$700,000,000,000.00

[Christopher McCandless]

Unfortunately for the Democrats, what Johnny posted is the truth.    Obama's economic advisor Franklin Raines (who is a former CEO of Fannie Mae lol)  and Barney Frank headed up the resistance against Republicans that wanted to investigate the books of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.   That really is bad news and it is the truth.    I like it how Democrats are trying to blame this on Bush and the Republicans, when they were the party that wanted to reform this situation years before the crisis we are facing now.   I actually read about that stuff a few days ago, and Hannity was bitching about it on the radio today.   I actually remember hearing about this in 2004 and it didn't even seem to be important back then.  I find it odd that two of Obama's economic advisors are both former CEOs of Fannie Mae.

http://overthehilloracles.wordpress.com/2008/09/09/the-obama-fannie-freddie-connection/

http://people.boston.com/forums/news/politics/general/?p=discussiondetails&activityid=8731153219468243318

Sorry, which party in large numbers voted against all this? Not the Democrats. If Clinton was still in charge as opposed Bush, the US would have built up a budget surplus of $5.7tn.

As for economic advisors, take a look at McCain. Not only does he not know at all what he is talking about when it comes to the ecomony (by his own confession, no less), he has hired the people responsible for this mess. Up until recently, his chief ecomonic advisor was a man named Phil Gramm. Look him up and see for yourself.

Looking through the books of Fannnie Mae and Freddie Mac would have made no difference, the mess would have happened anyway, just sooner.

it's hysterical to see post like yours, is it good drugs or just plain blindness to the truth or are you just a total sucker or just completely unable to understand what is happening on planet earth ?

No, its just you watch way too much Fox News and swallow all its bullshit.

I don't watch it, so much for your simpleton answer.

Not convinced.

[Callaway]

Well the bill goes into Senate on Wednesday to be voted on, and sequentially to the House of Representatives again on Thursday.

Although pressure from the public alone might see the bill being rejected again, especially since it's an election year, and a lot of Congressmen and Senator are on the vote on November. In fact, the failure of the bill passing on Monday can be partly attributed to people calling their representative and basically telling them, "NO Bailout". So this is proof that until the right circumstances, people can exert a lot of power over the system, and should seize the opportunity.

If the US actually used some sense when choosing who got to vote in the first place, then we would not have gotten here. All those people who are phoning up their representatives should be garrotted with their telephone cords.

What sort of ignorant elitist nonsense is this?

Whom specifically would you suggest we disenfranchise?  Women?  Poor people?  Maybe you think that we should have a poll tax or a poll test?

People elect their representatives here and they have every right to contact them concerning issues they feel strongly about.  Our representatives are accountable to their constituents.

[odeon]

Well the bill goes into Senate on Wednesday to be voted on, and sequentially to the House of Representatives again on Thursday.

Although pressure from the public alone might see the bill being rejected again, especially since it's an election year, and a lot of Congressmen and Senator are on the vote on November. In fact, the failure of the bill passing on Monday can be partly attributed to people calling their representative and basically telling them, "NO Bailout". So this is proof that until the right circumstances, people can exert a lot of power over the system, and should seize the opportunity.

If the US actually used some sense when choosing who got to vote in the first place, then we would not have gotten here. All those people who are phoning up their representatives should be garrotted with their telephone cords.

They use mobiles. Not that easy.

[Christopher McCandless]

Well the bill goes into Senate on Wednesday to be voted on, and sequentially to the House of Representatives again on Thursday.

Although pressure from the public alone might see the bill being rejected again, especially since it's an election year, and a lot of Congressmen and Senator are on the vote on November. In fact, the failure of the bill passing on Monday can be partly attributed to people calling their representative and basically telling them, "NO Bailout". So this is proof that until the right circumstances, people can exert a lot of power over the system, and should seize the opportunity.

If the US actually used some sense when choosing who got to vote in the first place, then we would not have gotten here. All those people who are phoning up their representatives should be garrotted with their telephone cords.

What sort of ignorant elitist nonsense is this?

Whom specifically would you suggest we disenfranchise?  Women?  Poor people?  Maybe you think that we should have a poll tax or a poll test?

People elect their representatives here and they have every right to contact them concerning issues they feel strongly about.  Our representatives are accountable to their constituents.

