- IdahoStatesman.com
- Blogs
- Bronco Beat
- Murph's Turf
- Varsity Extra
- Idaho Newsreader
- Inside Idaho Business
- Commentary: Kevin Richert
- Your Local Government
- Letters from the West
- Into the Outdoors
- Words & Deeds
- The Beer Nut: Patrick Orr
- What's Online
- Nonprofits
- TechIdaho
- The Cinemaniac
- Idaho Politics: LiCalzi
- Idaho Legislature: Labrador
- Idaho Legislature: Langhorst
- Forums
- Recent Posts
- Content

Thank you George Bush
Now that the rich have all cut and run, there's no mention about what federal programs will get cut to pay for this bailout. I guess we'll just add $600,000,000,000 to our $9.7 trillion dollar national debt - which already works out to be more than $31,000 per person. Not much if you're a millionaire, but I believe it's slightly more or less than Idaho's average annual wage and Otter's answer to that is use our taxpayer dollars to recruit more skilled workers to Idaho instead of growing our own.
Look what the Bush and the current Republicans have done to us on their way out and tell me McCain and Palin are going to change things. I'm sorry, but I don't think McCain has what it takes - or the will - to fix this.
It's more than Bush, samiam...it is Republican policy...
...it is the successful result of Republican agenda, pure and simple. The state of the economy is their interpretation of success. And half the country agrees with them.
Didn't John McCain say that the economy was fundamentally sound just a couple of weeks ago?
And then today, on Face the Nation he said (speaking to Bob Schieffer) "I hate to keep bringing that up--that we probably--you and I have never had a conversation when our economy was in greater difficulty than it is today."
So, as you can see, Senator McCain has a very clear stance on how he feels about the most important issue facing America today. Very presidential.
America - Improve it or Lose it
Our taxes will bail out the bankers
Shame on Bush. He saddles our taxpayers with needless wars, expects us to bail out bankers,and thinks we should vote GOP.
Forget it.
republicans
all ought to be branded with a big R on their forehead and them put in a refugee camp at camp bush in Texass or perhaps in Wyoming on chenney's spread where they could all go duck hunting.
With all of this going on, why do the polls show...
With all of this going on, why do the polls show McSame slightly ahead?
Do we not trust the polls? or are there really that many blind, dumb, ignorant voters who would put McSame in charge?
Saigon, I'll guess...
...number two. It's like a religion to them.
America - Improve it or Lose it
The polls
....I think it depends of which publication or which channel and what money runs it......Wall Street Journal, very much Republican, New York Times, more Democratic.
Some appear to be neutral....and then we all know about FOX...............geeesh!!!!!!!
And by their OWN admission
messnbc finally admits THEY are liberally slanted.
Nice.
*****************************************
Palin/McCain '08!!!
Nice to see a little honesty....
Has Fox News admitted that they are slanted to the right?
America - Improve it or Lose it
Is Fox news slanted right?
I'd like to see some hard data about that.
I don't mean in their commentary shows, but on actual news. Brit Hume is one of two actually balanced reporters, the other is Jim Lehrer. Juan Williams is openly liberal. Seems like there is some balance here.
Truth is hard to come by
There are no 'balanced' reporters in the popular media.
Read some of Noam Chomsky's books.
There is an allowable breadth to media topics. They can question the cost, or current success, of the war, but they cannot ask why we started the stupid war in the first place.
The popular media keeps the viewers ignorant by throwing out figures, but not giving comparison numbers to make the figure relevant.
When you watch the corporate news program, you think you are aquiring information, but it is just noise with no perspective.
It's not just "noise with no perspective", dog,
it's intentional brain-washing: The inevitable outcome of mass marketing.
Careful there conservodem, the righty-tighties will label you a
conspiracy theorist, and forever after all will avoid you like the plague. Your life will be worth nothing, your opinions shunned.
The only difference between a conspiracy and a coalition
is failure or success.
Edit: nly? what's nly?
Just as I thought
No hard evidence, just more speculation.
Truth is hard to come by
Spot on Baddog
Ron Paul will be haveing a major news conference on Wednesday morning. Lots of speculation on what this will be.
Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are the only ones to publicly call out the (lack of) justification and blowback effects of our war in Iraq. They have raised the issues and media stuck their fingers in their ears LA LA LA LA.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=456
one opinion--Palin/McCain '08!!!
Does that mean you are assassinating your pres pick?
Insane government bailout
This makes me so angry- I am very much for the free market, but this neocon version of capitalism where rewards are privatized and risk is socialized makes me sick. First Wall Street, now this. What's next? The auto makers?
