That McCotter voted against this could also be a result of listening to his constituents and the principle of not only ceding control of an arbitrary blank check to one unelected official, but furthering the role of Government as a financial arsonist, now showing up with a fire department to “help”.

I agree with Thad McCotter, fire Henry Paulson. Secretary Paulson is the former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs. Of course Paulson wants to bailout WallStreet… He IS WallStreet and what is bad and corrupt in Washington DC.

financial markets, but was this plan a good one? Just this morning the headlines are oil down $10, the dollar is up, and the EU markets are up. Isn’t oil prices down and the dollar up good things? Did the legislation have money for ACORN in it? I want congress to vote NO on bad legislation.

How can you be so sure that the Bail Out Plan will really address the WS crisis?

Global investors’ panic? It’s their risks. Since they get the reward of their selected portfolios, they should also be allowed to lose from the same.

Free market means “chance of losing and winning”. Winners-only system (only winners) is actually losers-only system. In fact, the same system is also called Socialist System of the economy. That’s general truism in any Mechanism Design in Microeconomic Theory.

If the insurer is dead, there’s no way to rescue the market. You might as well start from a new one (less the grandfathering).

The end of the world has not taken place like so many predicted. The European and Asian markets did not take a hit and proceeded ahead.

The markets are up this morning. Maybe the chicken littles of this world need to take a deep breath even the capital markets are up this morning.

Let the next few days play out before we mortgage the future totally.

Listen, I’m not going to defend McCotter. But there were legitimate reasons to vote against the bill.

Listen to what Marsha Blackburn and Michelle Bachmann are saying. Listen to Newt when he reveals alternative plans today.

There are very good alternatives that restore liquidity without bailing out bad loans.

The government (with the CRA act and subsequent expansion) got us into the mess. But in the end, only the market can get us out.

Yesterday’s bill would have only delayed a recession/depression, not stop one.

So many companies have business models wrapped around a housing boom. We have a long road ahead.

But a lot more Americans think like Thad than think like you. Should we fire you instead?

I don’t understand all the technical issues, but my biggest problem with this whole thing is that is has been a jump to conclusion from the get go.

Firing Poulson might not be a bad idea if we had someone we could put in his place who had a better idea.

If this is such a great idea, why didn’t all the Dems vote for it.

Thad was just lauded a few days ago on the front page by Erick .. now you want to fire him for voting the way America feels right now.

Either we need a better plan or we need a Perot like explanation to the American people as to why this is needed.

I think most Republicans wanted to hear our guys screaming about this whole debacle from the rooftops.

We want to hear president Bush lay out the time-line and our reps lay out all the filthy things in this bill.

I think most Republicans want our reps to be calling for the resignation of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd for their roles in this. By contrast, I don’t think many Republicans want to fire Thad Cotter.

Let me explain to you how many middle class Americans feel: We want our representatives to REPRESENT us. That means when dirty deals are going down, we want to hear about it. We expect that from “our” leaders.

I can give ordinary people a pass for not understanding where all this easy credit was leading, after all, all we heard was how wonderful the housing boom was. We watched cornfield after cornfield get turned under to make more houses, and dozens of new schools getting built. Watched more box stores everywhere – saw all the big name chain restaurants filled on a Monday night. Again, interpreting all of this as a powerful sign of a good economy.

BUT, now that things are heading south, we do not want our representatives being quiet little lambs, playing nice, with an important election ahead – it makes us feel like maybe our guys must have something to hide as well, which surely does not lend much confidence in this or any other bail-out type bill. We want our guys to lay it out – not just read about it on right leaning blogs.

Until the thieves are identified and dealt with, no one feels much like a bail-out.

most irresponsible screeds I have read on RS in a long time.
Seriously. Fire Thad McCotter? For listening ot his constituents? For standing up for conservative principles? Give me a break.

And yes, Paulson should be fired.

John Shadegg was on the raido this AM talking about this nightmare. In his mind, Paulson and his refusal to budge on two points were critical in Reps not supporting this plan. One of those points was increasing FDIC limits to $250K. A reasonable request. He said no deal.

Guess who is caling for that this AM?
None other than Barack Obama.

Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, today proposed increasing the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. limit to $250,000 from the current level of $100,000.

Dollars to donuts, this gets in the bill that passes. And Barack gets credit. Why, because I’m beginning to think that Paulson and Pelosi, etc…contrived this crisis for one reason and one reason only, to get Barack elected.

And you Leon, buy right into it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080930/plbloomberg/ar8qhit0nyi

And John McCain as well.

Hire McCotter for President.

What an absolute shame it is that Coburn caved on this.

I agree that we are on the brink of a significant danger.

I agree that prudent actions must be taken.

I disagree that the core of the Paulson plan is some type of “savior” and that all discussion of other alternatives is somehow stupid, unpatriotic, unwise, etc.

There are other alternatives. Why can’t they be discussed?

Who made Paulson God?

Are we not conservatives, or are we just sheep?

A democrat Treasury Secretary says we need the government to buy $700B in assets at prices that would be illegal for the companies to use as asset values on their balanace sheets, and saying “we can go a different route” is deserving of firing?

Since when is throwing a bunch of money at a problem ever the solution?