Only allowing God one vote would solve most of your electoral issues. If the Republicans were not given any kind office, let along the presidency, then this whole mess would not have happened.

An intelligence test would be a good idea for allowing people access to the ballot box though, how can people vote on what they know nothing about. Morons voting is what gets the Republican party in, especially the religious ones.

The people who are against this package have no idea what they are talking about. They are prepared to take a massive economic hit to stop "greedy bankers" getting money. Now thats really cutting ones nose off to spite their face.

[Alex179]

Unfortunately for the Democrats, what Johnny posted is the truth.    Obama's economic advisor Franklin Raines (who is a former CEO of Fannie Mae lol)  and Barney Frank headed up the resistance against Republicans that wanted to investigate the books of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.   That really is bad news and it is the truth.    I like it how Democrats are trying to blame this on Bush and the Republicans, when they were the party that wanted to reform this situation years before the crisis we are facing now.   I actually read about that stuff a few days ago, and Hannity was bitching about it on the radio today.   I actually remember hearing about this in 2004 and it didn't even seem to be important back then.  I find it odd that two of Obama's economic advisors are both former CEOs of Fannie Mae.

http://overthehilloracles.wordpress.com/2008/09/09/the-obama-fannie-freddie-connection/

http://people.boston.com/forums/news/politics/general/?p=discussiondetails&activityid=8731153219468243318

Sorry, which party in large numbers voted against all this? Not the Democrats. If Clinton was still in charge as opposed Bush, the US would have built up a budget surplus of $5.7tn.

As for economic advisors, take a look at McCain. Not only does he not know at all what he is talking about when it comes to the ecomony (by his own confession, no less), he has hired the people responsible for this mess. Up until recently, his chief ecomonic advisor was a man named Phil Gramm. Look him up and see for yourself.

Looking through the books of Fannnie Mae and Freddie Mac would have made no difference, the mess would have happened anyway, just sooner.

They both did actually for the most part.    Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lobby on both sides and have contributed to both parties.   Too bad their former CEOs back Obama.   I wouldn't say that he has hired the people totally responsible for this mess.   The blame can be attributed to both parties and not just Gramm.   He was on the committee, but Clinton also signed the bill in question and put it into effect.   Gramm does not work for McCain any more, but the two former CEOs of Fannie Mae do work for Obama still.

Most companies under your ridiculous system donate to both parties, it just underscores how corrupt American politics is. Yes Clinton may have signed it into law, but at that point the Republicans had both houses, he had little choice but to sign it in. Gramm is still advising McCain, just because he has resigned does not negate the point. How naive are you?

Do you fault the people who allowed guns to be legal or the person who shot people with said gun?    Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may have been not regulated closely, but they chose to take advantage and cook their own books.    They are the guilty parties and Obama's advisor was the one who was CEO when said corruption within Fannie Mae occurred.  Just because someone allowed a free market, does not mean they committed the acts themselves.   The greedy acts were done by the 2 companies that were trusted to not take things that far in the first place.   The government gave Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac too much rope to hang themselves with, and the 2 companies obviously were greedy enough to oblige.

[Christopher McCandless]

Unfortunately for the Democrats, what Johnny posted is the truth.    Obama's economic advisor Franklin Raines (who is a former CEO of Fannie Mae lol)  and Barney Frank headed up the resistance against Republicans that wanted to investigate the books of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.   That really is bad news and it is the truth.    I like it how Democrats are trying to blame this on Bush and the Republicans, when they were the party that wanted to reform this situation years before the crisis we are facing now.   I actually read about that stuff a few days ago, and Hannity was bitching about it on the radio today.   I actually remember hearing about this in 2004 and it didn't even seem to be important back then.  I find it odd that two of Obama's economic advisors are both former CEOs of Fannie Mae.

http://overthehilloracles.wordpress.com/2008/09/09/the-obama-fannie-freddie-connection/

http://people.boston.com/forums/news/politics/general/?p=discussiondetails&activityid=8731153219468243318

Sorry, which party in large numbers voted against all this? Not the Democrats. If Clinton was still in charge as opposed Bush, the US would have built up a budget surplus of $5.7tn.

As for economic advisors, take a look at McCain. Not only does he not know at all what he is talking about when it comes to the ecomony (by his own confession, no less), he has hired the people responsible for this mess. Up until recently, his chief ecomonic advisor was a man named Phil Gramm. Look him up and see for yourself.

