to whomever Congressperson(s) you want. If one or two million people did this--even once a week every week--and made their calls on ANY issue of major concern it would get dealt with a hell of a lot better than it presently is. Too bad most Amurkans as a rule are too inculcated in herd-think to figure this out.
Richard Cook says:
"Here I would like to turn to a proposal by a man I have met and respect. His name is Darrell Castle, and he is the 2008 candidate for vice-president of the Constitution Party. Castle has spent the last year traveling around the country meeting people on Main Street and listening to what they have to say.
This is what Castle proposes in the Constitution Party's latest newsletter:
“The Federal Reserve Banks should be seized by Congress under Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. The FED banks could survive as clearinghouse banks, but the Federal Reserve that has robbed the American people for 100 years would cease to exist. The debt owed by the American people to the FED banks would be discharged in bankruptcy. Congress would take monetary policy from the FED and would simply stand in place of the FED through a monetary board. The FED credit computers would be transferred to Congress who would issue new credit (money), because under our present system 97% of all money originates as credit. This new credit would keep the system going and prevent collapse. It could all be done without interest and without debt. The backs of the international banking cartel would be broken forever, and the American people through their elected representatives would control monetary policy; i.e. money in circulation, interest rates, and credit availability.”
Pearlstein, Bush, Paulson, Pelosi, et.al., along with Obama and McCain, should also read the U.S. Constitution. Then they would see that the problem stems from the fact that in 1913 Congress privatized our money supply by turning it over to the private banks that own the Federal Reserve System. This is also why we have lived under the mass delusion that a healthy financial sector leads to a healthy producing economy.
Actually it’s the other way around. The financial sector should support the producing economy, not bleed it dry through interest, fees, commissions, and the destruction that arises from financial profit-seeking.
There is also the fact that while the producing economy has been hammered by job outsourcing and bled white by financial parasitism, it is still a powerful machine that can produce the goods and services people need. We are a strong, capable nation. And we are blessed with the resources we require for a decent standard of living, though not necessarily at a rate of consumption that forever outpaces the rest of the world. But what is wrong with that? The underlying strength of the producing economy was on display this morning, when the Dow-Jones defied the doomsayers by coming back strongly the day after the bailout was defeated.
We now need to do what Darrell Castle of the Constitution Party recommends: Use the power of the money supply to rebuild the producing economy that we have given away and rebuild it from the bottom up: from Main Street."
Never heard of the Castle dude, we need to hear more.
History has shown that Americans will turn on Americans even easier than the 'enemy' turns on us. Our police killing strikers, kent state, police murders etc, police actions against non violent political demonstrators and news people.
And we have a very well trained military that is used to following orders, even if it results in actions that are war crimes. Just following orders didn't help the Nazi's either when it came to a defense of their actions.
www.NotOneMore.US
Senate to vote on rescue plan with added tax cut
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
WASHINGTON - In a bold bid to revive President Bush's multibillion-dollar financial rescue plan, Senate leaders scheduled a vote for Wednesday night on a version of the bill that adds substantial tax cuts meant to appeal to Republicans when it reaches the House.
The goal is to net at least 12 more House votes than the rescue proposal received Monday, when lawmakers rocked the political and financial worlds by rejecting it.
The gambit is certain to anger some conservative House Democrats, who object to tax cuts that are not offset with spending cuts. But Senate strategists assume it will gain more House votes than it will lose.
This is pointless. Some kind of bailout is going to pass no matter what you say. The one they are working on now is even worse. They want to ad a tax cut to it which only pushes us deeper into the red ink. I feel much better since I stopped fighting them.
There is actually an excellent progressive plan being put forth by Rep. DeFazio, Rep. Kucinich, Rep. Edwards, Rep. Katur et al. It is worth supporting. The Senate plans on ramming through the odious bill the House rejected on Monday. We can always hope that calmer and wiser heads will prevail; or Democrats will capitulate once again. Time will tell.
We progressives demand the new bill to ban all bailouts permanently. When you lend the capitalists a hand when they're down, they will pull YOU DOWN WITH THEM.
LIVE AND LET DIE.
LIVE AND LET DIE.
LIVE AND LET DIE.
Lots of people have blinders on when it comes to the Democratic Party.
Here, though, the numbers say a lot. The majority (60 percent) of House Democrats voted for the bailout. I'm not sure why Michael Moore can't see that 60 percent as a rather big problem.
It's high time to consider voting for some party other than the Dems and Repugs. If they don't support you on this issue, then they don't support you.
-TIA
Thoughts Into Action
"The majority [60 percent] of House Democrats voted for the bailout." That, basically, says it all right there. That figure is a damning indictment of the [alleged] people's party and yet Moore wishes to trumpet the fact that 40 percent of Democrats voted against the bailout. But then it should not be forgotten that this is the same Michael Moore who in his film Sicko [justifiably] pointed out the need for a single payer health care system in this country but yet backs a candidate, Barack Obamw, whose plan keeps the insurance companies in the equation, thus placing profits over the needs of the people.
