Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe Simultaneous Rejection of the Bailout and a Corrupt Ruling Class
Retired New York Times reporter David Cay Johnston, writing at The New Republic yesterday, makes a critical point, in a piece entitled "Celebrating the Bailout Bill's Failure":
Whether you favor the $700 billion bailout or not, the House vote today should make you cheer -- loudly.Johnston's celebration that "Washington is not entirely in the service of the political donor class" is probably premature given that Congressional leaders are falling all over themselves to assure everyone that this deal will pass in a few days after it is tinkered with in one direction or the other. I recall all too well celebrating a similar "victory" back in March, when House Democrats astonishingly refused to comply with the demands of the "donor class" -- and the entire political establishment -- to pass Bush's FISA bill to grant retroactive amnesty to the entire lawbreaking telecom industry, only to watch them jump into line and do what they were told a few months later. The corporate donor class and political establishment may lose a battle here and there, but they almost never lose the war, since they own and control the political battlefield.Why?
Because the majority vote against it shows that Washington is not entirely in the service of the political donor class, by which I mean Wall Street and the corporations who rely on it for their financing. These campaign donors, a narrow slice of America, have lobbied and donated their way into a system that stacks the economic rules in their favor. But faced with as many as 200 telephone calls against the bailout for every one in favor, a lot of House members decided to listen to their constituents today instead of their campaign donors.
Still, Johnston's overarching point is absolutely right. For better or worse, yesterday's vote was the rarest event in our political culture: ordinary Americans from all across the political spectrum actually exerting influence over how our Government functions, and trumping the concerted, unified efforts of the entire ruling class to ensure that their desires, as usual, would be ignored. Time's Michael Scherer described quite well what a stinging repudiation yesterday's vote was for those who typically run the country without much opposition:
There was a lack of trust, a loss of confidence, a popular revolt.Can anyone even remember the last time this happened, where the nation's corporate interests and their establishment spokespeople were insistently demanding government action but were impeded -- defeated -- by nothing more than popular opinion? Perhaps the failure of George Bush's Social Security schemes in 2005 would be an example, but one is hard-pressed to think of any other meaningful ones. We're a "democracy" in which nothing is less important in how our government functions than public opinion. Yesterday was an exceedingly rare though intense departure from that framework -- the kind of citizen defiance of, an "uprising" against, a rotted ruling elite described by David Sirota in his book, "Uprising." On the citizenry level, the backlash was defined not by "Republican v. Democrat" or "Left v. Right," but by "people v. ruling class." As Johnston argues, yesterday's events should be celebrated for that reason alone.Nearly every major political leader in America supported the bailout bill. The President of the United States. The Vice President. The Treasury Secretary. The Chairman of the Federal Reserve. The Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Democratic and Republican nominees for president. The Democratic and Republican leadership of the House and the Senate. All of them said the same thing. Vote yes.
But the leaders anointed by the U.S. Constitution to most reflect the will of the people voted no. This is a remarkable event, the culmination of a historic sense of betrayal that the American people have long felt for their representatives in Washington D.C. Roughly 28 percent of the Americans approve of President Bush. Roughly 18 percent of Americans approve of Congress. These numbers have been like that for years.
Now those bad feelings have manifested themselves in the starkest of terms. Not enough of the American people believed their leaders. And so the politicians that were most exposed ran for cover.
It's true that we don't live in a direct democracy where every last decision by elected officials must conform to majoritarian desire, nor should we want that. In general, elected officials should exercise judgment independent of -- in ways that deviate from -- majority views. But the opposite extreme is what we have and it is just as bad -- a system where the actions of elected officials are dictated by a tiny cabal of self-interested oligarchs which fund, control and own the branches of government and willfully ignore majority opinion in all cases (except to manipulate it).
Moreover, even in a model of representative rather than direct democracy, the more consequential an action is -- should we start a war? should we burden the entire nation with close to a trillion dollars in debt in order to bail out Wall Street? -- the greater the need is to have the consent of the governed before undertaking it. From all quarters, Americans heard the arguments in favor of the bailout -- "agree to have this debt piled on your back for decades or else face certain doom" -- and they rejected it, decisively, at least for now.