Looking through the books of Fannnie Mae and Freddie Mac would have made no difference, the mess would have happened anyway, just sooner.

They both did actually for the most part.    Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lobby on both sides and have contributed to both parties.   Too bad their former CEOs back Obama.   I wouldn't say that he has hired the people totally responsible for this mess.   The blame can be attributed to both parties and not just Gramm.   He was on the committee, but Clinton also signed the bill in question and put it into effect.   Gramm does not work for McCain any more, but the two former CEOs of Fannie Mae do work for Obama still.

Most companies under your ridiculous system donate to both parties, it just underscores how corrupt American politics is. Yes Clinton may have signed it into law, but at that point the Republicans had both houses, he had little choice but to sign it in. Gramm is still advising McCain, just because he has resigned does not negate the point. How naive are you?

Do you fault the people who allowed guns to be legal or the person who shot people with said gun?    Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may have been not regulated closely, but they chose to take advantage and cook their own books.    They are the guilty parties and Obama's advisor was the one who was CEO when said corruption within Fannie Mae occurred.  Just because someone allowed a free market, does not mean they committed the acts themselves.   The greedy acts were done by the 2 companies that were trusted to not take things that far in the first place.   The government gave Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac too much rope to hang themselves with, and the 2 companies obviously were greedy enough to oblige.

I fault both of them. However the Republicans knew what they were doing when mismanaging the economy so badly, in fact they made a healthy profit out of doing so. What they did would be the equivalent of myself walking into Peckham and handing out knives, and naively assuming that it wont make a difference on the number of stabbings. The Democrats would never do anything like that!

[Alex179]

They did not hand out knives and the Democrats were supporting the bill too, you moron.   Look at how the vote went.   Too bad the Republicans tried to investigate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac 4 years ago, which would have hopefully forced the 2 institutions to fix their problems instead of the Democrats allowing them 4 more years of cooked books and mismanagement.   The CEOs of Fannie Mae during that time are both Democrats and one man in particular made 90+ million in bonuses as CEO of Fannie Mae...... he is Obama's economic advisor Franklin Raines.   Nobody profited more from Fannie Mae's mismanagement than him.

[Christopher McCandless]

They did not hand out knives and the Democrats were supporting the bill too, you moron.   Look at how the vote went.   Too bad the Republicans tried to investigate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac 4 years ago, which would have hopefully forced the 2 institutions to fix their problems instead of the Democrats allowing them 4 more years of cooked books and mismanagement.   The CEOs of Fannie Mae during that time are both Democrats and one man in particular made 90+ million in bonuses as CEO of Fannie Mae...... he is Obama's economic advisor Franklin Raines.   Nobody profited more from Fannie Mae's mismanagement than him.

You are looking at individual events. Its the general management of the economy that is the problem, if they were following Clinton's spending plans then this mess could have been so easily resolved. Instead the US economy is now held ransom to both Saudi Arabia (which now owns 1/8 of the nation) and China, which has an awful lot of dollars sitting in its reserves.

[Johnny]

Unfortunately for the Democrats, what Johnny posted is the truth.    Obama's economic advisor Franklin Raines (who is a former CEO of Fannie Mae lol)  and Barney Frank headed up the resistance against Republicans that wanted to investigate the books of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.   That really is bad news and it is the truth.    I like it how Democrats are trying to blame this on Bush and the Republicans, when they were the party that wanted to reform this situation years before the crisis we are facing now.   I actually read about that stuff a few days ago, and Hannity was bitching about it on the radio today.   I actually remember hearing about this in 2004 and it didn't even seem to be important back then.  I find it odd that two of Obama's economic advisors are both former CEOs of Fannie Mae.

http://overthehilloracles.wordpress.com/2008/09/09/the-obama-fannie-freddie-connection/

http://people.boston.com/forums/news/politics/general/?p=discussiondetails&activityid=8731153219468243318

Sorry, which party in large numbers voted against all this? Not the Democrats. If Clinton was still in charge as opposed Bush, the US would have built up a budget surplus of $5.7tn.

As for economic advisors, take a look at McCain. Not only does he not know at all what he is talking about when it comes to the ecomony (by his own confession, no less), he has hired the people responsible for this mess. Up until recently, his chief ecomonic advisor was a man named Phil Gramm. Look him up and see for yourself.

