The Bail-Out Debacle (Why my prediction was wrong)
First off, I will admit that I was wrong in my predictions for Friday. But I’m thrilled that no bail-out legislation has gone through and not really that upset because, as I stated, I do this for free. But I will admit, I would have gloated happily had I been right - and I still could be, except for timing. McCain is, after all, back in Washington. But I stayed very close to the radio/TV/computer yesterday and I think I have a grasp of where I went wrong.
I mistakenly assumed that when the Democratic leadership said legislation needed to be passed this week to avoid the collapse of the entire banking system of the United States, their intentions were altruistic. (Crazy, I know.) I was wrong, but please cut me some slack - I was home with a sick kid for three days, had multiple volunteer commitments and got very little sleep. It honestly never crossed my mind that the tax and spend (and spend and spend) Democrats would all of a sudden get religion and decide that they could not force through universally reviled legislation based solely on their majority in both Houses and instead would require bipartisan support or refuse to pass the bill. I guess there is a first for everything. Or maybe not.
My revelation came as reports about Thursday’s White House meeting started to flow. For those of you out there who are skeptical, let me assure you that I 100% believe the report that Obama blew the whole meeting. We may never know why he had a copy of the House Republicans’ proposal (faxed from Goldman-Sachs, of all places - GD, Hank, who do you work for?) and whether he was supposed to have it or not. What we’ve heard is that he went in there and tried to systematically dismiss each point in it, thereby really ticking off the Republican leaders. That’s not really negotiating, is it? Again, no one is playing the tapes, but what we know of Obama and what we know of human nature can lead us to believe that after being dragged unwillingly back to Washington to work on this, it is likely he wanted to be the hero - why else would his own party have put him in charge of negotiating for them? (Reality check - If either of the candidates ultimately can claim credit for legislation that the public will accept on this, it will be huge for their campaign. The fact that McCain was willing to sacrifice his campaign to try and Obama was not will be inconsequential in the end - unfortunatley.) But, back to the disaster. The meeting ended badly - I think that is code for Pelosi putting Obama in a headlock. And nothing was accomplished except for, you guessed it, more bad blood between the aisles. (As an aside, let me just say that my Spidey-sense has me wondering if the reason Bush is so cozy with the Dems on this is because he sees how unpopular this is with the public and if the Rep’s continue to protest the bail out it can only help McCain. Finally, a right wing conspiracy theory I can get behind.)
OK, where was I? Bad meeting, lots of ridiculous public appearances by Obama afterwards. What was that all about? DId he look scared or what? WTF happened in there? Oh, I’d pay $700 billion to hear the tapes. Obama says ‘I’m going to Mississippi and I’m taking my toys with me’. McCain stays behind - I truly believe he still believed he could help negotiate this, God love him. But the Dem’s have decided, as they not so slyly exhibited on Friday AM, that they will not allow any credit to go to McCain. In fact, they told him to leave Washington - which is absolutely ridiculous since he’s a Senator - something Obama has entirely forgotten (understandable under the circumstances - he never was much of a Senator, anyway). The MSM is attempting to blame the melt-down entirely at McCain’s feet - something about injecting Presidential politics into the debate. No one is buying this except for the Dems, who need it to be true, even after they publicly invited McCain to come. Oh, and Nancy Pelosi is the only person on the planet who still believes that a deal was ready to be signed on Thursday afternoon, before the meeting - everyone else now knows that was a lie.
Now the House Republicans are starting to leak little details from the plan, such as 20% of profits going to more housing agencies, with $100 million or more of that going to ACORN-the organization being paid by the Obama campaign to register ineligible, dead and non-existent voters all across the country. Conservative talk radio and blogs are pushing for a continued flood of calls and faxes to Congress and the White House to squash any attempts by Democrats to funnel profits (if there ever are any) anywhere but back to the Treasury. Hey, what about back to us - the new “shareholders”? And every “special interest” in town is clamoring for a piece of the pie - including lots of minority business lobbyists that claim they should be given preferential treatment because it is their demographic that is being disenfranchised the most by the failure of Liberal policies that require lenders (under threat of litigation) to extend credit to the disenfranchised, even though they were and are unqualified and have continued to fail to thrive under preferential conditions. (A bit circular, I know but read it until you understand.)