Anyone arguing that their views should be ignored, that their judgment be overridden by the decree of the wiser, superior ruling class (see David Brooks and Kevin Drum as good examples), is simply endorsing the continuation of the predominant framework for how our country has been run for the last decade, at least. Whatever else that is, there's nothing "wise" about that framework. Even if one believes in principle that the country is best entrusted to the elevated wisdom of a magnanimous and superior ruling class, and that majoritarian opinion should be systematically ignored, our ruling class -- the one we actually have -- is anything but wise and magnanimous. It's bloated, incestuous, reckless, inept, self-interested, endlessly greedy and corrupt at its core. Ye shall know them by their fruits. It's hard to imagine anything less wise than continuing to submit to its dictates.
Liberation from -- one could say "destruction of" -- the system run by that ruling establishment class is of critical importance. Yesterday's rejection of their decree, on such a momentous matter, was a shocking first step towards that objective (and the doom and panic of yesterday has given rise to calm and even optimism today, as those with cash have taken advantage of the market drop of yesterday and, around the world, are madly buying). There may be, almost certainly will be, even greater financial distress in the near future, and perhaps Americans will come to view these matters differently. But regardless of whether yesterday's bailout was a good idea on the merits, the defeat -- for now -- of those who have enjoyed an unbroken (and ill-deserved) line of victories is something that ought to be cheered.
UPDATE: Strictly on the level of "Democratic v. Republican" political strategizing, Nancy Pelosi did exactly the right thing yesterday -- she provided just enough Democratic votes in favor of the bailout so that it could pass only if there was substantial GOP support (thus preventing Republicans from cynically blaming the bailout on Democrats), while simultaneously ensuring that Republicans (and McCain) would be blamed if it failed. Strictly on a strategic level, it was -- for the reason Matt Yglesias describes -- all very well-played by the House Democratic leadership.
Relatedly, several comments are pointing out that House members only voted against the bailout out of fear of losing the upcoming election, not because of any "sincere" concern for what their constituents think. That's a distinction without a difference. When elected officials take action out of fear of provoking the anger of voters, that is the democratic process in action. To say that the bailout failed (in part) because of public opinion isn't to ascribe noble sentiments to members of Congress -- it's only to say that they were driven to do what they did by public opinion.
48 Comments so far
Show AllIn the classic novel, Brave New World, author Aldous Huxley issues a “warning” of what would happen if the government took complete control of our daily lives. First published in 1932, Huxley wrote the piece in speculation of how his hometown of London may look in the year 2540, pending the continuation of programs to end war, conflict, suffering, and antagonistic (aka: “free”) thought. In other words, it is what the world would look like if nobody could utilize their voice, or live how people today want to, free of the iron fist of the various levels of government. Many people criticized Huxley for this, his fifth and most well-known novel, upon its release and still do to this day. Controversy or not, several seeds have been planted in America, which have made for some frightening similarities to this classic piece of literature. Yes, the socialist and communist movements have been around for several generations in America, though it hasn’t taken such prevalence until this one. This is thanks, in no small part, to politicians who are trying to put so many things under the exclusive control of the government. In parts of Los Angeles, for example, crooked elected officials have passed restrictions on where fast food restaurants can set up new shops. Yes, that’s correct; the “man” is telling you that you can’t go get a hamburger in South Los Angeles, and you’re going to like it. But, what are worse are state and national politicians, who are trying to take away your access to fast and easy payday loans. This is because the politicians are just trying to muster up enough votes for office, so that they can further their own self-interests. Surely, action is needed to fight the government’s ever-tightening stranglehold on all of us.
Post Courtesy of Personal Money Store
Professional Blogging Team
Feed Back: 1-866-641-3406
Home: http://personalmoneystore.com/NoFaxPaydayLoans.html
Blog: http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/
This finance situation is some of the easier stuff to commentate on ay? Housing failing, bills challenged, egregious government set back momentarily, expected agreement within the week, near trillion stakes widely challenged.
War disagreement the wealth of the country so at odds with a population so yet fully strategically prepared for this mass of movers and shakers. So many underground havens as the suburbs. So little time before nuclear ice age grips the planet fierce. No need to talk about the primarily money motivated even true Christians who take a clever read of Jesus story as what Christianity is meant for and capable of producing. The multimillenially tested yielding of one's earnings to authority. They, true Christians, twist Jesus use of money in recommending using money to buy favors as is biblically recorded and take it from their that money has good use. (Luke 16:9 NIV "I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.")