Looking through the books of Fannnie Mae and Freddie Mac would have made no difference, the mess would have happened anyway, just sooner.

it's hysterical to see post like yours, is it good drugs or just plain blindness to the truth or are you just a total sucker or just completely unable to understand what is happening on planet earth ?

No, its just you watch way too much Fox News and swallow all its bullshit.

I don't watch it, so much for your simpleton answer.

Not convinced.

considering your profile says you are 19 in my opinion you have a lot to learn and if Obama gets in will get one hell of a lesson, not knowing much isn't as bad as tuning out anything you don't want to hear

you can stomp your feet and throw a temper tantrum all you want, it won't change the fact the idiot baby boomers destroyed the country for you, you can blame it on some Bush guy but it won't change the outcome and you can ignore the real reasons for the mess and believe some messiah is going to make it go away

[Parts]

Evil and greed transcend all political boundaries 

[Christopher McCandless]

Unfortunately for the Democrats, what Johnny posted is the truth.    Obama's economic advisor Franklin Raines (who is a former CEO of Fannie Mae lol)  and Barney Frank headed up the resistance against Republicans that wanted to investigate the books of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.   That really is bad news and it is the truth.    I like it how Democrats are trying to blame this on Bush and the Republicans, when they were the party that wanted to reform this situation years before the crisis we are facing now.   I actually read about that stuff a few days ago, and Hannity was bitching about it on the radio today.   I actually remember hearing about this in 2004 and it didn't even seem to be important back then.  I find it odd that two of Obama's economic advisors are both former CEOs of Fannie Mae.

http://overthehilloracles.wordpress.com/2008/09/09/the-obama-fannie-freddie-connection/

http://people.boston.com/forums/news/politics/general/?p=discussiondetails&activityid=8731153219468243318

Sorry, which party in large numbers voted against all this? Not the Democrats. If Clinton was still in charge as opposed Bush, the US would have built up a budget surplus of $5.7tn.

As for economic advisors, take a look at McCain. Not only does he not know at all what he is talking about when it comes to the ecomony (by his own confession, no less), he has hired the people responsible for this mess. Up until recently, his chief ecomonic advisor was a man named Phil Gramm. Look him up and see for yourself.

Looking through the books of Fannnie Mae and Freddie Mac would have made no difference, the mess would have happened anyway, just sooner.

it's hysterical to see post like yours, is it good drugs or just plain blindness to the truth or are you just a total sucker or just completely unable to understand what is happening on planet earth ?

No, its just you watch way too much Fox News and swallow all its bullshit.

I don't watch it, so much for your simpleton answer.

Not convinced.

considering your profile says you are 19 in my opinion you have a lot to learn and if Obama gets in will get one hell of a lesson, not knowing much isn't as bad as tuning out anything you don't want to hear

you can stomp your feet and throw a temper tantrum all you want, it won't change the fact the idiot baby boomers destroyed the country for you, you can blame it on some Bush guy but it won't change the outcome and you can ignore the real reasons for the mess and believe some messiah is going to make it go away

Firstly, the experience argument has been done to death. Reagan was the only one any good at using it.

Secondly, go and read Obama's book. He makes some very compelling arguments. The fact he has to slightly mislead the masses is meaningless, if the masses had brains he would not have to mislead them.

[ProfessorFarnsworth]

Well considering that the toxic debt is actually trillions of dollars in value some even saying it's up to 8 trillion, 700 billion will have minimal impact of only delaying the inevitable, in fact potentially worsening it long-term.

If the American people were buy off ALL the toxic debt (if the maximum is 8 trillion for example), it would cost at least up to $21,000 max per taxpayer over the time period it's paid. This bailout is setting a dangerous moral precedent to banks that they can get away with it at taxpayers expense and real question is that, how much of the toxic debt will the government need to buy out before the system stabilizes (if at all)? If anything the bailout would allow more debt to accumulate leading to an even larger collapse in the future.

[Trigger 11]

Money is just an arbitrary means of adding to value to services and goods. The whole economic system is a bunch of hocus pocus.

[Tesla]

[punkdrew]

The Senate just approved the bailout. I'm torn on this. this mess was not of our making but we (taxpayers) wil pay for it. I hope the dividend system can be worked out. And I hope all those poor wittle Wall Street types will be able to go to work tomorrow and not have to take their Xanax.