While all the knee-jerk Bush bashers are having a field day with this, they we would pee themselves with joy if a Dem controlled government made this move. It's the Dems dream to have such control over part of the economy. Anyways, if you want to place blame, start with FDR- he is the one who set up this program in 1938.
Poor analysis, lee73
Roosevelt, made many mistakes in other areas, but his regulatory programs were to wisely PREVENT the inevitable boom-bust cycles of laissez faire "free markets" that require gov't bail-outs to prevent national (& now, world) financial collapse. If you've suckered into the Wall Street mantra for free markets, ala Kudlow&co, then your votes as well as your posts support socialized risks (in spite of your protestations).
Rational regulation is the ONLY path to a stable, efficient market place. (BTW, "rational regulation" DOES NOT include taxing business into oblivion -- in fact, it shouldn't include taxing business at all).
I am getting a crush on you
!
One question
If FNMA, a regulated entity started and chartered by the federal government was such a success, why are we bailing it out? FNMA was started in the spirit if rational regulation (as you suggest)and look at it now.
Fannie & freddie were also well regulated until
recently, and did their jobs quite well. This is typical R politics: Take a working government program, destroy it, then point to its failure to support destroying more working systems -- all in the name of speculative greed.
Please explain to the class how the Republicans
destroyed Fannie and Freddie. With credible sources.
Truth is hard to come by
Pee_J, the evidence is empirical...
I'm sure there is some "hard" evidence for those of you who have time to do the research, and I am sure there is refutable evidence as well. The empirical evidence is that the Fannie and Freddie systems were put in service by the Roosevelt Administration and worked well right up until the time the Neo-cons started "fixing" things..
Concidence? Maybe if only one thing went 'wrong', but you have to admit, things are falling apart faster than a house of cards on a milking stool.
Naw, I think the "manly" thing to do would be to 'own up' to the mistakes made and move on to get them fixed. I don't think 'more of the same' is gonna fix anything...
Just my $.02
Farang
My disconnect here is trying to find how the Republicans prompted the horrible business decisions that led to Fanny and Freddie buying up all of those deeply irresponsible loans. If that evidence exists I will shout it from the mountain tops, because this whole thing deeply pisses me off. I just haven't seen anyone show a political smoking gun. I know that Bush was all high on the "society of ownership," which was a laudable goal. I think that responsible market forces dictated the level of ownership that we had and trying to boost that just led to manipulative greed. You can say that the Bush administration should have seen what was going on and sought to regulate it early, and you would be right, but I still don't see a direct link here. If the executives of Fanny and Freddy had done their corporate duty of diligence on the loans they were buying then far fewer of them would have been made. Pointing to a politician that pressured them into buying bad loans would be the kind of smoking gun I am looking for.
Truth is hard to come by
I erased the line "don't ask me to back it up,
do your own research" before I posted because I wanted to see who would be the first to pretend that invalidates the statement. You win! I could probably find the evidence in less than 15 minutes, but you need the intellectual exercise. (Hint: deregulation of banking and financial institutions.)
You found me out- I am part of the R political machine!
All kidding aside- specifics would be nice. How did the Rs destroy FNMA? I think it was 1968 that FNMA was transferred to pseudo private control.
See reply to Peej
above.
It's called "CRONY CAPITALISM"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capitalism
It is NOT "free markets".
Don't be brainwashed. My dad loves to blame Bush and insists we need capitalism with rules, i.e, more like FDR.
Well, the question is: who's rules, the market's or the politician's rules? Or, which politician's rules?
The system is broken. The argument is not which group of bums should make the rules. The question is what should be the bounds of government, no matter who is in power, to subvert the free market. And how much socialism should be tolerated.
My new saying: Socialism is good for you. Now smile and pay your fair share.
And it's all being financed
And it's all being financed off the backs of the "slave" class... Middle-class Americans. Bailout by the PRIVATE Federal Reserve.
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -Thomas Jefferson
What happened to free market corrections?
What Bush did is nothing other than using our taxes to bail out big business. This should be considered criminal.
you are an idiot...
What is your solution?
Let the financial sector take its lumps and move on
The government cannot create wealth. It cannot create jobs. It cannot create prosperity. The government cannot pass laws or levy taxes to create prosperity. The government is not the tooth fairy or santa claus or God.
The government can only take from one party and give to another, while taking its cut for overhead (bureaucracy). The net is a drain on society.
Think about that for a moment.
A moment is way too much time to waste thinking about
such platitudes.