Jesus even instructed Jewish citizens under the Roman Empire to pay their taxes to the Emperor. (Jesus "Give unto Caesar what is Caesars." Spoken while holding a coin.) The bible also advocates yielding to authority. Which with the present bold faced murderous authority is obviously quite dangerous.
The point though is that the starvation and the nuclear war by armor penetrator bullets and the 500 pound bombing of neighborhoods and the building robot attack jets is pretty easy to sweep under the rug in such a butter issue election extravaganza.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
we need really to demand the regulations exact that had been in place since the depression be reinstated exactly immediately and then all finance come of the deregulation be questioned alongside the corrupt political field of the day then the fortunes there held challenged legally once the people weigh in on new law agreement. www.ni4d.org
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
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.
you keep posting this in every single thread it seems. what do you want to underscore about it?
any concrete actions we all can take to rebel against the fat cats in DC?
Saying that Nancy Pelosi did exactly the right thing yesterday -- she provided just enough Democratic votes in favor of the bailout so that it could pass only if there was substantial GOP support is giving her way too much credit. Believe or not, the "progressive wing" of the Democratic Party actually stood up, coupled with the Republican wingnuts, took this bill down. Check out DeFazio, Donna Edwards and others who led the D opposition. Pelosi, Dodd and Frank need to go. They are a part of the problem.
well how about a few of those who voted against the bill stand up and say, if the bill goes through we start impeachment chargers against the Prez and VP. Along with ALL the top advisers.
The U.S. Senate is planning on ramming through a WORSE more conservative bill tomorrow night. It's so frustrating! We need the DeFazio plan! Will the House reject this odious Senate ploy? Please don't appease the conservatives! Now I have to call my U.S. Senators and beg them to vote against this obnoxious bill. Democrats, please redeem yourself and vote NO against this nonsensical bailout!
I hate to tell you this, but it was the conservatives that stopped this sorry bill. And they are the best hope to stop any others.
Just when you think you understand, some additional information comes to light. I do urge folks to particularly read part 5 of this essay by Catherine Fitts. If you've read any of her previous work detailing the massive fraud at HUD, you know she has a handle on the depth of the current problem.
so the senate will now try to ram through something... can this be done? we need to put more pressure on them, not just the house. what in the hell are they trying to do?!
we need a taxpayer revolt if the thing passes!
Lets cut to the chase folks: do you think for a minute that Paulson and the rest of the criminals are in a panic because they care about America?What they are in such a frenzy about, is the crimes of Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the Wall Street thieves is close to being exposed. They need this bailout before it is too late and they are found out for the criminals they are. They are the ones that are scared to death.
Bring America Back !!!!
YES, SIR PAUL.==COMMEND you on the perception, just as Iraq was the shock & awe for
the military, the Big Bailouts are the shock & awe for our Economy ! King
George needs a cover for the next 4 months so he can slide out the back door
un-noticed==the footsteps of the FBI are pitter pattering on 26 of his favorite
Base Companies, several counties of the US have arrest warrants outstanding for
Bush & Cheney.
****AGAIN, mainstream media provides the Drumbeat for the Bailouts, distracting
attention where Bush has the US again meddling in Bolivia, Venezuela, Argentina,
and making an Enemy out of an Allied Russian Putin !!
*** Only, this time It is more than obvious to see where the enemies are==on
Wall Street==whereas on 9/11, it was not so easy to see Building 7, Ground Zero,
and THEY were able to blame a cave-dwelling boogieman, & 19 airline school flunkouts, for an ingeniusly, masterminded, false flag attack in NY & DC !!+
THE TRUTH IS NOT EXACTLY 'MARCHING ON', BUT IT IS====COMING !!!!!
I am very much in favor of Rep. DeFazio and the progressive members of the House's bailout plan. My hope is that Democrats will embrace and enact it. I also hope that the House rejects the plan that the millionaire club Senate will inevitably pass tomorrow night. We finally have a real chance of doing this right with this progressive plan. The question remains if the Democratic leadership will accept it or capitulate once again.
