McCain conference call: Jack Kemp

posted at 2:00 pm on September 30, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Jack Kemp conducted a conference call to discuss the economic rescue plan and John McCain’s policies.  They also attacked Barack Obama’s spending plans, and Obama’s alleged mischaracterization of McCain’s positions last night.  Doug Holtz-Eakin declared McCain “disappointed” in the result yesterday, and noted that the failure had begun keeping credit from people who need it to keep our economy growing.

Secretary Kemp recalled his days in the Bush 41 administration and his experiences with the Resolution Trust Corp and the S&L collapse.  Kemp strongly supports immediate action to alleviate the financial crisis.  He sees an opportunity to rescue institutions but also to revive the credit market.  Kemp agrees with McCain that the situation is urgent and needs attention now.

One of the mistakes conservatives have made is thinking that this socializes the credit market.  Kemp says that’s not the case.  The government will buy assets for later resale when the market stabilizes.  The new FDIC limit should have been applied long ago and is greatly needed now.  Kemp hailed McCain’s leadership on this issue.

Kemp hit Obama on tax policy.  He didn’t know of any tax-policy thinking that said taxes should be raised in an economic crisis.  McCain’s policy of lowering capital-gains and corporate taxes will stimulate the economy. Raising taxes on investment capital could send us into a depression.

Questions:

  • Business Week: Any sense of changes in the plan that McCain would support to get more votes, and does the FDIC need more funding to meet the requirement for greater insurance?  McCain would support the changes for FDIC expansion.  The FDIC says they have adequate reserves, but McCain could support more funding for those reserves.  Kemp says conservatives need to support this plan, and his own suggestion would be that bank losses could be amortized instead taking it all in one quarter to maintain liquidity.
  • Reuters: Should FDIC increase be temporary or permanent?   What will McCain’s role now, and what about his assertion today that it failed because of a lack of recognition of the pain on Main Street now?  McCain sees his role as that of a leader on the Hill, and will continue in that role.  The increase should be permanent in Kemp’s opinion.  The pain is real on Main Street, and we need to do a better job of communicating that, and the Wall Street vs Main Street idea is a huge myth.  Everyone will lose value in this meltdown.
  • New York Times: Will the next action occur in the Senate or House, and what will McCain do now to promote an agreement?  McCain wants to communicate with Republicans on the Hill to see how he can get more support for emergency action.
  • Cincinnati Enquirer: Only one-third of House Republicans voted for this package.  How did this fail, and who gets the blame?  Kemp was surprised that they didn’t get the votes counted beforehand.  He thinks the problem started with the characterization of the bill as a “bailout”, when the taxpayers would purchase tangible assets and could profit from their resale when the market stabilizes.  He objected strongly to the idea that this bill would socialize the credit markets.  Instead, it allowed the only player with enough liquidity to trade it for real assets.

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

New York Times: Will the next action occur in the Senate or House, and what will McCain do now to promote an agreement? McCain wants to communicate with Republicans on the Hill to see how he can get more support for emergency action.

I think McCain should get together with Lieberman and, if humanly possible Hillary or other major Democrat, to come up with a deal that would be acceptable to moderate democrats and Republicans. I know McCain has done his best to not play partisan politics with this thing, but by only referring to Republicans in this answer above, Kemp reinforces the misconception that the failure to pass the bill was on the Republicans, rather than putting the blame on Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank, where it belongs.

Y-not on September 30, 2008 at 2:06 PM

The government will buy assets for later resale when the market stabilizes.

Unfortunately a lot of us don’t trust that to happen. We smell nationalization of industry.

BadgerHawk on September 30, 2008 at 2:06 PM

Kemp!

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 2:13 PM

Even if they do sell everything they acquire, the govt is still socializing risk. They are telling the big banks that no matter how badly they screw up, they can run to govt to bail them out.

MarkTheGreat on September 30, 2008 at 2:14 PM

Kemp hit Obama on tax policy. He didn’t know of any tax-policy thinking that said taxes should be raised in an economic crisis.

The flip-side is that McCain should be calling Obama’s “tax cut” what it really is–welfare. He should point out how many people currently pay federal income tax (38%) and how many will pay federal income tax under Obama’s regime (50%). I really don’t think Americans want to consider themselves welfare queens.

And if that’s too harsh, maybe McCain should describe the series of five to seven refundable tax credits that will supposedly net voters $500 to $1,000 a family. I’m guessing each credit will require a form consisting of two detailed pages, as well as another five pages of instructions. After taxpayers pay H&R Block or deal with the aggravation on TurboTax or, God forbid, do their returns by hand, the refunds will be a wash.

