Bush Sold McCain Down the River for Billions in Bailouts for His Banking Buddies

[McCamy Taylor]

Everyone step back for a moment. What was the turning point this fall? That’s easy. The moment when It’s the economy, stupid became a reality. How did that happen? When the banks made a run on the U.S. treasury. Why did they do that? Because their good buddies George W. Bush and Hank Paulson were about to leave office soon and this was their last chance. To hell with John McCain and his presidential campaign. If JP Morgan could initiate a hostile takeover of Bear Sterns and get the taxpayers to bankroll it, Morgan did not care who the next president was. If Goldman Sachs could get its hands on a few hundred billion dollars of our money, then a centrist Democrat from Illinois sounded just fine to them.

The administration swore that it needed an emergency appropriations bill to buy up the mortgage industry’s trouble assets in order to avert a Second Great Depression. Our Village Idiot from Texas got on TV looking like a deer paralyzed by headlights and talked about how (financial) life as we knew it was about to come to a screeching halt. He didn’t look that scared when he was talking about Saddam’s yellowcake.

The stock market reacted in the way anyone could have predicted. Billions---a trillion even---in paper assets were lost. Financial types ran around like Chicken Little demanding action. Congress decided to trust the Great Liar one more time.

And now Bush and Paulson are handing out billions to the lenders to help them prop up their stock. All that talk about how we would be buying up property that would have real value that we could sell later for real cash to help the taxpayers recoup their losses----just as phony as Colin Powell’s UN speech on the eve of the Iraq invasion. Bush LIED . He can't help himself. It is so easy, and everyone always believes him.

So who lost, besides all of us who pay taxes and who just watched hundreds of billions of dollars pour down the sinkhole of the nation’s giant banks, JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs? John McCain, whose campaign was not prepared to weather predictions of a Second Great Depression being tossed around by the Commander-in-Chief just months before the election. McCain was screwed by Karl Rove in 2000 during the South Carolina primary when the Bush campaign claimed he had a Black love child, and he got screwed again when they decided that they would rather take the money and run than help a member of their own party win the election.

Moral, if you are in a foxhole with a Bush, find yourself a new foxhole.

[SammyWinstonJack]

1. K&R

[OwnedByFerrets]

2. The Last Great Heist of our Treasury

[truedelphi]

3. It is not just McCain that is screwed over. Obama voted for this mess

When his campaign coffers were already overflowing with monies.

Much of these monies were collected from low income households and middle income households, who believed in Obama and he could have easily voted against the BailOut.

Then he could have made a 30 minute informercial about the reasons why this BailOut bill was nasty:
exorbitantly expensive and also pointless, unless you were one of the financial institutions' CEO's and/or one of Bush's buddies...

This decision is going to come back to haunt him. And it will haunt the rest of us too, when we realize it means that we are broke and that Federal dollars will not exist after Summer 2009.

[ben_meyers]

4. I've been accused of "snark" for pointing that out

by some birdbrain here. Be careful what you say!

[CoffeeCat]

6. I'm curious...

What do you mean by this... "when we realize it means that we are broke and that Federal dollars will not exist after Summer 2009."?

I'm asking because right now I am very concerned about the safety of banks and the probability that
the FDIC will be able to cover future losses--which could be massive.

Your comment caught my eye and I'm interested in hearing more, if you want to explain further.

:)

[dixiegrrrrl]

13. There are those who know the FDIC, and our economy, is broke.

For years now our mafia gov. has been hoping Japan and China would not realize
all the debt we sold them in the form of Treasury bonds could not be paid back.
( a bond is a debt, a promise to pay in the future with dollars that have value.i.e. "full faith and credit of the government. How much faith you got in the Bush government?)
Our dollar has only as much worth as people think it has, there is no underlying gold or silver or independent "value" to it. In non-Orwellian terms, this is called "fiat" money.

Now China and Japan and other countries have realized there is "insufficient" value/funds for us to pay anybody anything, which Paulson and his cronies knew a long time ago.
So the raid on the Treasury by the Fed. is just a way to get the last of Treasuries, which can be turned into another/valuable currency for the favored few big shots,sent to those infamous offshore accounts, before the world catches on.
And the world is catching on faster than Paulson would like.