I agree. Here is a link to their plan Note that it's short and very easy to understand. Please read Marion Polk's comments for an explanation of why the mark to market rule needs changing. Both Marion and I are members of the National Coalition Against Naked Short Selling [NCANS] and have worked tirelessly for no pay to force the SEC to enforce its laws, but to little avail as the current crisis proves. We witnessed the creation of this crisis first hand and know it was a ciminal event perpetrated by Paulson amogst others.
Those of us who tried to get the SEC to do its job can say with a high degree of confidence that if the SEC had done its job starting in 2003 we wouldn't be going through this avoidable financial crisis.
How can there be an uprising in the greatest country on earth and a force for good for all mankind? That does not sound right.
I myself would gladly accept "a plan", and not necessarily a "bailout" type either - IF only a proposed plan would be allowed to be submitted by 200 of the top financial experts who teach economics at our Universities, and Colleges.
Allowing the White House or Congress to fix a "supposed" financial meltdown is like letting an Auto Service Technician do brain surgery.
Coffeelover,,,,,
Within this Chomsky article about South America's new-found unity is his description of what the so-called bailout bill will attempt:
"We should note that this is a regular feature of contemporary state capitalism, though the scale today is unprecedented. A study by two well-known international economists 15 years ago found that at least twenty companies in the top Fortune 100 would not have survived if they had not been saved by their respective governments, and that many of the rest gained substantially by demanding that governments "socialise their losses." Such government intervention "has been the rule rather than the exception over the past two centuries," they conclude from a detailed analysis. [Ruigrok and von Tulder]
"We might also take note of the striking similarity between the structural adjustment programs imposed on the weak by the International Monetary Fund, and the huge financial bailout that is on the front pages today in the North. The US executive-director of the IMF, adopt ing an image from the Mafia, described the institution as "the credit community's enforcer." Under the rules of the Western-run international economy, investors make loans to third world tyrannies, and since the loans carry considerable risk, make enormous profits. Suppose the borrower defaults. In a capitalist economy, the lenders would incur the loss. But really existing capitalism functions quite differently. If the borrowers cannot pay the debts, then the IMF steps in to guarantee that lenders and investors are protected. The debt is transferred to the poor population of the debtor country, who never borrowed the money in the first place and gained little if anything from it. That is called "structural adjustment." And taxpayers in the rich country, who also gained nothing from the loans, sustain the IMF through their taxes. These doctrines do not derive from economic theory; they merely reflect the distribution of decision-making power.
"The designers of the international economy sternly demand that the poor accept market discipline, but they ensure that they themselves are protected from its ravages, a useful arrangement that goes back to the origins of modern industrial capitalism, and played a large role in dividing the world into rich and poor societies, the first and third worlds.
"This wonderful anti-market system designed by self-proclaimed market enthusiasts is now being implemented in the United States, to deal with the very ominous crisis of financial markets. In general, markets have well-known inefficiencies. One is that transactions do not take into account the effect on others who are not party to the transaction. These so-called "externalities" can be huge. That is particularly so in the case of financial institutions. Their task is to take risks, and if well-managed, to ensure that potential losses to themselves will be covered. To themselves. Under capitalist rules, it is not their business to consider the cost to others if their practices lead to financial crisis, as they regularly do. In economists' terms, risk is underpriced, because systemic risk is not priced into decisions. That leads to repeated crisis, naturally. At that point, we turn to the IMF solution. The costs are transferred to the public, which had nothing to do with the risky choices but is now compelled to pay the costs - in the US, perhaps mounting to about $1 trillion right now. And of course the public has no voice in determining these outcomes, any more than poor peasants have a voice in being subjected to cruel structural adjustment programs.
"A basic principle of modern state capitalism is that cost and risk are socialized, while profit is privatized. That principle extends far beyond financial institutions. Much the same is true for the entire advanced economy, which relies extensively on the dynamic state sector for innovation, for basic research and development, for procurement when purchasers are unavailable, for direct bail-outs, and in numerous other ways. These mechanisms are the domestic counterpart of imperial and neocolonial hegemony, formalized in World Trade Organization rules and the misleadingly named 'free trade agreements.'"