It’s beginning to look more and more like we’re screwed big time. But wait, why won’t the Dem’s just vote? They have a majority - they can pass it and the President will sign. (Spidey-sense tingling again) So my question to you is “Why won’t they just pass their own bill?” What is the problem? Could it be that they are afraid to be the responsible parties here? Could it be they are playing politics with our financial security? Could it be they realize the voting public does not want this? Could it be they are between a rock and a hard place and if they screw this up they will lose - again?
More from Michelle Malkin (my new imaginary BFF)
Diversity Racketeers want their piece of bailout pie
Hot Air has it going on, too -
House GOP Rejects latest bailout proposal.
Popularity: 24% [?]
Review this site
I don’t understand - the bailout has the support of everyone - the Bush administration, Treasury/Fed, Senate Democrats, Senate Republicans, House Democrats - everyone except John McCain and the Republicans in the House, and it’s Obama’s fault that an agreement wasn’t reached? Seriously?
Neither of the candidates needed to be in Washington - the administration came up with a plan and worked with and got the support of Congressional leadership. McCain pulled a publicity stunt because he wanted to look like he rode in like a hero when none was needed. The House Republicans wouldn’t have been able to hold out as the only opposition to the plan if it weren’t for the backing of McCain. It’s his fault the bailout plan wasn’t passed this week - both he and Obama should have stayed out of DC and let the administration and Congress get the job done.
Yeah, It just might be Obama’s fault but we won’t know for awhile or ever. He went when the President called and instead of sitting back and listening he had to jump in and try to make a stand. Now don’t get me wrong, my opinion is let ‘em fail. And let the chips fall where they may. Maybe a good old fashioned Depression is just what we need to bring about a return to basics - simplify, right?
I still don’t totally buy the”publicity stunt” theory. I believe McCain really felt, whether good or bad, he needed to get to Washington. The campaign spun it a bit much and of course the MSM and Dems ran with the cynical explanation. I’m sure he knew the possible benefits but he also knew the risk. So far, it’s not paid off. But, he’s still there and Obama isn’t. If McCain can get something through that adheres to his vision - not $700 billion up front, an independent oversight committee (McCain said it first), profits back to Treasury, no stimulus package, no hand-outs to dodgy ‘agencies’, no earmarks and even a temporary break in capital gains, he’s done good. But I’m right with the House Rep’s on this - we’re being robbed- let’s keep it to a minimum. Haven’t we learned enough from the public school system - throwing money at a problem does not solve everything. And why don’t the Dems just pass the plan on their own? Why can’t anyone explain that?
Hey, I didn’t forget that they’re all politicians. I’m already planning my next project - a campaign to get a minimum of 100,000 to refuse to pay income tax this year because of the bail out. And I’m planning my run for Congress in two years. If you want something done right, do it yourself.
I guess my only two responses to that would be that 1) there would have been an agreement on a bailout if it weren’t for McCain (whether or not you agree with the bailout) calling for him and Obama to rush back to Washington when they weren’t needed as negotiators; and 2) we have to keep in mind that the 700 billion dollar bailout is misunderstood - it’s a 700 billion dollar investment that most economists think the government is going to make money on because they’re buying undervalued assets. It’s extremely unlikely that it will actually end up costing 700 billion bucks.
How can you say there would have been an agreement? As a registered Republican in MA with no representation whatsoever in Washington, I am thrilled that the House Reps put up a stink and made negotiations continue. I know W was behind all of this but I’m not willing to give even him the benefit of the doubt when this much money is involved in an unconstitutional policy. Or are you referring to the Dem’s saying on Thursday that they had an agreement when they didn’t, in an attempt to preempt McCain? I suppose we can only hope (and pray) that with a spoonful of sugar, we can swallow the deal announced this morning.
In the end, I don’t think anyone’s mind is changed in regards to Presidential picks. McCain supporters like me will give him the benefit of the doubt that, like I said, he believed he could help, he believed he should be there as an elected Senator and was intentionally blocked by the Dems in any attempt. Obama supporters will say the whole thing was a stunt and McCain was playing politics and therefore, they blocked him.
But is it so bad that a deal wasn’t signed on Thursday of Friday? Let them earn their pay, right? And think of all those faxes coming in all weekend reminding Congress that they are distrusted and hated even more than W. Now let’s throw them all out.
As for a return on our investment, that remains to be seen. It all depends on who ends up handling the investment, doesn’t it? And will the government actually release all those homes for sale or are we going to expand “Section 8″? And will these reforms include tightening credit requirements or are we going to do this all over again in twenty years?