Amen to that Bro
all the people who voted yes to the bail out, if you check their portfolios, own huge chunks of these companies/banks they are bailing out.. no conflict of interest here is there...
notice the panic and fear in their eyes.. they greedily went along with all the deregulation, allowed these shysters in the banks to rip everyone off, including them..
now when they look at that pile of worthless paper they've accumulated by selling their souls to the corporate interests, they realize the bail out is for them not us..
pitiful to see these politicos, and their corporate masters begging the people to bail them out..
give them what they gave you all these long 8 years..."so?".
HP wrote, "I feel the Dems feel they have the next election in the bag and have started to NOT listen to the people already."
"Started"? When was the last time they listened to us?
"Now is the time to hit them as hard as you can with calls , E mail or even a letter."
HP, are you new to politics? You seem a little green. Do you honestly believe they vote based on how WE feel?
Take any issue on which there is overwhelming popular support, how are those other letter writing campaigns coming? Are the wars over? Have we stopped torturing? Spying?
Can you even get Obama to guarantee that he will still rescind the Bush tax cuts for the richest 1%?
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5isOFwdbq0tsqatW6vJpkDRTI1gMgD931VVBO0
Nope.
matti, re: your 7:59 post, why a market meltdown could/would translate into a need for martial law. google pdd51 and click on national security and homeland security presidential directive. then go to 2b: "...disruption severly affecting the u.s. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;" they're batting three for five just on that one sentence alone. perhaps the police paramilitaries and national guard might enforce martial law, but i'm not sure they can impose it. yeah, this thing is far from over.
for some of you obama bashers, maybe mr. moore does indeed support obama, but re-read the article and stick to the facts presented, please.
Funny thing. Michael's free movie is playing on T.V. right now. My wife and step-son are watching the movie as I type. I'm getting sick of hearing his name repeated ad nauseum. And I have answered my own question. "Why is Michael Moore a Democrat Shill?" There are more liberal democrats than progressives.
It's all about Michael Moore. Sick. Dude, get rid of your ego, and look in the mirror and repeat: It's the message - not the messenger. Please go away.
ONE POINT AND THE US NEOCON RUN MEDIA ARE SKIPPING OVER IS THIS
Most stock markets around the world recovered with gaining almost 60% of the loss. I say give the stock market 10 days and I feel it would be back to the level it was before all by itself. As for the greedy companies, well that is the price of not running your company within the rules and should go out of business. They will be replaced with other new companies that are in the same business. Why do we have to keep THESE companies alive???
I feel the Dems feel they have the next election in the bag and have started to NOT listen to the people already. Now is the time to hit them as hard as you can with calls , E mail or even a letter. Remind the Dems who support this bill they are not in the drivers seat yet.
Before I would entertain any form of corporate bailout, I would have to see, at the very top of the list of conditions, full responsibility for this melt-down laid upon the heads of the CEO's, their closest advisors, their lawyers and any public officials who abetted in the rape of this country's treasure.
By that I mean: I want to see all those crooked bastards do time in a prison like any common thief who committed a robbery of a convenience store or bank.
Yes, we should lock up bank robbers. So should we lock up robber bankers.
Businesses like the DOW have grown at about 7% ever since we have been keeping records.
At a 7% growth rate things double every seven years.
After seven years of Bush/Cheney management the DOW has grown ZERO percent
and only the National Debt has doubled - are they trying for a 'triple' with this scam?
Bush and his Corporate Junkies are only looking for another money 'fix' - to shoot up our savings.
Will Congress invite the IMF and World Bank to pick over the bones of our Republic after this?
Michael Moore doesnt have much credibility although he does a great job stirring things up and the way he can switch from class clown to shrewd but affable interviewer(for his documentaries) is quite remarkable as a skill.
The open letter on Counterpunch is hugely damaging.
Why does MM endorse Obama? So he can keep a few doors open for his career.
Look how Nader had every door shut on him because Gore ran an idiot campaign and didnt contest the vote theft.
Much easier to blame a third party candidate instead of the Democrats who voted for Bush.
After the 2004 vote MM disappeared fast(except he posted a big photo of Bush made up of the faces of the war dead).
This all seems so strange to me.
How odd that the Dem's immediately jumped on-board with BUSH? Why?
It never occurred to me, as a progressive Democrat, that I would ever actually AGREE with something that right-wing conservative Republicans want? (i.e., H E L L NO to the bailout)
Is the timing a coincidence? Not at all - nice diversion, Bush. But it all seems so familiar - exactly like the run-up to Iraq - you MUST watch this:
http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=186052
Since all the players in this game are up to their necks in complicity, and being invested in the outcome - personally profiting by a bailout - I think that we should hire the Swedes to come in and impartially clean things up for us, since they know how and we obviously do not - will not - can not. Here is a link to what they did (great article)
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/23/business/worldbusiness/23krona.html?em
Michael,
Why is your hero, Obama, leading the charge to get this unfair bill passed?