As you see, the bailout bill was written to install an IMF structural adjustment/shock doctrine situation onto the US public. With this added insight, those supporting Obama, who is currently being very strident in his determination that this bill be passed in its current form, must rethink their position, as Obama shows himself to be no better flack than Pelosi, and certainly unfit to handle his own checkbook let alone national fiscal and monetry policy.
Please pass the Chomsky piece onto your social network as his analysis must gain a wider audience.
Although I respect the writings of Chomsky his viewpoints regarding South America are Western in origin and lack the depth of understanding necessary to properly interpret the changes in South America. Jew's have historically blocked any open discussion of the American Holocaust in our media. Jew's have chosen the road of reserving the victimization of genocide to themselves. Therefore, there is now not a proper understanding of Indigenous South American's beliefs as they relate to their political behavior. My take is that Jewish intellectuals do not have the mindset or objectivity to properly and accurately interpret the meanings of South American Indigenous decision making. They are lacking. His comments may have some generalized accuracy but are not to be trusted further. Jew's should not attempt to claim intellectual hegemony regarding South American social and political meanings. Indigenous South American's are more than capable of speaking for themselves.
Forgetting Rwanada, Darfur, Bosnia, Kosovo, etc? Last time I checked those have been in the news.
I would say you need to read more, especially Year 501. And the South Americans I read that speak for themselves reinforce what Chomsky is saying. Chomsky also spends a lot of time in South America observing and conversing with people, activists and academics and is a far more credible source about what's happening in South America than the whole of the US Propaganda and Indoctrination Systems combined.
Chomsky hasn't changed his tune in 40 years.
Neither have you, for the last 40 weeks. And unlike Chomsky, there has been much evidence presented here that has pointed out the illogic behind your so-called arguments.
So please wake up and change your tune about that "change we can believe in" bullshit. Because I see that the Obamanation is supporting the Senate/McPain/Bush/Harry Reid plan that is going up for a vote tomorrow.
Hope(less).
I am absolutely amazed. How did you designate me as an Obama supporter? I've never posted anything supporting him or saying he should be elected. If anything all my posts have been questions or negative. I think you are confused.
As to Chomsky, he's an old communist singing the same old communist line. I have made it clear I have no particular use for communists or maybe you missed that. They must have an opressed class for their ideology to work, so he finds one behind every bush. And its BS.
First I'll have to find a way to "dumb it down" as my social circle would be lost after the second sentence.
But muchos gracias. Chomsky is dead-on as usual and it is nice to see SOMEONE finally point out that this is the imposition of State Capitalism on the U.S. and nothing less.
.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/09/25-1
Congressional Backbone Needed
by Ralph Nader
(Follows with list of 12 solutions )
Also read nader.org for an archive of all his articles...Great Stuff ...
.
"Cowards and Traitors. We need some moral fortitude and an adjusted sense of accountability and we need it now. No more games. Just stand up for us and say NO!"
Pretty fair comment I believe.
I'd also like to take this opportunity to suggest that the American people are proving themselves to be a little less brainwashed or "sheeple" as many keep trying to portray them. Its just that there is no leadership for them. But when you have a unifying factor that is truly important, even without leadership they stand up and do the right thing. Last year it was the "cheap labor bill", this year the attempted rape of the public treasury by Paulson and the boy's.
Buried in the bill, as per an article in Forbes Magazine, was the US Governmnet taking over futures contracts for various failed or failing firms.
In a nutshell these people were speculating on the prices of commodites, especially oil and driving the price upwards. According to the an analyst the author cited, were these futures contracts allowed to collapse the price of oil would plummet to around 75 dollars.
So think about that. The US Government takes over these contracts as per the bailout. The US currently runs an 800 billion dollar trade deficit with the world and half that due to oil imports.
In order for the US Government to make the taxpayers money back if they took over these contracts, they would have to support a HIGHER Price for oil which the Consumer would pay for via inflation.
People should not rest easy because of the defeat of this bailout. The package grew from a 4 pages document to one that promises to be hundreds of pages long , filled no doubt with massive loopholes.
The fundamental problem as i see it is this. The US long ago went away from producing items with true value that they could sell to the world in order to create wealth. Instead they decided they would create wealth by selling and buying pieces of paper, representing debt, which has little in the way of value.