But crickets from McCain’s campaign.

BuckeyeSam on September 30, 2008 at 2:14 PM

Jack Kemp conducted a conference call to discuss the economic rescue plan and John McCain’s policies.

Blah, blah, farking blah. Who cares?

ManlyRash on September 30, 2008 at 2:15 PM

One of the mistakes conservatives have made is thinking that this socializes the credit market. Kemp says that’s not the case. The government will buy assets for later resale when the market stabilizes.

I like and respect Jack Kemp but he is another in a growing list of so-called conservatives who are too-plugged-into-the-Beltway to fully appreciate what they are asking Americans to swallow.

This notion that the government is going to sit on $700B in assets is in-f’ing-sane. Is the government going to setup a property management company that will arrange to meet HOA requirements for the development I live in to keep the lawns nice and tidy for the two foreclosed homes on my street? They will own them and when they do, the rest of the neighborhood will expect upkeep.

Oh but wait…. the Democrat controlled Congress can fold this into an expansion of Section 8 and give those houses, at pennies on the dollar to people who can’t even afford the HOA dues. It will be like we’re all funding Habitat for Humanity.

It just keeps getting better. Again, let’s just ask the EU if we can join and be done with it. Let Sarkozy run us this year and Merkel next.

Do Kemp or any of the others commenting on these issues even think of the logistical issues involved? I don’t think so.

grdred944 on September 30, 2008 at 2:17 PM

The government will buy assets for later resale when the market stabilizes.

That’s right — it’s not a bailout, it’s a buy-in, as Speaker Pelosi said. Or, as the President said this morning, it will pay back.

Sure.

BigD on September 30, 2008 at 2:17 PM

Now we’re supposed to trust the people who screwed things up to do the right thing this time? Good intentions or not, every government intrusion eventually backfires. Then we need more government intervention to fix it. Again,and again, and again…

Mini14 on September 30, 2008 at 2:19 PM

BigD on September 30, 2008 at 2:17 PM

Heh. The Democrats in the new Obama Regime will be profiting handsomely.

ManlyRash on September 30, 2008 at 2:20 PM

It didn’t pass because the Dems were bragging that this was thier little “coup”. It was there way to stick it to the Repub.
Meanwhile, 12 of Pelosi’s buddies in Ca, didn’t vote for it, 12 of Franks buddies on his committee didn’t vote for it, Obama’s “black caucus” didn’t vote for it.
They (Dems) shielded their
Screw them, it is there bill, let them come up with 2/3 of their people, and the Repubs will provide the rest of the vote.

right2bright on September 30, 2008 at 2:21 PM

BTW, Paulson was a guy from the private sector, one of the foxes watching the hen house. Why put any faith in a guy who was part of the problem…

right2bright on September 30, 2008 at 2:23 PM

That’s right — it’s not a bailout, it’s a buy-in, as Speaker Pelosi said. Or, as the President said this morning, it will pay back.

Sure.

BigD on September 30, 2008 at 2:17 PM

Exactly. Nothing about govt. is efficient. Who in govt. is capable of properly valuing all these assets they’re going to buy? Odds are they will pay too much, and eventually sell for too little. All sorts of govt. programs look great on paper and completely suck in real life.

BadgerHawk on September 30, 2008 at 2:23 PM

Heh. The Democrats in the new Obama Regime will be profiting handsomely.

ManlyRash on September 30, 2008 at 2:20 PM

You betcha. Oversight over this boondoggle by the Obama administration? We’re going to see a bunch of new gazebos popping up.

Mini14 on September 30, 2008 at 2:29 PM

I don’t know what McCain’s camp is thinking. They should support the alternative financial plan presented by the house republicans and scream against Bush’s plan and Obama advise to american people to support the bailout. The future looks bleak.Its not a good time to be a gentelman and support the administration.

clemycali on September 30, 2008 at 2:29 PM

I think that we can trust Kemp and McCain. All the rest of them need to be thrown under the bus.