Once enough people/countries finally realize that our money has been devalued to the point of nada, they will not accept it. We won't be able to buy imports.
Or pay debts.
It is what happened to Argentina in the early 90's.

The folks who saw this coming got out of the market, got out of banks, to preserve the cash they have, got out of debt, and even "invested" in things that will not be available when the money "loses value", or is "devalued", a euphemism for "worthless".
Some of them got out of the country.

Other folks have not yet got it at all.
The warning has not been broadcast by MSM.

Sad.

[ToolTex]

28. My little local bank collapsed last Friday. FDIC then sold it's deposits for

I suspect a nickel on the dollar to another bank, but kept the non-performing loans. Glad I didn't own any stock in the local bank.
I invested in Euros as a hedge last July and so far have lost about 1/6 against the dollar. (Ignoring the exchange fees). I bought them just before Paulson said the US would start supporting the dollar. But I still think the Euro will soon bounce back against the dollar.

[dixiegrrrrl]

35. Not all banks are taken over by FDIC itself..

Often banks fail, other banks work out a way to keep the accounts, the performing loans, sometimes part of the failed assets, the depositors simply continuing banking but at the new bank.
Other times banks fail, no buyers to be found, then FDIC is supposed to step in and make the depositors whole.
But the rules say the "shareholders" get money back before depositors.
It used to take up to 5 years to get deposit back, and that was when the rules worked the way they were supposed to.

[petgoat]

8. There was good authority for nixing the bailout--160 Economics Professors

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aNKGD.bJwmRA&refer=home


Hundreds of Economists Urge Congress Not to Rush on Rescue Plan

By Matthew Benjamin

Sept. 25 (Bloomberg) -- More than 150 prominent U.S. economists, including three Nobel Prize winners, urged Congress to hold off on passing a $700 billion financial market rescue plan until it can be studied more closely.

In a letter yesterday to congressional leaders, 166 academic economists said they oppose Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's plan because it's a ``subsidy'' for business, it's ambiguous and it may have adverse market consequences in the long term. They also expressed alarm at the haste of lawmakers and the Bush administration to pass legislation.

``It doesn't seem to me that a lot decisions that we're going to have to live with for a long time have to be made by Friday,'' said Robert Lucas, a University of Chicago economist and 1995 Nobel Prize winner who signed the letter. ``The situation may get urgent, but it's not urgent right now. Right now it's a financial sector problem.''

[Mind_your_head]

19. Some questions about this statement please

"we are broke and that Federal dollars will not exist after Summer 2009."

1) If Federal dollars won't exist anymore, what do you think will take its place? Or how will people exchange goods?

2) What will happen to people who are still holding cash, federal reserve notes? Will those just be worthless scraps of paper?

3) Why do you believe this will all happen within the next 9 months? That's REALLY soon.

TIA

[truedelphi]

24. You can check out some other DU'ers posting some really negative findings here:

http://tinyurl.com/6h52j2

1) I have no idea what will take the place of the dollars we use. I live close enough to an area of the world wherein units of the largest cash crop somtimes buys huge favors - you give me a certain amount of this item, I give you the motorcycle I was going to put on E-Bay. (I am speaking here figuratively - I am not currently involved in this sort of thing. Too old for it I guess!)

So I would say that possibly we could go back to barter and trade. Numerous areas of the country printed their own currencies during the Great Depression. And at least one area in Upstate NY has been using alternate currency since the mid 1990's if not earlier.

[truedelphi]

27. As far as number three, my forecast is the doom and gloom scenario

A worst case scenario. There are forces at work that could come into play and resolve this mess.

In the Great Depression, the press was much more open than it is now. Currently our media is owned by the Financial Institutions and the Oil companies, and Big Pharama as well.

The M$M are not about to drive away the goose that lays the Golden Egg - which is their much touted notion that we just need to save this ONE institution, so just ONE TEENY TINY ROUND OF BAILOUT FUNDING. As we have seen, it is not one round of funding, but has been
1) between 700 and 900 billion quietly leaked to the banks between August 2007 and August 2008.

2) The AIG Bailout which was supposed to be around 80 Billion but is already at 125 Billion.

3) The 770 Bailout HorsePucky Bill - money given to the same predaters that lost us our economy to begin with.