The solution to this is to create more pieces of paper representing debt. Debt is now a commodity that is bought and sold and on which paper fortunes are made. This system is bound to fail as the paper only has a perceived value.
If they truly want to fix this they need a fundamental rethink of the entire economy, and that includes abandoning ideologies long held sacrosanct.
pk
People should not rest easy because of the defeat of this bailout.
Absolutely true!
"The fundamental problem as i see it is this. The US long ago went away from producing items with true value that they could sell to the world in order to create wealth. Instead they decided they would create wealth by selling and buying pieces of paper, representing debt, which has little in the way of value."
Excellent points! If you don't manufacture, producing items with true value , you die.
"If they truly want to fix this they need a fundamental rethink of the entire economy, and that includes abandoning ideologies long held sacrosanct."
Absolute agreement! And the best place to start is to throw out unfettered markets.
.
The U.S. Economy is in the toilet.........
Both Bush and Cheney should be IMPEACHED by Friday !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
.
I know that it is fashionable to "hate the Fed". I can understand why. But, in 2007, the Fed bought $840 billion in govt bonds from US Banks. Why cant they use the Fed to bailout these "banks and securities", if they see them as so essential? (the word "bank" should be used in the loosest sense fo the word>)
We need to tax traders (traitors) for every trade, flip, capital gains, etc. If there is nothing to discourage them they wil not stop. This coudl raise $100 bilion annually.
The US has a tax phobia. To hear the corp. talk, youd think they pay exhorbitent tax rates, when, really nothing could be further from the truth. Sadly, the people that resist a tax increase, say, in order to pool their money to pay for, say , health insurance, adn sometimes the ones who could benefit most. But the spin, spin, continues, adn they seem to buy it over and over. "$1000 will shut them up--they can spend it at Wal-mart, propping up the Chinese economy". If you call your congress-people again, ask them WHY. WHY can we not take these criminal's bonuses and assets? Then, go to OPen Secrets.org. Look at their tax returns and campaign contributions. There you will find the answer.
"...Keep 'em hoooked on religion and sex and tv..........and you think youre so clever and classnles and free...but youre still fucking peasants , as far as I can see.."
Yeah, I had a short discussion with my former boss about corporate taxes. He repeatedl McCain's line about how we have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, blah blah blah. Was there not an article on here earlier that pointed out there are so many loopholes that about 70% or so of corporations never pay ANY tax?
.
Nader/Gonzales is looking better and BETTER...
For more information on the Nader/Gonzalez campaign, visit: votenader.org.
Support by giving DONATIONS to make this happen ...
VOTE NADER 2008 !!!!! WORLD PEACE !!!!!!! End THE WARS......
.
Your update is revisionism at it's best.
Translation... The Democrats desperately want to hurl the spoils of our pillaged Treasure at the greedy corporate criminals... they just don't want to take all the blame... they want to cover their political asses... and in that respect, it was wonderfully played.
But make no mistake, they are only thinking of their political futures... not our economic futures... and in that sense, they are screwing us. They are just waiting for the right time to do it.
The gamesmanship you point to and rejoice at, is one of the basic problems with our government. Truth and ethics are something that were abandoned log ago, and with it, any sense of accountability for actions.
I fully intend to vote out my Representative for his act of "gamesmanship"... and this is someone I have supported for decades. That McDermott has been hiding behind a firewall since the vote is very telling.
Cowards and Traitors. We need some moral fortitude and an adjusted sense of accountability and we need it now. No more games. Just stand up for us and say NO!
Pelosi is one of the worst political "leaders" this country has ever seen. She is a disgrace and a fraud. She is a Republican posing as a Democrat. Unfortunately, she should have taken her cue from card-carrying Republicans and voted no.
need to read:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/business/30plan.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin
Media spin is in full force: the market drop yesterday was due to the bills failure and the rise today is due to renewed hope for passage... the credit market has totally dried up...
I'm not buying it. The drop looked to me like a reaction to the belief it would pass, and the rise today smells like relief. And I heard the FDIC was telling the banks to hold credit Seems like they're trying to manufacture a crises...
Can anyone elaborate?
I can say that Rep. Kuncinich spoke about this on DemocracyNow! yesterday, he said it added a "stench" to the whole deal.