PierreLegrand on September 30, 2008 at 2:34 PM

Jack kemp is a david gergen type Republican at his heart. Anytime the media needs a Republican to tell them how racist the Republicans are then he is there guy.
I can’t stand the guy

All of these old timers get along bipartisan guys can jump off a cliff. Take John sununu with you

kangjie on September 30, 2008 at 2:34 PM

Kemp used to be a “conservative”. I listened to him yesterday on Hannity radio and could not believe his stupid anti-free markets comments. He needs to go back to where ever he has been hiding and shut up.

luckybogey on September 30, 2008 at 2:39 PM

McCain is pushing all the old school huff and puff republican pundits through the revolving door to the mic to sell this thing . It’s like enduring a case of insomnia at 2 am watching old 80s re-runs on TV Land.

Fletch54 on September 30, 2008 at 2:41 PM

About any other area except economics and I will agree that Jack Kemp might be a problem.

PierreLegrand on September 30, 2008 at 2:41 PM

The selling of assets and the govt recouping their initial outlay, what chance is there that it somehow gets returned to the taxpayer? Will this end up like the SS/medicare trust fund? As piously as crats talk about both those programs, you’d think they were actually trying to preserve them and yet both sides raid them yearly and pretend there’s money waiting to be paid out in benefits. How is this any different? I ask because I geniuenly don’t know. Any help understanding this would be greatly appreciated.

hump1201 on September 30, 2008 at 2:49 PM

BTW, Paulson was a guy from the private sector, one of the foxes watching the hen house. Why put any faith in a guy who was part of the problem…

right2bright on September 30, 2008 at 2:23 PM

Newt Gingrich was on Greta van Susteren’s show on Fox last night, and pointed out that Paulson is a former Goldman-Sachs executive, and that when the Government bailed out AIG, Goldman-Sachs got a $20 billion interest in AIG.

To which Greta replied; “Do you think Secretary Paulson has a conflict of interest?”

D@mn good question, Greta! Maybe the fox HAS been guarding the henhouse, while people’s nest eggs are stolen! This might be a good reason to take things out of Paulson’s hands. Paulson will probably leave his current job on January 20, and have a cushy job waiting for him at Goldman-Sachs or AIG…

Newt also said that either Congress or the Executive Branch could do a lot to help by eliminating the “mark-to-market” accounting rule, which is requiring banks to value mortgage-based-securities based on the value of the worst of the bunch. We might be throwing real taxpayer dollars at a fictitious problem, if some of those mortgages are really worth more than somebody in the “market” thinks they are.

Steve Z on September 30, 2008 at 2:50 PM

This might be a good reason to take things out of Paulson’s hands. Paulson will probably leave his current job on January 20, and have a cushy job waiting for him at Goldman-Sachs or AIG…
Steve Z on September 30, 2008 at 2:50 PM

He had the cushy job at Goldman before he joined the government.

dedalus on September 30, 2008 at 2:56 PM

And while Congress fiddles, the markets are…

now up over 4% in the S&P 500 and Nasdaq. Maybe they don’t WANT the bailout, or have figured out another plan.

Steve Z on September 30, 2008 at 2:56 PM

The government will buy assets for later resale when the market stabilizes.

The government will buy them? Buy them with what? Don’t you mean we will buy them and the government will re-sell these “assets”, probably at a loss, and we won’t ever see that money again. By the way, have any of those geniuses on Capitol Hill thought to repeal the Community Reinvestment Act which was how this whole thing got started in the first place?

celtnik on September 30, 2008 at 3:02 PM

Newt also said that either Congress or the Executive Branch could do a lot to help by eliminating the “mark-to-market” accounting rule, which is requiring banks to value mortgage-based-securities based on the value of the worst of the bunch. We might be throwing real taxpayer dollars at a fictitious problem, if some of those mortgages are really worth more than somebody in the “market” thinks they are.

Steve Z on September 30, 2008 at 2:50 PM

Right!! You can’t “mark to market” when there is NO MARKET!!!

These mortgage-backed securities are sold via phone calls between buyers and sellers. There is no posting of offerings or bids, no publicly-disclosed competing bids, and no significant trading volume: some days there are no sales at all!! So where is the “market”???

What are holders supposed to do on days when there are no sales? Should they mark everything down to zero?….only to mark everything back up the next day there is a sale? With such a small trading volume, how are banks supposed to distinguish between high-quality and low-quality loan bundles? This is the kind of blind-deaf-and-stupid foolishness which only could have come from the common-senseless bureaucrats in Washington.

landlines on September 30, 2008 at 3:07 PM

The government will buy them? Buy them with what? Don’t you mean we will buy them and the government will re-sell these “assets”, probably at a loss, and we won’t ever see that money again.
celtnik on September 30, 2008 at 3:02 PM

It depends on which set of assets the government buys and how far they’ve been marked down.