I mean, I just thought I'd ask.
Barack Obama was for single payer before he came out against it.
Everyone changes their mind on ideas as complex as national health care. There is no easy solution.
Even Nader changes his mind sometimes.
Please give more details.
myconscience writes: Everyone changes their mind on ideas as complex as national health care. There is no easy solution. Even Nader changes his mind sometimes.
Nader changes his opinion if he has a better solution or was wrong.
Obama changes his opinion when corporate elite tell him to, and secondarily to public opinion. There is a difference when you change because of principle, and when you change because you are selling out.
Who do you honestly believe would sell out America more, Nader or Obama? The answer is the same person who has already sold America out more than Nader.
Obama will not put the public ahead of corporate interests. It is that simple. Does that mean that he will never do anything good for the public? No. What it means is that when the choice is public good or corporate good, Obama will always vote for the corporate good.
so it goes.
www.NotOneMore.US
www.NotOneMore
Intelligently and persuasively stated. This, I believe, is why Obama is more dangerous than McCain because he is more insidious than his Republican counterpart, presenting the illusion that he is more progressive while, like McCain, pushing for the bailout plan which would aid his corporate cronies on Wall Street and being just as militant and aggressive in his rhetoric as the warmonger McCain.If the media were to allow Nader's voice to be seen and heard in the presidential debates, one suspects that his poll numbers would rise dramatically as Americans would see a stark difference between Nader and the two corporately owned and pro-militant major candidates.
hhttp://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com/2008/07/
so-i-guess-hmos-us-chamber-of-commerce.
htmlttp://www.pnhp.org/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080831_curb_your_enthusiasm_for_obama/http://www.gp.org/press/pr...
How many more do you want?
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/sep2008/obam-s23.shtml
I'm no economist, but the second article did not satisfy my skepticism against your asertion that Obama is a sell-out against the poor.
The first link did not work.
"But what they didn't know was that hundreds of thousands of Americans woke up yesterday morning and decided it was time for revolt. The politicians never saw it coming. Millions of phone calls and emails hit Congress so hard it was as if Marshall Dillon, Elliot Ness and Dog the Bounty Hunter had descended on D.C. to stop the looting and arrest the thieves."
So if the Republicans based their decisions on "phone calls" why did the Democrat ignore their constituents?
"Here's my guess: The Democratic leadership in the House secretly hoped all along that this lousy bill would go down. With Bush's proposals shredded, the Dems knew they could then write their own bill that favors the average American, not the upper 10% who were hoping for another kegger of gold. "
Yeah, I'm sure all the times the Democrats have supported a neo-conservative agenda they were secretly working against it. It makes perfect sense that when a Democrat votes in favor of a hand-out to the wealthiest Americans they are doing it to help the average American. The Democrats and Moore live in opposite land. A place where supporting torture is taking a stand against it, funding a war is the same as fighting it, authorizing spying is a "compromise", and giving the President immunity from impeachment is "bipartisanship". I suppose when the Democrats just rubber-stamped the other 600 billion spending package they were actually trying to cut the pentagon budget by increasing it 6%.
"So if the Republicans based their decisions on "phone calls" why did the Democrat ignore their constituents?"
95 Dems -or 40% of them- didn't. They voted against the bill.
With you on your doubts about Moore's speculations though.
Without anarchy there will be no change
Here is a thought I haven't seen on this thread. As you might remember there was a supposed rebellion amongst the Republicans in the meeting between Congressional leaders, Bush and Paulson. This meeting was to shape Hank's bill into something that both parties could vote "aye" in a House vote but this group brought their own plan-plan B. As it turned out no one thought Plan B was better than Paulson's plan A so plan A went to the House for a vote. Prior to the Vote Cactus John McCain announces in the media that he supported plan B. Plan A goes down in flames in the House because Republicans shot down their President and Secretary of Treasury's bill. Now the media is hailing it as a tax-payers revolt but actually this sets up some Kabuki theater where the Statesman and financial genius Cactus John jumps into the limelight to hobble together plan A and plan B (basically putting rouge on the pig that already has lipstick) and on the next vote for the gussied up pig all the former "nays" turn into "ayes" and the bill passes having Cactus John's fingerprint on it instead of Paulson's to prove what a grand bipartisan mediator and financial whiz the old boy is-no need for an alzheimer test here.
Might work with the 2000 model John McCain, but the 2008 model is too crusty, too old and too robotic to work well enough on TV to pull it off.
Its clever though, the GOP should hire you as a strategist.
