Senators Express Reservations on Bailout, Despite Pleas for Swift Passage

Leading Banking Panel Senators Reject Bailout Plan

www.foxnews.com

WASHINGTON — Leading senators of both parties are expressing strong reservations about the administration's financial bailout plan despite pleas from the treasury secretary and Federal Reserve chairman for quick passage.

Sen. Chris Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, said on Tuesday, "What they have sent us is not acceptable."

Sen. Richard Shelby, an Alabama Republican, said, "We have got to look at some alternatives."

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.cnbc.com
www.bloomberg.com

Mod Edit: Breaking News Forum Submission Guidelines – Please Review This Link.




Modified thread title to reflect headline of the article.

[edit on 23/9/2008 by SkepticOverlord]

I was watching this entirely on CSPAN with live stream- It was bound to happen. Senators asked questions which were later confronted with answers that were repetitive or they were completely avoiding the subject, often repeating the same. It was clear that this bailout plan was in nobody's interest. Even if it would be taken into concideration, no way it would be accepted in this week.

Following this, Dow again plunged 170 points. Doubt has risen to control the markets.

Well... What are the alternatives?

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Mod Edit: Breaking News Forum Submission Guidelines – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 23/9/2008 by Mirthful Me]

Awesome! The bastards are finally working for the common good now that they know the mess that they've created and propagated will adversely effect their livelihoods too. Weird how the game changes when their slick necks are on the chopping block along with the rest of ours.

It was no coincidence they waited until the final minutes of the market being open o announce this. They wanted to test it to see what would happen if they hinted at the bailout not passing the Senate. I'd expect tomorrow morning an announcement from Washington that the bill is expected to pass the Senate combined with a statement by Dodd supporting it.

I'm sure we'll be bombarded with this "The Dow fell 170 points immediately after the announcement" rhetoric on the news tonight as well as much commenting from Bernacke & Paulson's "Recession likely without bailout" speeches. Hell, there may even be a statement by the Big Cheese, GWB... who knows? Anyway, it's all intended to scare the last holdouts among the citizenry who can be swayed and the rest of us will be painted as crackpots, profiteers, and unAmerican for criticizing the bill.

(which, if it happens that way, will be quite interesting. I've never been on the "you're UnAmerican" side fo the fence, before.

I started to get worried when Paulson couldn't answer WHY they need such broad and unhindered power.

The questions about credit card debt and student loans also threw him for a loop and all he could muster was that they may need power to go after 'other securities' as needed but they didn't know what those were.

Neither of them could answer why the taxpayers would pay for this and not expect anything in return except that 'bad stuff might happen'.

reply to post by burdman30ott6


Good theory, man.

With that spin on it, I'm excited to see what happens tomorrow. I never thought about it as a ploy. Some of the stuff I've seen on C-SPAN seemed legitimate. There are some politicians out there who are pissed about them trying to plow this thing through there without any resistance. I've seen a lot of awesome opposition to it. We'll see though, I guess.





How the hell is this thread not getting any attention? This is only the next step to complete economic collapse and people are talking about palm reading and ufo's in Argentina?!?!?!?

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Anyway, it's all intended to scare the last holdouts among the citizenry who can be swayed and the rest of us will be painted as crackpots, profiteers, and unAmerican for criticizing the bill.

No question about that- It will be portrayed as a "Patriotic thing to do."

reply to post by DeadFlagBlues


lol, Its interesting also only 28% of your people want it, i wonder if that is a true reflection of your country or typical poll, thats made up, for political reasons.

Of course Dodd doesn't find it acceptable. He's been the biggest beneficiary of this whole mess since the beginning.

My guess is he wants to hold out for more money.

I wouldn't approve any proposal that doesn't include the resignations of Dodd and Barney Frank.

Originally posted by emsed1
I started to get worried when Paulson couldn't answer WHY they need such broad and unhindered power.

The questions about credit card debt and student loans also threw him for a loop and all he could muster was that they may need power to go after 'other securities' as needed but they didn't know what those were.

Paulson & Bernanke know full well the slyness of their bailout proposal,

the 'other securities' are the Trillions of dollars in CDS and other mortgage related derivitives that their favored banks & institutions are holding...
Pleading the 'mortgage' angle is just to get their foot in the door...
after they get ahold of the full $700Billion as they both insist upon....
they have carte blanch to spend the funds any way they see fit--- without penalty of recrimination as they also insist for the program's funds



what else can be done???
.... well in several other threads, over the last 30 hours i spelled out another way to rectify the (elite's) messes.
read 'em, thank-you

Originally posted by emsed1
I started to get worried when Paulson couldn't answer WHY they need such broad and unhindered power.

The questions about credit card debt and student loans also threw him for a loop and all he could muster was that they may need power to go after 'other securities' as needed but they didn't know what those were.

Well, now, here's where it gets uncomfortable:


It is NOT breaking news that a very organized and focused financial expert has been saying for months, that Henry Paulson, is dead. Killed by a fellow gangster.

The answer to your questions above, might be, that this man does not know much about anything, and is a body double, called in for the performance of a lifetime.

I will post a snippet here, from Christopher Story's website

worldreports.org

HENRY PAULSON HAS DIED AFTER BEING SHOT IN THE CHEST
TOP AIDE TO VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY SHOT DEAD AT CLOSE RANGE
Wednesday 2 January 2008 02:18
THREE UPDATES WERE APPENDED TO THIS REPORT ON 2ND JANUARY 2008:

UPDATE, 5.00PM 2ND JANUARY 2008:
Henry M. Paulson, the Secretary of the United States Treasury, died today from gunshot wounds suffered as described in this report. The State Department have confirmed this to sources in touch with this service. We do not know, and it may never be known, whether Paulson was shot dead 'in the course of duty' given that he had continually committed gross treason in time of war and had repeatedly (we are informed) been warned of the consequences if he did not cease and desist.