In a case where they buy mortgage securities backed by conforming mortgages, they might pay off 95 cents on the dollar. If those securities have been marked down to 75 cents on the dollar there is money to be made by someone.

The taxpayer incentive is to facilitate the credit markets so that businesses can continue to grow and consumers can continue to spend.

dedalus on September 30, 2008 at 3:18 PM

Yeah, well the bad news is that the market is up substantially today, and the panic appears quelled for the nonce. Thus, barring another big dip (which no one should rule out)it will be more difficult come Thursday to assemble a Congressional majority to pass any major rescue legislation.

Or, is that the good news?

Remind me, someone.

JudetheFossil on September 30, 2008 at 3:20 PM

Something struck me this morning carpooling into work, discussing this with my Democrat friend (who is also strongly against a buyout!)…

For most people, this doesn’t seem like a big issue. We still have jobs. We are at work today. We pay our mortgages on time. Our properties have value. Who wouldn’t want to own our mortgage?

The same issue that contributed to this problem (buying and selling of mortgages / securities), is the same thing that insulates normal Americans from this crisis. We’re now used to financial companies selling and buying our mortgages. We don’t really care who owns them… we just need to know where to send our checks. It’s the speculators that will suffer… and I say GOOD… it’s about time the market adjusted and all the risk they’ve been playing with, came home to roost.

dominigan on September 30, 2008 at 3:26 PM

O/T, Freddoso is on Medved right now. Did another obama action email go out about disrupting the show? So far the callers have been split which is Medveds M.O.

hump1201 on September 30, 2008 at 3:30 PM

Where is Mitt lately? Avoiding microphones? He was the establishment Republican pick and economy guru – so what gives?

rhodeymark on September 30, 2008 at 3:31 PM

And while Congress fiddles, the markets are…

now up over 4% in the S&P 500 and Nasdaq. Maybe they don’t WANT the bailout, or have figured out another plan.

Steve Z on September 30, 2008 at 2:56 PM

Yeah, that other plan is called the “Free Market Plan”.

tdavisjr on September 30, 2008 at 3:33 PM

I am no financial genius so, could someone please tell me why the President is not doing the things that don’t need Congressional approval, such as instructing SEC Chairman Cox to suspend mark-to-market while a deal is being put together?
I’d like to see a deal that repeals the CRA and takes the cuffs off of Wall Street. Let the free market be unleashed. (I know, the Donks will never go for something that isn’t packed full of bribes for votes.)

sandspur on September 30, 2008 at 3:38 PM

Kemp is a joke just like McCain is turning into.Please sentor grow a set and stand for something have some passion and shut up about reaching out to the damm dems.Fight back for one,s in your life!!!!

thmcbb on September 30, 2008 at 3:38 PM

Tune in Hannity right now. I think he should direct McCain!

Star20 on September 30, 2008 at 3:43 PM

The day after refusing the $700 Billion bailout the market is up almost 500 points. The dollar is up against the Pound, Euro, Yen and Canadian dollar and the price of oil is down.

How much better could it get?

RJL on September 30, 2008 at 4:09 PM

Blah, blah, farking blah. Who cares?

ManlyRash on September 30, 2008 at 2:15 PM

My sentiments exactly! This just reminds me of how McCain has the Jurassic Park of the Beltway surrounding him. What good does this do when the McCain camp is AWOL on hard hitting ads?

freeus on September 30, 2008 at 4:11 PM

thmcbb:

Neither of these men are jokes. As for reaching out, when you are minority and there is a crisis, you can either reach out or you can be run over. That does not mean you have to be a pushover. No one is saying that.

Terrye on September 30, 2008 at 4:17 PM

tdavisjr:

The markets are up because they expect the government will take action by the end of the week. That is what the analysts are saying.

That is how this whole thing has worked thus far: up when they think there is hope and down when hopes are dashed. The market has been doing this for days. I have noticed however, that for people who choose to believe there is no problem the up market has a lot more validity than the down market does.

Terrye on September 30, 2008 at 4:21 PM

RJL:

The dollar is not up so much as the euro is down. The Europeans are having the same credit problems and bank failures we are and their euro is in free fall.

Terrye on September 30, 2008 at 4:23 PM

The dollar is not up so much as the euro is down. The Europeans are having the same credit problems and bank failures we are and their euro is in free fall.

Terrye on September 30, 2008 at 4:23 PM

Well that shows that we are handling it better without a $700 Billion gift/bailout to Wallstreet than whatever the Europeans are doing.