The media spin on the market reaction is really quite nasty. According to cnn.com and the rest of the Corporatist Media everything, EVERYTHING, hinges on the passage or "failure" of this particular form of bailout. This notion is utter fantasyland and can only be propagated because so few people understand what is really going on.
Or -I should say- so few understand the particulars, though as the public outcry on the bill demonstrates they do understand the general idea.
The General: A bunch of rich jerks have messed things up so badly that they have led us once again to near Collapse. And now they want to "double screw" all the rest of us by A) Forcing through legislation that would pawn off all their fake "assets" onto us and our friggin' grandkids, and by B) Attempting to get their toadies in Congress to not even throw us a bone like renegotiation of loan terms at foreclosure.
In other words: They screwed it all up by being greedy, they want us to take the main hit for it, but they're STILL so greedy that they don't want to give up on the maximum repayment on the loans that they issued even though many of them CAN'T be paid back!
The People's instinct that this is all really just to protect a bunch of the bigwigs from losing their mansions in the Hamptons while doing nothing to save an "economy" that is dead no matter what is likely very close to the truth.
It is never a good idea to ignore the Common Sense of the Common People.
As for the Particular: It has everything to do with these B.S. "derivatives" that were made possible by computers and de-regulation. I'd strongly suggest checking out DemocracyNow!'s archive on their site to listen to Rep. Kucinich on this for a better understanding -he is very right on on this. Basically, the Street and these banks are now "losing" a bunch of "capital assets" -that were less real than Monopoly Money- because they "backed" them with stupid loans that were never going to be payable. Imaginary assets spun out of unpayable debts that require exponential growth but are tied to something that can only grow arithmatically (home loans need house starts need people to buy more houses, but there were only so many people who could do so with hope of repayment).
It was all either very, VERY stupid and fueled by hubris, or very, VERY nasty and fueled by cynicism.
Just remember that the people telling you the sky is falling are the same ones who knocked the pillars out from under it.
And Don't Panic,
-matti.
Let the politicians in the House (and Senate) fear us and our votes. Fight for a good bill. I am proud of the regular folks.
Is'nt it just Too bad about the brainwashed masses eh?, Especially the ones who played it "straight". The little punkers, will always stand up for themselves, same with the Mexicans, the Blacks, the Arabs, the Burners and all the other subgroups that have nobody but eachother to depend on. THESE are the unrecognised heroes that take the beatings , arrests and gassings FOR YOU, protecting whats left of YOUR constitutional "freedoms"
So who stands up NOW? Ball one, They will push at it again, with a smaller power margin, if that fails they will try again some other way.... Untill everybody knows where the knife cuts and which way.
Hey it happened in Albania, as it happened in Texas. ALL pyramid scams end up like this.
But this time we have NAMES and FACES, and we know who WON the game.
Let's play FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!! Our celebrity accountants will go first to the CAYMAN Islands!
Yachts, Estates, Racehorses! All for the good of AMERIKKKA!!! Honey! There is a camera crew at the door, they say they've come for the WARHOL COLLECTION!
The bolshevik's they INVENTED MEDIA! Every film editor knows this truth...
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
I disagree with the Update comments. Pelosi made sure that the Democrats got their hands dirty with this debacle, instead of allowing Bush to be the fall guy (along with any Repubs that supported the corporate bailout).
Many Republicans (including mine own, Darrell Issa R-CA 49th) can now stand as defenders of Main Street against the Dems. He said "This is a manufactured crisis."
And the appearance is that Pelosi could only deliver 60% of the Dem vote. She appeared weak and unable to control her own kind. Not very leader-like.
I'm with you.
My Rep. (also R) is one of those "lifer" types so he wasn't exactly in any real danger of losing his seat.
But he has gotten weaker politically as the terms have gone by -not to any Dem. but to another GOPer, maybe.
I can almost guaruntee you that this vote alone will cement his victory in Nov., barring some really craven reversal with no cover story.
I don't think "Wahington insider" analysis apllies to this situation. I think that to most "average joe Americans" Pelosi comes off as a bitch, and the crap she was spinning about how much this bill would help everybody was far too obviously total B.S. to fly anymore.