"Watching C-Span yesterday morning was one of the best comedy shows I'd seen in ages."
Yes... 100+ Democrats tripping over each other in a desperate attempt to cram this travesty down our throats... just hilarity incarnate Michael.
"And guess what? That's exactly what Wall Street did! The largest, single-day drop in the Dow in the history of the New York Stock exchange."
Believe you might be uninformed. As a percent of the daily levels of investment measurement, it was only the 16th or 17th largest drop.
I find your assessment to be partisan in an attempt to shed favorable light on Obama. If you wanted me to believe that type of spin, then the acting on the part of 60% of the Democrats should have been better. It was MOORE OF THE SAME.
They are all to blame... and they will all screw us to appease their greedy masters... and the fact that they have been incommunicado for over 24 hours is just indicative of the levels they will stoop. Representation? Not likely in this day and age.
After two or three conditioning cycles, CheneyOilCo and buds will have their way with us.
MM never mentions Obama.
He gets partisan with good reason. The GOP has been on a free market deregualtion kick since the Reagan years and look what it did for country first? Savings and Loan scam indicting McCain in the Keating 5 and Neil Bush (Dubya's bro), then Enron, and now Wall St. Eveything the deregulation was supposed to infuse with competition and lower prices did the opposite. Isn't that clever of those republicans?
This should be a good ol fashioned asswhooping of them GOP bastards!
I hate to be the one to point this out, but the Dow has never dropped 777 points in one day before, in its entire history. Thus, it was the largest, single-day drop in the Dow in the history of the New York Stock exchange.
So, Mr. Moore is, in fact, correct.
Again.
Actually, this is a tricksy-word thing.
The 778 point drop was the largest POINT drop ever in one day, yes.
But what ~toast~ was saying was that this was far from the largest PERCENTAGE drop ever. And that Micheal Moore was either confused or being purposely obscure when he just said "largest drop".
Add to all this the fact that the Dow ROSE 800-plus points last week (supposedly on the hope that this bill would pass) and this 778 point drop seems even less of a big deal.
Remember the Dow that just fell down into the 10,000s (before rallying today a bit) was in the 2,000s a decade ago. Are things so much better now then they were then?
These "indexes" and "averages" shouldn't be given so much importance.
Don't Panic,
-matti.
Thanks, you got it said for me.
Welcome.
I've read elsewhere of others that think it's no coincidence that a lot of the "nays" in the vote yesterday were Republicans. Their assertion is that BushCo want this to fail so that the economy will go into freefall and they will have their October surprise early or a reason for Bush to make use of Directive 51 and decalare martial law. Any believers? I for one am skeptical, but less so after reading last week about the brigade that is being reassigned from Bagdad to the US. Posse Commitatus anyone?
The trap is the passage of this bill AFTER the elections, probably as some sort of rider slyly slipped into some "insignificant" legislation, something guaranteed to pass that will have a name like "No Child Left Behind!" that no member would dare vote nay on because they would be seen as anti-child...
The trap is this: if you owe the bank $70,000, then the bank owns you. If you owe the bank $70,000,000,000 (10% of the current proposal), then you own the bank. The US, We the People, are the bank, and we are "loaning" $700,000,000,000, or whatever the amount ends up being, (looks more impressive that way, than $700 billion) to the financial elite. And make no mistake, they WILL default and walk away laughing at us, the chumps, the taxpayers, the PEOPLE, all the way to their banks, probably the offshore branches so they don't have to pay any taxes.
The problem with this concept is why exactly would a market meltdown translate into a need for martial law?
It would take a huge run on the banks, the failure of the FDIC, a complete lack of action by the Government AND -most essentially but least likely- some sort of major shortage on food and fuel right after the harvest and with the N. gas pipelines now repaired and plenty of (expensive) fuel oil in stock.
All of this would need to happen in the next 30 days or less for the kind of wide-scale rioting and chaos to erupt that would provide the excuse for martial law and/or the suspension of the election.
And even then what exactly is ONE brigade supposed to do? What is that, a couple thousand guys?
Look to police paramilitaries and the national guard for the imposition of martial law and don't bother looking for the suspension of the Elections.
That would be the beginning of the END of their control, which is best applied subtly and behind the scenes.
Don't Panic,
-matti.
I can get behind that too. This feels like a trap, but I'm not astute enough to figure out how exactly. Feels like check & mate - either way it goes.
It IS a trap.
But the trap is financial and political -and very sneaky.
Crude schemes of "take over by force" would only destroy the more subtle control that is already weilded against us.
If the beery, football and NASCAR watching, truck and SUV driving, suburbanite pale-redneck masses were ever roused into action than the whole game would crumble.
A Government that allowed a bunch of greedy Wall Street-types to screw the "economy" and then imposed martial law on all the "average joes" who just wanted their paychecks safe in a bank so they could have a nice, consumerist Christmas, might be the only thing that COULD rouse them with any speed.
