House GOP throws tantrum

Expect plenty of disagreement. Just keep it civil.
User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

House GOP throws tantrum

Postby Rspaight » Mon Sep 29, 2008 2:22 pm

So, I just saw the House GOP leadership on TV telling me that Nancy Pelosi hurt their feelings by blaming the administration for screwing up the economy, and that's why they voted against the bailout bill.

Setting aside the relative merits of the bailout bill, it sounds like they need milk and cookies and a little nap time.
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

David R. Modny
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Location: Parma, OH

Postby David R. Modny » Mon Sep 29, 2008 3:07 pm

It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Pelosi will take a hit for "failing" to get it passed - at least that's how some will spin it.

McCain will take the biggest hit for going to Washington and failing to deliver the GOP votes...a whopping 60 something Pub votes.

The GOP in the House will take a hit for -- as Ryan pointed out -- putting their "feelings" before country. In truth, there probably weren't enough golden concessions for the big money folks that they're in cahoots with. It almost appears that it was more important to try and present the Democratic controlled Congress as "ineffective." At last count, polls showed the 'Pubs losing anywhere between 8-20 *more* seats. That is, if they're already psychologically conceding the Presidency, they still have to try and save face there. Will it work though?

Finally, Bush takes another hit to his legacy...at least for the time being.


P.S. One also has to wonder if the Pubs -- in a joint effort -- bombed it in round one (with perhaps the spotlight turned on Pelosi), only to have McCain ride in on his white horse to "save the day" in round two. Photo ops abound!


Of course, there were some -- Dems and Pubs together -- who probably just got cold feet in front of their constituency in light of a very unpopular bill.

Bennett Cerf
Posts: 738
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:54 pm

Postby Bennett Cerf » Mon Sep 29, 2008 4:02 pm


User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Mon Sep 29, 2008 4:22 pm

It's gonna be hard to spin this as the Dems' fault without looking ridiculous ("She said mean things about the President so I voted against the President!" "I blame my Democratic opponent for not delivering enough Republican votes!").

What's really going on here, I think, is that voters are telling Congress that they will be boiled in oil if they vote to give a $700 billion blank check to Wall Street. Congress knows that some sort of bailout is preferable to economic collapse, but is trying desperately to look like it doesn't really want to do it. The paleocons have the most to lose by voting for the biggest government intervention in the markets since the Great Depression (it was funny watching the loathsome Glenn Beck twist himself into knots trying to reconcile his hatred of government with the evidence that the free market had fucked itself -- he was trying to say that government "greed" caused all this and the financial markets were innocent victims), so they'd sooner watch the country circle the bowl.

And, of course, Boehner can't actually come out and say this, so instead the bill failed because Pelosi said mean things about Shrub.

And the Dow goes down 777 points.

The silly, ridiculous part of the whole thing is that Pelosi was at least partially right (though the Dems have been just as deregulation-happy as the Republicans of late) -- what we're seeing is the pro-business "let the markets govern themselves" philosophy deliver its bitter harvest. There's no way to address it without repudiating the philosophy itself, which certain elements will never do.

It's not a stretch to posit that 20th century America (both at a macro and a micro level) was ultimately done in by hostility to reason and the desire to acquire things we couldn't afford. (The infeasibility of the latter hidden by the former.)
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

David R. Modny
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Location: Parma, OH

Postby David R. Modny » Mon Sep 29, 2008 4:42 pm

And I think that the interesting dichotomy of that macro and micro, personal responsibility vs. corporate malfeasance model is that it's something that most Americans simply cannot reconcile with themselves - regardless of the potential outcome. That, and the looming election (and the obvious political posturing) presents an additional set of dynamics to further muddy the process.

They're going to write books and make movies about this one...

User avatar
Jeff T.
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:28 am
Location: Blueberry Hill

Postby Jeff T. » Mon Sep 29, 2008 5:43 pm

"In truth, there probably weren't enough golden concessions for the big money folks that they're in cahoots with"

Exactly, there are companies lining up to make a killing on the dist. of funds. And those golden parachute exit packages are NOT going to be given up easily. The current wording speaks of reasons for being fired, and how much assistance given in funds to the amount of failure of the company.

Bottom line is that the reason given for letting a CEO go of the broke company can be worded as such that the 25mil. exit package remains. That is the big sticking point. This whole thing was drawn up in a few hours, and need to be written up over the next three months.

The golden exit package is going to be fought over and fought over. And these are the guys that gave big bucks to the Rep elections, and thus expect some consideration. Let the damn compnay fail, but I want my 25mil. for driving it into the ground.

I am glad it got voted down. 700 billion is just too high a price tag right now for most of us. We need to see some losses, and accept that fact. They (the Government) need to do some lending like the AIG deal, and not buy the worst assets that these companies have on their books, and then pay out the contracts of CEOs to walk away with millions.

We are in another great depression, no doubt. So lets stick together, ride it out, and we'll turn that corner soon enough. I have not seen anyone jumping out of 30th floor windows over this, not yet anyway.