At this point, a strong move toward a more tuly "FDR-like" platform would ensure a huge "FDR-like" landslide for the Dems more than it ever would before. It is ridiculous for them to even consider NOT doing this! Reintroduction of protections for the bankrupted and forclosed upon alone would be enough. Any plan for real universal healthcare would have the polls swamped with millions of former Abstainers looking to vote Democrat!
Yet they don't do (at least not yet) ANY of these things!
Even though the failure to do so hurts their chances horribly.
So no, I don't think Pelosi's scheming is quite as clever as Greenwald makes it out to be.
I think the People expect the Party of FDR, who constantly envoke the language and person of FDR, too start finally friggin' ACTING like FDR!
When they don't, things might get kinda weird.
Don't Panic,
-matti.
"Any plan for real universal healthcare would have the polls swamped with millions of former Abstainers looking to vote Democrat!"
Universal healthcare will NEVER happen in America. Its not the cost, it's the sheer leverage private healthcare gives to the system over the workers--tied directly to your employer-- keeps people "productive". Its the dirty little secret of our brand of capitalism. Take THAT away from the system and the people have real freedom. We can't have anything like that!
Never say "never". And especially never say "NEVER". ;)
Over the long-term lack of health care hurts real productivity and employer-based health care overburdens private enterprise.
But I agree it will not happen under the current scheme of politely waiting for corrupt politicians to introduce it while ignoring the bribes they take from the insurance industry to not do so.
If we do not enact single-payer health care, we will become a Third World Nation. Half of the Midwest and the Deep South are already living in conditions that should make us ashamed.
This could be a chance for Obama to stand up for the poor and working classes. But he will never take it.
Forget about National healthcare, its gone south for a few years with the recession.
I for one am heartened by this whether some form of "bailout" eventually passes or not.
I was so sure that the Congress of the People had moved so far away from the Will of the People that I was toasting the death of the Republic Sunday night.
(Remember that the bill that was rejected Monday was not merely a "bailout for fat cats on Wall Street" -that would be bad enough- it established powers for the Treasury Secretary and obligations to the Treasury that would not have stopped at $700b. This was a giant leap toward State Capitalism and must be rejected until the language is REALLY altered to prevent this.)
To wake up bleary-eyed on Monday morning and realize that this thing had actually been defeated, and that the only explanation was the Congress's fear of the People! Amazing!
Let's not be too sure that essentially the same bill will be passed in the future either. The "gun to their heads" of a total market meltdown looked like it would work on Monday, but, as Mr. Greenwald notes, calm is returning and the markets still seem to be functioning properly.
Also we can't underestimate the invigorating hope that this kind of effect will have on the People. The fact that it was their calls and threats to withold their votes this Nov. that convinced many of the Nay voters that way is not just some Internets secret -it is all over the media. The expectation that a small victory will drive them into complacency and allow their enemies to move forward may be as out-moded as the idea that such a horrible bill would pass without resistance.
If my guess is correct I would say that SOME kind of "stimulus" will need to be added to or be partned with any "bailout". And that while the weak language that allows steps toward State-Capitalism might be retained -it is a murky area, and only of concern because of the Congress's tendency to kow-tow to the Executive in recent years- the basic structure of the "plan" as top-down, not bottom-up, and run by the same criminals who got everybody into this mess I don't see surviving now.
So chins up and stay on the phones people! It is the "work week" now, but why not call on your lunch break?
Two final things:
1. I don't think the average Citizen views the kind of sneaky tricks that Pelosi got up to quite as well as Mr. Greenwald does. But after hours and hours of TV propaganda, they may be swayed.
2. Should we do a "roll call shout out"? Was your Rep. Yea or Nay? Mine was Nay- that evil old Republican bastard, I could kiss him!
Don't Panic,
-matti.
Before we tout GOP "populist values", I think we should look at Darrel Issa's very different reasons for voting down the bill.
Two friends of mine have no more IRA's and they are not young. ]
I didnt watn this thing to pass, either. But, the entire session should have just showed the US people how little that DC even considers what happens to you.
I'm sure most of them are invested in the Cayman Islands, etc. If they were populists, they would include the bankruptcy reform, clsoe down Hedge Funds, and take these bastered's money.
Capitalism (moneyism) sucks.
Darrel Issa is a Repug scum bag of the first order whom has been a blot on the California political scene for years!