RJL on September 30, 2008 at 4:31 PM

I don’t care what Kemp says. He’s a former Bill, so he’s the man. Go Bills!

Now we just need to get Jim Kelly to agree to run for Congress (I’ve been told he’s been close in the past).

Pope Linus on September 30, 2008 at 4:33 PM

He thinks the problem started with the characterization of the bill as a “bailout”, when the taxpayers would purchase tangible assets and could profit from their resale when the market stabilizes. He objected strongly to the idea that this bill would socialize the credit markets. Instead, it allowed the only player with enough liquidity to trade it for real assets.

If the government becomes a player in the credit markets, its called socialism. However, if government is the only player in the pool, geez, I think we’ve moved somewhere to the left of socialism. Now Fannie/Freddy have had status as GSEs playing in the market for decades so this is not a surprise. But now that these GSEs have substantially failed under circumstances where the public was lead to believe the GSEs were being adequately overseen, it is tough to argue that what is needed is MORE liquidity. The government does not exist to make markets, but to preserve market stability. The government from Fannie and Freddy to the SEC on up and down, failed to preserve a functioning mortgage market. By the time the U.S. goverment becomes the only player who can “rescue” a market, the market ceases to exist. A market where the only major player is a government is a house of mirrors, a third world banana state unworthy of private investment.

Angry Dumbo on September 30, 2008 at 4:37 PM

You bet McCain should lead and drop this “hands off the democrats” scheme that ain’t working. Democrats are attacking him left and right and McCain is not doing a good job of fighting back and letting people know where and how this all started.

McCain needs to come up with a plan and including the Clintons would be a GREAT idea. Bill can glad hand the Democrats and McCain can get the Republicans support. We need solutions, not party politics as usual. But unfortunately, we do need to play the blame game because the Democrats are doing this and the American public is sucking up the sound bites. The American public needs to see McCain whap Obama upside the head on the economy in the next debate. He needs to feed back the Democrats 2004 words about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

katablog.com on September 30, 2008 at 4:43 PM

Let’s also face it, if we are to have an oversight board, it needs to EXCLUDE Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. It needs to be good honest people who understand the market and who do not have full time political jobs.

katablog.com on September 30, 2008 at 4:44 PM

Angry Dumbo:

The government really had to take over Fannie and Freddie, being responsible for something they do not have control over is not going to work. I think they should faze them out myself. I know that is what McCain said to do. But in order to do that the market has to stabilize enough for long enough to allow the privatization of their assets. I also think the government is going to have to really look at those books before they know just what they are dealing with.

But this is not socialism. I do not know what people call it that. The government spent a lot of money in the Gulf Coast after Katrina and now Ike, but that does not mean it has nationalized the Gulf Coast.

I think it is also true that there is simply no private buyer large enough to get the job done. I guess we could see if the Saudis are interested. Or maybe we could sell a larger chunk to China.

Terrye on September 30, 2008 at 4:45 PM

RJL;

You do not know that. The rise of the dollar and the fall of the euro does not show anything yet. These things are volatile, changing on a daily basis. The dollar is also up because the Europeans are hoarding dollars, that can mean a stronger dollar, but it can also mean even tighter credit.

But that can reverse itself just as quickly. Look at oil, up..down…up…down..up. In less than a week.

Terrye on September 30, 2008 at 4:48 PM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26961154/

JDA says Wells Fargo unit joins finance group

“JDA Software Group Inc., which makes back-office software for businesses, said Tuesday that Wells Fargo Foothill, a unit of San Francisco-based Wells Fargo & Co., has joined a group of banks that have agreed to lend JDA money to help the company complete an acquisition.

The Scottsdale, Ariz.-based company is buying i2 Technologies Inc., a Dallas-based company that makes software for managing companies’ supplier relationships. JDA said in August that it has agreed to buy i2 for $346 million in cash.”

WHAT?! A bank lending money to a business?! How can that be?! I though the sky was falling!?!

Mr_Magoo on September 30, 2008 at 4:51 PM

My point is quite simple, the bailout is not going to work and will only encourage more bailouts.

Thanks, I will resume lurking now.

Angry Dumbo on September 30, 2008 at 4:52 PM

I just got an email from the office of Mike Pence. The Republican Study Committee has released an alternative plan
http://mikepence.house.gov/UploadedFiles/RSC_Economic_Rescue_092908.pdf
A work-out, not a bail-out.

sandspur on September 30, 2008 at 5:10 PM

RJL;

You do not know that. The rise of the dollar and the fall of the euro does not show anything yet.

