Sun editorial:

No confidence

House’s failure to pass bailout shows lack of leadership from Bush, House GOP

Tue, Sep 30, 2008 (2:07 a.m.)

Immediately after the House of Representatives on Monday killed the $700 billion Wall Street bailout, the stock market plummeted. Finger-pointing quickly followed.

Republican leaders blamed Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for the bill’s failure. They said a dozen Republicans who planned to support the bill changed their votes because Pelosi gave a “partisan speech.” Those 12 votes would have been enough to pass the bill.

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said that was a telling critique of the Republicans.

“Because somebody hurt their feelings, they’re willing to punish the country,” Frank said.

Many of the Republicans, and the Democrats who voted against the bill, noted voters’ disgust with Wall Street and see the bill simply as a bailout. Although that anger is understandable, it is clear that the government will have to take action to prevent an economic disaster.

On Monday the Dow Jones industrial average fell nearly 778 points, the largest single-day drop ever. The problems, however, go beyond retirement plans wrapped up in stocks and bonds.

Analysts see major economic problems without government action. They are concerned about the credit market’s restricting further, making it even more difficult for businesses and consumers to obtain loans. That could seriously damage the economy.

The blame for this mess can be traced to the White House. President Bush’s policies have hurt the economy, and his response to the troubled economy over the past few years has been anemic.

Bush’s administration offered the plan, and Bush and his aides negotiated with congressional leaders to find a consensus plan. Bush, Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain and House Republican leaders urged their colleagues to support the plan, yet Republicans voted 2-to-1 against it.

Americans are desperately looking for someone to lead the country out of this mess, but what they have found so far is a Republican Party that has failed to show any leadership.

Discussion: 13 comments so far…

By GeraldD

9/30/08 at 3:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

A HANDFUL OF CORRUPT DEMOCRATS AND AN EQUALLY CORRUPT GROUP OF FORMER FANNIE MAE OFFICIALS ARE LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS MESS:

THIS IS THE VIDEO THOSE CORRUPT FANNIE MAE OFFICIALS & AT LEAST FIVE CORRUPT GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS DON'T WANT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO SEE:

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheMouthPeac...

If you agree, then PLEASE pass it along To All Your Friends. Someone Needs TO GO TO Jail For This !!

And Here Is Another Shocking Fannie Mae Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7...
By NVMakz

9/30/08 at 5:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Lying to "The People" has become the norm here at the Socialist Sun.

Of course, a lying hypocrite like San Fran Nan would have an effect. Not THAT much, as the morning's light confirms!

The raping of "The People's" finances by Democrat operatives and their liberal legislative protectors has brought us to this place.

Bush may be where the "buck stops" - but democrat insider faves like Raines, Johnson, Gorelick and others = protected by the leadership of the House and Senate LSDs for the last 5-7 years = had their slimy hands on that "buck" before Bush. They juiced that rotten "buck", and now hand it to Bush for faux blame and lying hypocricy.
By azsk8fan

9/30/08 at 7:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

How typical - the Republicans have a few dissenters and look to place the blame for that on a Democrat who gave a speech that supposedly swayed the vote.........if the Republicans are having a problem with the vote why not point the finger at their own party members - of course not - a good republican would NEVER see anything wrong EVER with one of their own..........again, very typical repugnantcan behaviour.
By jfnance32

9/30/08 at 7:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

What about Pelosi's and Obama's leadership.

95 Democrats voted against the bill.

On Sunday, Pelosi was barking it was not a bi-partisan bill.

Obama did nothing to get any of those 95 Democrats to vote for the bill.

On the day of the vote, she knew that there were going to be lot of Democrats to vote against the bill and she needed Republicans to vote for it.

What did she to get those votes? She attack Republicans which is so stupid.

Stupid is not leadership.
By NVMakz

9/30/08 at 7:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

The Republican Party is serving as a MAVERICK Party for "The People".