If you don't believe our media is awfully quiet, than why when Greenspan, or the Head of Bear Stearns or the Head of AIG, or any of these people standing in front of a microphone are stating so calmly - "We just couldn't have foreseen this! How could we have known?" All I can think is that a real media would be saying, "Oh c'mon now. When you encouraged the removal of ALL THE RESTRICTIONS that were put in place to prevent a Great Depression, you never once thought about why those restrictions were there to begin with?" A wiser pundit than myself has been known to remark that the banks were supposed to serve as the croupiers at a casino, and not as the mob!!

[MadMaddie]

25. You are right Obama did vote for it and it was probably

politically motivated so he could stay in the race and still be a viable candidate.

We then have to look at the the other side of the coin if he voted "NO", what is your projection of the political fallout and the damage to the campaign?

We can almost guarantee McCains folks had the commercials ready to attack Obama on how he was weak on the economy, and he didn't understand the enormity of the bailout package...and on and on...

This could have been catastrophic to the campaign...

Obama had to pick his battles and the American Economy was not one of them.

[truedelphi]

39. You say:

Obama had to pick his battles and the American Economy was not one of them.

He spoke to us like we were grown ups over the Rev Wright affair. And I expected his belief in us to continue. But apparently the DLC got ahold of him (probably via one of the overpaid consultants)


Ah, the Pelosi effect - it's a contagious virus whose meme reads - Take no difficult actions now, because:
1) there is an election to win
2) the Republicans in office will give the needed actions a hard time
3) the next set of elections need to be dealt with first
4) repeat as needed

[99 Percent Sure]

40. I totally agree. n/t

[slipslidingaway]

5. K&R n/t

[wroberts189]

7. I bet a good AG could fix this. ie : get the money back. eom

[petgoat]

9. The Republicans Wanted McCain to Lose

Now they saddle Obama with the bailout, they can sabotage everything
he tries to do, and in 2012 they can blame all the problems they
created on the Dems.

[Auggie]

16. IT'S A SCREW-FEST! They screwed Democrats! They screwed Republicans!

They screwed the world!

[PaDUer]

23. JAIL them ALL involved...n/t

[ToolTex]

26. At least Rove wanted mccain to lose. don't know about all rethugs.

[NotGivingUp]

10. but obama voted FOR the bill. eom

[McCamy Taylor]

12. Irrelevant---like blaming Hillary Clinton for the lies about WMDs that lead to the Iraq War.

The administration and the complicit news media and the requirements of the political campaign forced politicians to vote certain ways now as then, when too many Senate Democrats caved in on the Iraq authorization because they were scared not to. No one forced Bush and Paulson to lie same way no one forced Bush, Condie and Powell to lie.

Bush and Co. were able to back Congress into a different corner and hold a different loaded gun to their heads, because Congress never held them accountable for all the other times they have done it. And it is possible that Bush and Co. will do it again before they clear out of Washington. Maybe they will demand some other favors in exchange for not vetoing a bailout of the auto industry.

The lesson for the Republican Party is the Bush Family and their allies---the Cheneys, the Bakers etc.----have always been about the Bush Dynasty first and never about the GOP. In the end, when there was no one left for them to take to the cleaners, because no one else trusted them, they took their own party to the cleaners, sacrificing their own party's candidate's chances in the election so that they could make some money----off the taxpayers, off course. The result helped the Democrats, but it hurt the US economy and taxpayers and it was unethical as hell. I would not be surprised if everyone at the White House did not have bets placed on Obama to win. One last chance to make a quick buck off Junior's presidency.

If the Republicans ever nominate Jeb, they are fools.

[barbtries]

11. that's true as far as it goes

but mccain screwed himself as well, when he chose palin for his running mate. that poor decision is his to own.

[malaise]

14. While Bush lied and while I agree with your view of the bailout

Neither McBush nor any other Rethug was winning an election in 2008. The majority of the country was finished with the REthugs since 2005 Katrina. They showed them just that in 2006 and were biding time waiting for the Presidential election. This election was about eight years of lies, death, war, fear, the unitary executive, constitutional violations, torture and failed policies. The economy was just the icing on the cake. Of course the Rethug interpretation will be that it was about the economy but that is just another one of their big lies for they take responsibility for nothing.