Terrye on September 30, 2008 at 4:48 PM

True it varies, but when the dollar is up across the board, Pound Sterling, Euro, Yen and Canadian dollar, it’s a good sign.

RJL on September 30, 2008 at 5:16 PM

The government really had to take over Fannie and Freddie, being responsible for something they do not have control over is not going to work. I think they should faze them out myself. I know that is what McCain said to do. But in order to do that the market has to stabilize enough for long enough to allow the privatization of their assets. I also think the government is going to have to really look at those books before they know just what they are dealing with.

This was the main problem with Fannie and Freddie. They were supposedly backed by the Government, but had wide latitude to function as private businesses, including having publicly-traded shares. Lots of private upside potential, no downside risk, because good ol’ Uncle Sam would pick up the pieces. A prime target for abuse and corruption, whose chickens have come home to roost.

The Government taking over Fannie and Freddie is probably a good thing. If taxpayer dollars are on the line, the Government gets to regulate it. Fannie and Freddie could become home-mortgage lenders of last resort, but then the Government sets the criteria for qualification–no ifs, ands, buts, or maybes.

If a private bank wants to make a risky loan, it loses money if it goes south–that’s how capitalism works. The worst of both worlds is private bankers making profits on risky loans, while depending on Uncle Sam to bail them out when it goes south.

On another point, there’s an interesting article by peter Robinson on National Review about why the markets went up today:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/

The three big events of the day? In the view of your humble correspondent:

1) That the sky still hasn’t fallen. When the market closed just a few minutes ago, the Dow Jones Industrial Average had risen nearly 500 points, or just shy of five percent.

2) That it has become impossible—simply impossible—to dismiss opponents of the bailout as mere hayseeds and (what to a lot of people amounts to the same thing) House Republicans. See, to name just one example, this column by Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron.

3) That as a matter of practical politics, overwhelming support has emerged for what is widely being called “Plan B,” namely, the use of the FDIC to backstop commercial banks, on which (as quite distinct from investment banks) our system of payments and credits actually depends. The broad outlines of such a plan—increasing the deposit insurance level while giving the FDIC additional discretion to help wobbly banks—are in very little dispute.

If Hank Paulson, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi were serious about doing something useful in a hurry, they could have “Plan B” on the president’s desk by tomorrow evening.

If it involved less taxpayer money than Plan A that was voted down yesterday, this might sail through Congress with broad bipartisan support. But why didn’t Paulson think of this earlier, instead of getting both parties and the markets all freaked out over his original plan?

Steve Z on September 30, 2008 at 5:22 PM

oops…should have capitalized Peter Robinson.

Steve Z on September 30, 2008 at 5:22 PM

Terrye I said Kemp is a joke and if McCain is not carefull he will become one also.I do not want to reach out to anyone that says Consev.want to starve children throw old people in the street hate people of color give all tax breaks to the rich.You reach to who ever you want but be carefull you may pull back a nub instead of your hand

thmcbb on September 30, 2008 at 5:54 PM

Steve Z on September 30, 2008 at 5:22 PM

I have a feeling plan B is going to look at lot like plan A. It seems the markets can play chicken too.

phronesis on September 30, 2008 at 5:57 PM

So many articles by so many supposedly conservative leaders, all touting the necessity of the BAIL OUT (Yeah, I’m not impressed with euphemisms). It is really dispiriting. And then I read the comments and find them overwhelmingly in favor of letting this thing, this crisis, play itself out without intervention. It surely helps me to keep my faith in Americans: it really ticks me off no end against the purported “leaders”, many of whom claim to be capitalists and free marketers. Fair weather capitalists at best, I presume; ready to run for Mama’s skirts at the first sign of serious problems. These leadership cowards apparently don’t really have the courage of their convictions. And they wonder at the skepticism us Main Streeters have toward them?

This is what free markets DO, ladies and gentlemen; they punish bad investors. This is what you so-called leaders used to tout as the great strength of the markets. What changed your tune? Have you no faith? Have you no courage to wait through a bad market (which ain’t so bad today anyway)? Do you actually have the discipline to “buy and hold” during a down market? Or are you a bunch of panic-stricken hypocrites scrambling for a prettily packaged welfare check? And yes, I am well aware that the phrasing of that last question reveals my sympathies.

Not every national problem requires a federal solution.

ss396 on September 30, 2008 at 11:45 PM