Pelosi built in a cover story with her stunt. She HAD to know the score going in, so - she opens her mouth.

Democrat legislative rot and Democrat insiders cooking the books and now, the crisis they created threatens all of us, for a few seats more. The "moral hazard" in American politics reside with the LSD party and their cheerleader major media.

The Democratic would rather lose a war AND crash an economy - to win an election.
By azsk8fan

9/30/08 at 8:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

We've had a republican president for 8 yrs. and congress has had control for the majority of those years and yet it's the dems who are crashing an economy?
By NVMakz

9/30/08 at 8:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

Yes! For a few seats more.
By redferret

9/30/08 at 8:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

He's delusional, that's all. I mean everyday the sun is devoured by democratic obstinance only to be reborn in the morning, because most of the democrats fall asleep and lose a hold on their powers. lol.
GROW UP PEOPLE!!! Both sides did this. Are you going to tell me that Bush sat back for 8 years in his ivory prison while Democratic minorities for most of his term hemmed him in? Seriously did I wake up in Bizzaro World? BUSH IS PUSHING THIS BILL. IT ORIGINATED FROM HIM/HIS PEOPLE. Bashing the bill is bashing Bush. Also the whole republican party are mavericks? You mean they defy Bush, their national/party leader?
My final thought: Shooting out blanket generalities about almost anything is stupid and more often than not fallacious.
ps-still haven't found out how to spell sycophantic?
By Future2012

9/30/08 at 8:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

13 Democrats on Franks Finance committee did not vote for this bill. This would have covered the loss margin.

5 Democrats in the House Leadership did not vote for this bill.

Failure to pass a bill can not be blamed on the past. We are in the here and now.

Democrats control the House and Senate
By LaDiDa

9/30/08 at 10:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Am I the only one who can't wait for this election to end so all these blind-faith sheep partisan people will go back under their rock and stop posting talking points they directly lifted from CNN or FOX, depending on whether or not they are "left" or "right"
By Gordon

9/30/08 at 10:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

The mavWRECK. Watch the real McCain here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4egXbhSO...

9/15/08 John McCain "The fundamentals of our economy are strong"

9/18/08 Republican administration requests a 700 billion bailout.

9/24/08 McCain cancels debate appearance to go to Washington and derail a bipartisan agreement. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0663DHLr...

9/29/08 The worst one day point loss in wall street history. The dow closed lower than when Republicans started wrecking our economy on 1/20/01. Republicans excuse for rejecting a Republican requested bailout, our feelings were hurt.
By Rverp1

9/30/08 at 12:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

A BAIL OUT HAS TO HAPPEN BUT THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO DO IT...

The government should not buy mortgage backed securities they should buy the mortgages...Rewriting the terms of the loans not the principle.. The loans would be written placing any late payments onto the back of the loan as principle. The interest rate would be at current rates plus a .25% premium...So they would still pay a penalty for the loans that they bought. The length of loans could even be written out to 40 or 50 years, to allow people to afford these loans (this would have to come also with a prepayment penalty before 10 years or something like that)...One their credit stabilizes over a 5-7 year time period the government could sell these loans back to the private sector....Meanwhile the taxpayers make money on the "bail out" in the long term...Interest payments alone would be a huge source of revenue...Then selling the viable mortgages down the road would also provide revenue...Making the loans non dischargable in bankruptcy would guarantee the debt...
By jfnance32

9/30/08 at 12:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

"Meanwhile the taxpayers make money on the "bail out" in the long term."

That does not make any sense.

If there was money to be made on these loans the banks would have already reworked the loans.

Taxpayers will lose big time on this bailout.

They are buying loans where the asset behind the loan is only 50% to 70% of the value of the loan. That means that taxpayers will have to eat 30% to 50% of loan.

This is why borrowers are walking away from the loans and this is why the holders of the loans want to walk away, too.

To believe that taxpayers will might a profit is a pipe dream.