So no, they won't be trying it.
I can get behind the Directive 51 theory. I think the coup may happen whether or not the bill passes... and this might end in the complete death of American Democracy, and institution of a fascist police state in America.
I think it's time to let the pie's fly!!! No one can be branded a terrorist for pie chucking. It's time to fling more pies in the faces of politicians, bankers, Wall street exec's, and reporters than ever before. Anyone who supports this grand theft should be pied immediately. Even Michael has a pie. Let em' fly. Micheal, film the pitiful pie faced politicians and give us a few laughs. I want to see Roy Blunt, Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Harry Reid, and the rest of the goobers embarrassed on film. Let them know that they are not beyond our reach.
Dear Sunlighter,
Today, the Sunlight Foundation is calling on Congress to
exercise restraint and increase legislative transparency by
posting the next version of the financial bailout legislation
online for at least 72 hours before bringing the bill to a vote.
We believe all legislation should be posted online for at 72 hours
before a vote to give lawmakers and citizens sufficient time to
review and debate it, and this bill is no exception.
That's why we just created a petition --
http://readthebillfirst.org -- that urges Congress to wait at
least until 72 hours after the publication of the next version
of this bill, before moving to a vote.
The failure of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008
on Monday, September 29, 2008, is a case in point. The bill was
posted online late Sunday afternoon, and voted on less than 24
hours later.
This isn't a bill to rename a few courthouses; this bill is
Congress's biggest intervention in the economy in decades. This
important legislation deserved more time for public scrutiny.
Please join us in our call for legislative transparency by
signing the petition at http://readthebillfirst.org
You can review and comment on the Emergency Economic Stabilization
Act on PublicMarkup.org -- http://tinyurl.com/4q3zvn -- too.
Our Party Time site -- http://PoliticalPartyTime.org -- is also
doing its part to shine a light on how the financial sector is
wining and dining the very lawmakers in Congress who are making
the decisions about the most massive proposed bailout of
industry in history. Based on the anonymously submitted
invitations we've received, we now count 357 parties this year
planned for or featuring members of the two crucial committees
that are the first stops for considering the administration's
$700 billion bailout request for the financial sector. See the
full list of parties here: http://tinyurl.com/3htbev.
And be sure to check out our blog post here --
http://tinyurl.com/3lq3d7 -- about the finance industry's
investment over the past 18 years attempting to influence
Congress. The post includes a very cool interactive graph
showing their spending, and a YouTube tutorial video explaining
the graph.
Thanks for all that you do,
Gabriela Schneider & the Sunlight team
Michael Moore can complain about the financial crisis, but he won't do the one thing that needs to be done to fix it. Support someone who wants to correct it. Mr. Moore still supports Obama who is supporting the corporate elite first and foremost.
Obama talks about protecting the middle class, which is a good election gimmick, but the democratic party no longer talks about protecting the poor.
Why doesn't he hope that Wall Street corrects itself instead of handing them over 700 billion dollars.
I have make many bad investments, I collect books. Hope someone bails me out.
While I admire Moore for many of the things he has done with his movies, this is not the time to be blindly cheerleading for someone who doesn't represent the public's interest.
Vote Third Party, vote Nader, Vote Green.
www.NotOneMore.US
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/09/25-1
by Ralph Nader
Congress needs to show some backbone before the federal government pours more money on the financial bonfire started by the arsonists on Wall Street.
1. Congress should hold a series of hearings and invite broad public comment on any proposed bailout. Congress is supposed to be a co-equal branch of our federal government. It needs to stop the stampede to give Bush a $700 billion check. Public hearings should be held to determine what alternatives might exist to the four-page proposal advanced by Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson.
2. Whatever is ultimately done, the bailout plan should not be insulated from judicial review. Remember there is a third co-equal branch of government - the judiciary. The judiciary does not need to review each buy-and-sell decision by the Treasury Department, but there should be some boundaries established to the Treasury Department's discretion, and judicial review is needed to ensure that unbridled discretion is not abused.
3. Sunlight is a good disinfectant. The bailout that is ultimately approved must provide for full and timely disclosure of all bailout details. This will discourage conflicts of interest and limit the potential of sweetheart deals.
4. Firms that accept government bailout monies must agree to disclose their transactions and be more honest in their accounting. They should agree to end off-the-books accounting maneuvers, for example.
5. Taxpayers must be protected by having a stake in any recovery. The bailout plan should provide opportunities for taxpayers to recoup funds that are made available to problem financial institutions or to benefit from the financial institutions' rising stock price and increased profitability after being bailed out.
6. The current so-called "regulators" cannot be trusted. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), "the investigative arm of Congress" and "the congressional watchdog," must regularly review the bailout. We cannot trust the financial "regulators," who allowed the slide into financial disaster, to manage the bailout without outside monitoring.