Here's where there's a serious kink in the cover-up. In this video of Paulson, supposedly in the morning of January 8 on CNBC, Paulson is asked a question regarding the depth of the problem in the housing market and that the problem was initially underestimated (UNSAID: because it covered up the underlying frauds).

Paulson goes on to answer the question as follows:

"Well I can remember, I came to Washington early in the summer of 2006
and I remember late 2006 early 2007 that most economists, as they looked at housing were looking at it bottoming out sometime in 2007 and this problem has been more significant than a lot of people, a lot of us first thought it would be. I can tell you it was about MID YEAR THIS YEAR that we put together, and I think we put together an effort to deal with this and I think we'll be talking about that later to deal with what's going on in
the sub prime area".

This interview was supposed to have taken place in the morning
of January 8, 2008 and yet he said "MID YEAR THIS YEAR that we put
together, and I think we put together an effort to deal with this"
meaning mid year LAST year. i.e. in mid-2007.

This is a strong indication that this interview was conducted towards the end of 2007, and NOT on 8th January 2008 as the population is supposed to believe.

I am not sure if what he says is true, but I have been following this story for a while and feel it bears mentioning, particularly on a conspiracy website.

reply to post by andy1033


Yeah, it's like 28% in favor, 33% opposed, and 35% undecided.

You can look at this a few ways.

28% of those people may have given in to the propaganda machine. Not just Fox, but I've seen a majority of the news talking about how this will single handedly save our skin. They're either Bush loyalists, or in favor because they were told so on television. The short sighted.

33% may actually be in the know. They might have heard Ron Paul or someone of the like, talking on numerous talk shows about how this would subsequently bring down our economy entirely. Some of them might not know what exactly is going on, but understand that Bush tried ushering this bill through. They, being against Bush, refuse and decide against it.

35% and change are your average person. Not given any specifics by their local news media, and don't get around to understanding the severity of the situation. Like most issues, they "don't know" and probably don't care to know. Some of this demographic are just fence sitting like the two presidential hopefuls waiting to see what side to take.

reply to post by nyk537


I'm all for that. Dodd is a real bastard. He's been soaking up that banking lobbying money for a long time now. He's turned a blind eye while these bankers had free reign on the system. Now he wants to act like some sort of savior to us? Dodd is a joke.

I just love how Bernecke and Paulson are so surprised that section 8 is causing them problems.

It cracked me up when Paulson said; (I paraphrase but its close)

"Of COURSE we want transparency, we just thought it would be PRESUMPTUOUS to include an outline for oversight in the draft."

Lol, whatever. Like anything could possibly be more presumptuous than,

www.nytimes.com...

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

I am just proud of the American people right now. If people had not stood up, and voiced their displeasure to their representatives, I am willing to bet this would have already been rubber stamped.

Thank all the gods that this draft got air and print time.

so if Bushes plan got rejected, good chance it wont. I think the situation would warrant an executive order if it gets a little worse.

I think we need to be aware.

What REALLY ticks me off, and keeps me from otherwise seeing the MSM, no less even companies as large as CNN as honest independant journalists are reports of this nature.

(Bear in mind I NORMALLY dont call out senior writers on their information, but in this case I HAD to call out David Goldman on what I termed an "obvious attempt to mislead his audience")

In an article dated September 22, 2008: 5:27 PM EDT, he headlines with:

Americans want bailout - poll
CNN poll finds most Americans support government intervention, but they are concerned about the cost to taxpayers.

Of which the Article Can Be Found Here


Now, to someone who may not be paying attention, they may find that to be completely feasible.

However, I participated in THEIR OWN online poll which asked the IDENTICAL question that he was reporting about and the poll results are thusly:

1. What should Congress do with the $700 billion proposal to take pressure off the credit markets?

Pass the legislation quickly 16%
Pass it, but add stimulus and foreclosure relief 32%
Reject it 52%

Total responses to this question: 145660

And the Poll Responses Can Be Found Here


While, it's entirely possible that he WASNT trying to mislead anyone at all, then one can assume it was just an error. Ok, but if you make an error on a situation that maybe someone's name is mispronounced or your TIE falls off, thats fine, we all laugh and have a great day. When you make such an egregious error that could well sway minds and attitudes on something as LARGE as the global economy, I find that gross negligence.

It almost makes me sad.


AB1

reply to post by alphabetaone


We're on the brink, I believe. We're going to get steam rolled into submission and just obey or we're one economic head spin from throwing these bums out.


I bet on the first one, as the second one would require effort.

Good, I reject it too....I don't get bailed out when I go bankrupt. Firms shouldn't either!

reply to post by Mammoth


I'm glad this Bail-Out is being turned down, but we still need to hear the final vote on Friday. That's the make or break day, so CALL YOUR CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVE AND MAKE IT KNOWN TO THEM THAT THEY MUST REJECT THE BAIL-OUT!!

With or without a Bail-Out we are headed for a recession folks, because people are still filing for foreclosures, losing value in their homes, and production is slowing down, people will lose there jobs regardless.

With this Bail-Out we stand not only to continue with the current recession, but also will be facing inflation. So here we have it, either we take our lumps and go for the recession OR listen to those two jerk-offs in Washington and let them put their foot on the accelerator with the double whammy of high unemployment with hyperinflation a.k.a., stagflation.




[edit on 23-9-2008 by Gateway]

I'm afraid we must remain vigilant still.

There a many tricks and plans within plans with this lot. There is always another twist to their tale.

We mustn't lose sight of the fact that the 'owners' of the central bank system are knee deep in this, and they are NOT loyal to the American people.