You're insulting Americans to believe the majority of them were ever going to vote for an erratic 72 year old with cancer and a batshit crazy woman from Alaska.

[McCamy Taylor]

15. Put the shoe on the other foot. If a Dem candidate had poor chances, would you be ok with another

Dem who decided to write that candidate off and who exploited the power of his office for personal gain by staging a phony crisis that actually helped the Republican candidate? Wouldn't you be mad as hell at the incumbent who sold out his party for personal gain? Wouldn't you wonder if the reason the Democrat lost was because his fellow Democrat decided not to go to bat for him?

Lots of Dems blamed Bill Clinton for Al Gore's loss in 2000. They said that if Clinton had not (selfishly) clung to his elected office, if he had resigned and let Gore run as an incumbent, then Gore would have won, and we never would have had Bush Jr. All through this campaign, I have listened to people blame Clinton for Bush.

Well, I think that Republicans need to question how loyal they are to the Bush family---because the Bush family has demonstrated that it has no loyalty to the Republican Party. Or to the American people. Of course, we knew that back in 1980 when Papa Bush arranged for Iran to hold onto the American hostages so that Reagan could steal an election. The fruit does not fall far from the tree, in this case Prescott Bush, Hitler's banker.

[malaise]

17. Everything you said is valid except that McCain was sunk by

Bush. That's how they were spinning the defeat even before it happened. That's the basis for the center right argument and it is hogwash. McCain had no chance from day one. Let the Rethugs deal with criminal Bush family. We have Dem policies to push.

[McCamy Taylor]

18. McCain would have lost anyway. Obama campaign much better.

But that does not excuse W.

[malaise]

20. Rethugs eating Rethugs gives me

great pleasure. There are too many criminal acts for which he will never be excused.

[varelse]

21. K&R

and shared (via link) with some friends. You're absolutely on target with this post.

[spanone]

22. bu$h* sold the whole fucking country down the river

[earth mom]

29. K & R! nt

[McCamy Taylor]

30. One more note. This was probably planned in advance. At any other time, it would have looked

suspicious. However, right before the election, the last thing anyone would expect Bush to do was to pronounce the nation on the verge of a Second Great Depression---since this would focus the voters' attention on the economy which was 100% bad for the Republicans and 100% good for the Democrats. So, when he and Paulson and their buddies in the banking and mortgage industry did just that in September, many people who would have ordinarily been skeptical thought that they must be telling the truth----if there was any way that they could cover up a financial crisis until after the election to help McCain and the Republicans' chances they would, right? It made W.'s scared deer in the headlights act seem more plausible.

They never intended to buy up a bunch of mortgages that the taxpayers could sell later. They always intended to hand out free money that banks could use any way they wanted. It has always been about driving smaller banks like Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns under so that a chosen few like Morgan and Goldman Sachs can corner the market.

We have been ripped off.

We need Eliot Spitzer to head the federal special committee to investigate and prosecute Hank Paulson, George W. Bush and all the banksters for what they have done this year. There was no national security involved. There is no Article II exemption. It was just one last run on the national coffers.

[dixiegrrrrl]

31. Yes, I agere.Amazing how complicit the Dems are.

K&R

Every 10-15 years we have this pattern. No one seems to see it.

[McCamy Taylor]

36. Dems not complicit. They were lied to. No one expects GOP prez to sell out his party.

Same as no one expects prez to make up shit in making a case for invading another country.

This has been Karl Rove's mo all along--and Henry Kissinger's too! Rove isn't smarter than anyone else. He is just willing to lie and break the law when no one else is, so of course people are tricked, because they do not expect him to be operating with the morals of a felon. Same goes for the war criminal Kissinger. And when Papa Bush made his hostages for votes deal----that kind of stuff may be ok in the CIA but it isn't kosher with the American people.

No more sociopaths in the White House ! The same law for everyone. Prosecute Bush and Co.

[Nye Bevan]

32. I bet the next post is by Grovelbot........

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our fourth quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[Nye Bevan]

34. Yes! I was right!

[McCamy Taylor]

37. You should be running the fed. You would better than Paulson.

[Nye Bevan]

38. Oooh. Faint praise, that.