7. It is time to put the federal cop back on the financial services beat. Strong financial regulations and independent regulators are necessary to rebuild trust in our financial institutions and to prevent further squandering of our tax dollars. The Justice Department and the SEC also need to scrutinize the expanding mess with an eye to uncovering corporate crime and misdeeds. Major news outlets are reporting that the FBI is investigating American International Group, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Lehman Brothers.
8. Cap executive compensation and stop giving the Wall Street gamblers golden parachutes. The CEOs who have created the financial disaster should not be allowed to leave with millions in hand when so many pensioners and small shareholders are seeing their investments evaporate. The taxpayers are bailing out Wall Street so that the financial system continues to function, not to further enrich the CEOs and executives who created this mess.
9. Congress should pass the Financial Consumers' Information and Representation Act, to permit citizens to form a federally-chartered nonprofit membership organization to strengthen consumer representation in government proceedings that concern the financial services industry. As the savings and loan disasters of the 1980s and the Wall Street debacles of the last few years have demonstrated, there is an overriding need for consumers and taxpayers to have the organized means to enhance their influence on financial issues.
10. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, separating traditional banks from investment banks, helped pave the way for the current disaster. It is time to re-regulate the financial sector. The current crisis is also leading to even further conglomeration and concentration in the financial sector. We must revive and apply antitrust principles, so that banking consumers can benefit from competition and taxpayers are less vulnerable to too-big-to-fail institutions, merging with each other to further concentration.
11. Congress should impose a securities and derivatives speculation tax. A tax on financial trading would slow down the churning of stocks and financial instruments, and could raise substantial monies to pay for the bailout.
12. Regulators should impose greater margin requirements, making speculators use more of their own money and diminishing reckless casino capitalism.
"Michael Moore can complain about the financial crisis, but he won't do the one thing that needs to be done to fix it. Support someone who wants to correct it."
Vote Don Quixote. He hasn't got a chance but what an idealist!
Vote the [alleged] agent of hope and change. He does not have not a chance if he is elected president of offering any hope to the Afghans and Pakistanis who will again feel the pain of seeing more American soldiers entering their countries and killing more innocent civilians and children. But so many of idealistic Americans continue to believe that Obama will change things!
... or you can vote for a life of corporate slavery. It's up to you.
Obama took some money from the corporations. Does that mean he is Mr. Fascist all of a sudden? Get your head on straight people. Obama is the best possible candidate yhat has a chance of winning.
The "best possible?" I don't think so. There were/are other possibilities but the corporate media is scared to death of even hinting to the general public that they exist. Dennis Kucinich was a great possibility. One of the few Democrats that really is for the people. John Edwards was good too. Nader's not bad. Cynthia McKinney is still running. There are other possibilities also, some good, some bad, some on the lunatic fringe. The "best possible" mentality = lesser of two evils. If I wanted something like that I'd vote for Cthulhu, because why settle for a lesser evil? And change is not enough either. We will have change come January 20th: a change of name on the door and the mailbox. I, however, want improvement! And I don't see Barack Obama, and certainly not John McCain, as the instruments of improvement. Vote third party on the whole ballot: local, state and federal. That's change/improvement I can believe in!
Kucinich rocks, I agree. But he is not taken very seriously by the masses or, for good reasons, the corporate press. Kucinich or Nader would stick it to the corporations.
Nevertheless, the BBC polls suggest that worldwide, 80% of the people want Obama to win. I doubt the world even knows who Nader or Kucinich are.
For America to elect someone that popular and a minority who (even if only slightly) favors worker's rights over corporate profits, this is a huge step forward for the country. Why can so few "progressives" see this?
Another Apocalyptic Shtick
'Apocalypstick' for the republican rose looks good
on a Barbie Palin or ‘mission accomplished’ doll/action figure
just a good strong stick unlike Cheeney's
more like Halliburtons upticks
or General Dynamics freedom sticks
and portfolios with missed cluster bomb opportunities
the warfare stick that makes our nation tick
You can be the second dick without one
Just stick with the timed out John
the experienced one with practical jungle time
spreading agent orange or napalm
to clear the peasants for a Johnny run
a 'wag the dog' one of dumb bomb sticks from another quagmire.. Johnny's pride
as songbird fly sticks or curly fly licks
keep the lies off the dung heap of empire
as it readies the world for a new partially clothed leader
the all in one pale in one.. one
The paleface pride of the north a family head like Amadinejad
the celebrity mom one but please keep her mum
just keep her pictured with stalwart leaders like Uribe or Kiss of death in ger
and Johnny the for/four strikes one
Let's sell the road to nowhere
to the enamored few
or to a gentile or a jew
Please keep that road to nowhere well oiled and ethically clean
Keep it away from that Putin team or those Mullah queens
or the chosen few who may prefer tolls and check points
Check points to nowhere
like fallen Johnny angel prophecy
The Corporate Crime of the Century was halted by a vote of 228 to 205.
