The $700 billion bailout vote failed today, and the point-drop in the Dow Jones Industrial matched better than point for dollar. The DJI shed over 777 points on Monday. The only good news thus far is that it was not raining businessmen in Manhattan today.
House and Senate Democrats rushed to the microphones on Friday decrying the presence of John McCain as a force of division they could have done without, but as it turned out, it was Obama's quick tutor-job by the staff of Henry Paulson, through emails, that derailed Friday's "meeting". Obama walked in shooting from the hip and all hell broke loose.
The perplexing part of it all is this, however; Democrats claimed to "have a deal" in place before the arrival of McCain who, according to their accounts, "blew up" the meeting. So why did Indiana House Democrats, to name a few, vote two to one against the bailout? Even more important is the question of why Nancy Pelosi made this speech hours before the vote:
To me, that does not sound like a person trying to get a deal done. It sounds like a person holding a large knife and plunging it repeatedly into the deal.
Then Barney Frank decided to insert his foot into his mouth yet again by claiming that Republicans were to blame. Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., the whip, estimated that Pelosi's speech changed the minds of a dozen Republicans who might otherwise have supported the plan.
That was a remarkable accusation by Republicans against Republicans, said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee: "Because somebody hurt their feelings, they decided to punish the country."
That's a very interesting accusation of its own, considering that 40% of House Democrats also voted against the bill. This is the same Barney Frank, while we're at it, who in 2003 said: "These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."
And that was in response to a call by none other than President Bush for more regulations on the two institutions to prevent what many others recognized at the time as a potential disaster. How does Nancy Pelosi interpret history? Like this:"[W]hen was the last time someone asked you for $700bn? It is a number that is staggering, but tells us only the costs of the Bush administration's failed economic policies — policies built on budgetary recklessness, on an anything-goes mentality, with no regulation, no supervision, and no discipline in the system."
I read these quotes, I listen to the audio and I remember past events, and I am left scratching my head, trying to understand how a modern political party can utter such nonesense and not even be held accountable in the mainstream media.
But I am not alone. Is it any wonder why Congress enjoys an 11% approval rating?
Monday, September 29, 2008
Democrats: Bi-Partisan or Bi-Polar?
Labels:
Bailout,
Barney Frank,
Democrats,
Nancy Pelosi,
Wall Street
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment