House GOP revolt?!
Many press reports have given credit for killing / stalling this $700 billion bailout to House Republicans. But just how bad is it?
(A member of the House GOP leadership) Mr. Cantor acknowledged, “People want to see a deal made, no question about it.”
Yet, at the same time, it was becoming quite obvious that some House Republicans no longer saw themselves as an extension of the Bush White House. (NYTimes, by Carl Hulse)
Finally!
For example, in advance of the president’s speech Wednesday, Representative Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan, a member of the Republican leadership, sent out this statement expressing his pique: “Who’s giving the Republican response?”
Tim White
2 comments:
What they are saying about Dodd's plan ..from Instapundit
"Much of the blogosphere is up in arms because of the provision in Senator
Dodd’s financial bailout bill that might funnel profits from the bailout
plan to ACORN Housing (related to the disreputable activist group ACORN),
and other more reputable service organizations.
I have read Dodd’s proposed statute and in some respects, it is far worse
than has been reported. Senator Dodd has placed a loophole in the bill that
is explicitly designed to siphon off tens or hundreds of billions of dollars
to the Housing Trust Fund and the Capital Magnet Fund even if there are no
net profits in the $700 billion venture.
You know, it would be easier for me to believe this was a crisis, if the
people in charge were acting like it was a crisis, instead of just an
opportunity for graft. Then again, to some of these people, everything is
just an opportunity for graft."
http://www.pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/archives2/024996.php
The Washington establishment doesn't represent voters. It represents itself. So your comments come as no surprise. But there is a more fundamental problem with the bailout.
From the May 7, 1999 WSJ opinion piece on Ron Paul's hero F.A. von Hayek:
Although Hayek did brilliant research on money, credit, capital interest and monetary cycles... perhaps his greatest contribution lies in a simple insight: Man does not and cannot know everything, and when he acts as if he did, he invites trouble.
To support this bailout is to invite trouble. We all know it... we've just got way too much fear-mongering from the TV networks and elected officials.
Again, I understand the theory that the bailout gives us the 1970s instead of the 1930s.
But until we begin to address the debt and monetary policy, it's a safe bet that the dollar will continue to devalue and our standard of living will continue to decline dramatically... even with the easy credit of the Bush years.
Post a Comment