I e-mailed my 'thank you' to my congressman yesterday.
But, like Arnold says, the words "I'll be back" keep ringing in my ears...
"The Democratic leadership in the House secretly hoped all along that this lousy bill would go down. With Bush's proposals shredded, the Dems knew they could then write their own bill that favors the average American"
Mike:
Why are you a Democratic Party Shill? No really why? It doesn't make sense. The Democratic Party doesn't share your values. Is there something you're not telling us? Do you have a crush on Obama? Why does Wall Street need any Bailout?
Top Obama Contributors
Goldman Sachs $691,930
University of California $611,207
Citigroup Inc $448,599
JPMorgan Chase & Co $442,919
Harvard University $435,769
Google Inc $420,174
UBS AG $404,750
National Amusements Inc $389,140
Microsoft Corp $377,235
Lehman Brothers $370,524
Source: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638
Very persuasively stated that Obama is wedded to the titans of Wall Street.
The above comment was directed to Green Retirement's comment at 2:16 pm
Instead of harping and reharping this point over and over, why don't you suggest a viable alternative.
How boring to revist Obama's acceptance of money from huge donors. Does this money gurantee that Obama is just another corporate slave? I think not.
Clinton was on the take from corporations too. But at least he seemed to care a little bit about the little guy. Obama will be even more in tune with the little guy.
Okay, Obama is no Ralph Nader, but I wouldn't put it past Obama to invite Nader into the oval office.
Agreed. The single-minded harping solves nothing, nada.
Maybe, just maybe, we're giving these people much more importance and power than they really have. Seems to me that the place where the rubber really meets the road is the everyday work that we do as citizens. To whit: Congress did not vote down the bailout bill of their own accord, they voted it down because citizens finally stopped sending misdirected missives long enough to tell THEIR representatives what they want in a very clear way.
Obama is not evil incarnate and Nader is not the embodiment of perfection, so can't we please get past this point?
Here's a viable alternative: Let's get real and get busy doing the work we're supposed to do - as citizens. Do we want it? It's right there - let's take it!
I'm making an exception to my "Don't respond to Trolls" policy, on second thought no, you need to try harder.
I don't particularly care for Mr. Moore usually because as an idealogue he usually goes to the extreme. That does not mean he doesn't make good point's.
And I have to agree with his points here. Though he is wrong to advocate for any bail out bill in my opinion. His pork will be just as tasteless as theirs.
Growing up in the 50s, we could get credit, with no interest, at our corner grocery store. It was great for the neighborhood and great for the store owner. Neighborhoods helped the city to prosper. Everything was going along OK. You still believed that you could do better than your father and that hard work and honesty would be rewarded. In the 60s many windows of opportunity opened. New and relevant social and political issues were being advanced. It was a chance for the country to really grow and learn. But what entered those windows of opportunity didn’t come from the neighborhoods. It came from the boardrooms of corporate America. They sent in greed and his brother, corruption. And called it deregulation, and compassionate conservatism. The result is that the city is dying now because the neighborhoods are mostly dead, because the credit is long gone, and the beliefs were shattered along the way.
Hoa binh
Well put. But we will restore it if we can remove the radicals from power and keep the other radicals from getting it.
Michael...Are you now ready to admit that you were wrong for not supporting Nader - or are you waiting till we are all jobless, homeless, and the USA has declared war on Norway?
So the fear mongers are telling us that credit will dry up. Maybe this is true if Main Street continues to do business with these casinos cleverly disguised as investment banks. Maybe this is true if Americans continue to invest in hedges and derivatives that have no intrinsic value.
I spoke with a couple local credit unions this morning. They are doing business as usual and have money to loan for mortgages and cars. They are member owned (by definition) and hold on to their mortgage paper rather than sell it.
This may be a crisis for Wall Street, a crisis for corporate America, a crisis for Bush's cronies, but don't let them scare you into thinking Main Street will go down in flames. And don't be scared into believing that we must act now. It's no coincidence that this "crisis" and the "solution" were promoted by Bush & Co. just days before Congress was to recess.
Responsible economists have proposed a number of solutions; many include elements such as federal investment in infrastructure projects, relief for people with mortgages, regulatory reform, insurance, etc.
Keep the heat on your Representatives and Senators. We had a dramatic effect by engaging and letting Congress know, in no uncertain terms, that this bailout in any form is unacceptable. Keep calling and writing with the same message. And encourage Congress to take a deep breath and develop a financial program that is good for the country and not just an attempt to sustain the unsustainable for a few more weeks while rewarding the gamblers who made bad bets.
And do business locally with institutions like credit unions that put profits back into the communities they serve.
Mr. Moore are you still supporting Obama? If so, you're a hypocrite. Obama is for the bailout. Not only is he for it, but according to Kucinich on Democracy Now, Obama's also making sure that no provision for any type of bankruptcy negotiation that could be determined by judges in favor of foreclosed homeowners is attached to the bill.
That's perverse and demoniacal. Let's not forget that Biden was a major force behind the corrupt bankruptcy law passed in 2005, designed by the credit card companies to stab consumers in the back and twist the knife many times over.
Can't you see that you Dem Party Apologists are the real problem?
It still comes down to McCain vs. Obama, Not Obama vs. Nader.
However, I think Obama came down on the wrong side on this one.
"Bailout includes no bankruptcy aid for homeowners
The Wall Street rescue deal does not include a provision allowing judges to revise loans on primary residences.
By Tom Hamburger, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 29, 2008
Americans who take out loans to purchase cars, boats and even investment properties can file for bankruptcy protection and have a judge restructure their payments. But that's not the case with their home mortgages. Since 1978, bankruptcy laws have prohibited judges from adjusting loans on a "principal residence."
Some Democrats had called for the bailout bill to change bankruptcy laws to permit such restructuring as a way to offer something for Main Street America.
But those proponents -- major labor unions, consumer groups and other pillars of the Democratic Party establishment -- proved no match for a coalition that included the American Bankers Assn., the Mortgage Bankers Assn. and the National Assn. of Home Builders.
Starting with a core of Republicans who adamantly opposed any such change, the coalition persuaded key Democratic leaders in Congress that pushing the idea could doom the rescue effort and endanger the whole economy.
So successful was the effort to portray the bankruptcy idea as a deal breaker that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, while campaigning in Florida last week, said he thought the proposal was meritorious but did not belong in the emergency bailout bill.
Some analysts saw Obama's statement as a practical recognition of political reality: Republicans would never accept the bankruptcy provision, and the bailout plan was too important to the economy to jeopardize. The Illinois senator's position drew cheers from business and banking lobbyists and from Republicans.
Consumer and labor advocates consider Obama a friend, but his statement rankled. They say that current law has made it more difficult for homeowners to work their way out of difficult financial straits and that a change in the rules would have eased the crisis for all concerned."
Full story at:
http://www.latimes.com/business/investing/la-fi-scrub29-2008sep29,0,2890645.story
That was the same thing I heard in 2000, that it was about Bush and Gore. Ignoring Nader and his voters cost Gore the election back then and hopefully will cost Obama the election now.
And Obama came down on the wrong side on this one? Oh really, *only* on this one? What drug are you Dem Party Apologists on? Obama came down on the wrong side on the FISA bill, on the war funding, on drilling, etc. you name it.
And fyi, consumer and labor advocates don't consider Obama a friend. He picked Biden for running mate, you know, one of the major players behind the bankruptcy bill, which was written by the credit cards companies and stabbed Americans in the back in 2005. Stop being a fool.
tutti-fruiti sez:
"Ignoring Nader and his voters cost Gore the election back then and hopefully will cost Obama the election now."
Glad to see you admitting you want Obama to lose.
Let's see who does that leave?
Oh yeah, Gramps & Barbie.
ctrl-zany: Gramps & Barbie or Obama bin Biden will result in the same disaster for Americans.
Why do you Dem Party Apologists and Lesser Evilists can only think in a flat, 2-dimensional way? Repeat after me: Democrats and Republicans are one and the same.
tutti-fruiti
You followed up a nice "Obama bin Biden" with the hackneyed "Dems & Repubs the same."
Try to be original throughout.
And no, it doesn't count that 'Err-oll the Bottom' liked it. He's under almost every anti-Obama poster, singing praise.
.
Nader says...
"Wake up Americans! Cut the crap and take over."
VOTE NADER/GONZALEZ 2008… You’ll be glad you did and so will I…
.
Tetti tatti
Bingo. You nailed it.
"It still comes down to McCain vs. Obama, Not Obama vs. Nader.
However, I think Obama came down on the wrong side on this one."
Agreed on both counts.
While we may have to pony up some money, I have to ask where the hell the sum of $700 billion came from? I mean, who pulled that number out of who's hat? Why not $200 billion or $550 billion or some other number? Just asking...
I really didn't have any grasp on what all this meant or what the bailout was really for, and I don't think too many people really understood it. Hell, members of Congress didn't even have time to read the bill! Kudos to Kucinich and all those who voted against this (excepting my rep, Tom Allen, who traded in his conscience for a rubber stamp when he entered Congress). This needs to be completely transparent before it passes!
Something must be done to protect the people or my answer is hell no - today, tomorrow, next year. NO!
Keep calling the bastards!
Obama---(312) 819-3008
Harry Reid---(202) 224-3542
Steny Hoyer---(202) 225-4131
Pelosi---(202) 225-4965
And call your Representative and Senators.