Since when is having the government doing something (violating the mark-to-market valuation rules) better than having the private sector do something (free the banks from the mark-to-market valuation rules).

Bottom Line: Thaddeus McCotter has actually asked questions, proposed alternatives, and is eager to address the issue.

In contrast, Paulson et al. just want us to behave like well-trained puppies, and are unwilling to explore anything outside of Paulson’s “there are no alternatives” plan.

Instead fire the democrats in Congress that blocked oversight of Freddie and Fannie and created the CRA.By the way the market is over 200 so its not all doom and gloom.

Let’s fire Wolf and keep Thad McCotter!

I appreciate writers that uphold conservative values. I don’t see that in Wolf’s post.

but I’ll make a prediction. Bailout doesn’t pass. More banks go bust but the credit markets rebound and life goes on. Proponants of the bailout all step up to say we dodged a bullet and they were against it before they were for it.

Who’s afraid of the big bad wolf anyway.

I don’t know this Thad guy but bravo for him that he voted “no”. Whatever the motivation, when he voted against this garbage Bill he did us a favor.

I can’t fathom why in the world any conservative would support this government intrusion.

In their hastiness to do whatever it takes to get the economy out of this, the Bush administration has put all their eggs in the basket of Paulson, who cannot seem to even consider alternatives to this situation other than the ones that he has proposed…and that being a massive bailout supported by the tax payers.
Now, I’m sure Paulson really wants to get out of this thing alive, with the economy in one piece, but could it be that he also has an agenda, being the former CEO of G-S? Why would he choose to bailout AIG over all the others? Could it be a coincidence that GS was about to face a $20 billion loss if AIG went under?
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/aig-bailout-saved-goldman.html

If Paulson and Bernanke were serious about using all the tools at their disposal, why is it that they have not yet taken the actions that Newt Gingrich and Steve Forbes have been calling for by suspending Mark-to-Market? This certainly could not hurt at this time, while the payoffs could be astronomical! This is an action that would not require the approval of Congress.

http://www.forbes.com/home/2008/09/29/mark-to-market-oped-cxng0929gingrich.html

This is the only plan that I have found so far that would rescue the economy while preserving the value of the US dollar at the same time. Even Paulson and Bernanke have acknowleged that these rules need tweaked.

http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSWBT00874820080410

http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/22/paulson-weighs-in-on-mark-to-market-debate/

If Paulson can’t at least consider another course of action, Thad’s right, he needs to go!

You allude to Coburn, who I happen to respect and like immensely.

But let’s be frank, his to contributors are Cummins-American, Friedman, Billings & Ramsey, American Securities and Windway Capital. You can guess the industry.

I am not suggesting anything other than there is a very powerful counter argument for his support.

and should be fired. Anyone who rose to be CEO of GS has to make John Gotti look like a pickpocket.

Not only should he be fired, he should be sent to jail for trying to deraud the American Taxpayer out of 700 BILLION dollars to spread amongst the various Wall Street “Families”.

Why is everyone in a panic about the narrative that the Republicans fought off the bailout bill? Look at the polls, Americans are against it and see it as a power grab and handout to Wall street out of their pockets.

The real damage is McCain trying to broker a deal (seriously killing his credibility) and Bush pushing a plan, any plan.

I just don’t buy anyone’s argument that we have to pass a bailout plan no matter how flawed. That doesn’t make sense. Should we pass a plan that gets the $700 billion by cutting the funding to Iraq and Afghanistan?

Lot of “stuff” flying around about bailout or whatever you want to call it. Perhaps if reason and true cause and effect was interjected into this it might make more sense. But alas, I live in a fantasy world thinking MSM, Democrats, and spineless fake-republicans would actually try that..

Good article below:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/29/miron.bailout/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

 Wow. I cannot believe this bill failed. I would have assumed that the Wall st. fat cats, who got into this mess with their own greed as the foremost cause, would have been bailed out by John Q Taxpayer. Thank God, it didn't pass. Take responsibility for your own actions. That seems to be a lost mantra these days. The sky is not falling, planes are not falling out of the sky, people are not jumping out of windows. ets all take a deep breath

 Wow. I cannot believe this bill failed. I would have assumed that the Wall st. fat cats, who got into this mess with their own greed as the foremost cause, would have been bailed out by John Q Taxpayer. Thank God, it didn't pass. Take responsibility for your own actions. That seems to be a lost mantra these days. The sky is not falling, planes are not falling out of the sky, people are not jumping out of windows. ets all take a deep breath

Here is a better idea fire Boehner and replace him with McCotter.

I think there are a few things that the government could do right now to alleviate some of the problems to give us at least some space to work. Immediately suspending the mark-to-market rule would solve probably about half of the problem. Have the FDIC guarantee ALL deposits and that would stop any bank runs.

Why aren’t those done already?

I suspect because Bush wants to have the full solution done on his watch instead of solving half of it and turning over the rest of it to his successor (whether ego or a belief that the next administration won’t solve it right, or both).

I started out for the Paulson proposal, but have changed my mind. We can do better than this.

in the next couple of days. Grandstanding about firing Paulson is utterly counterproductive. I mean, the guy is doing us a favor working in very stressful circumstances when he could be taking it easy.

I don’t have time to write today, but everything I see around me reinforces that an imperfect solution now is much, much, much preferable to to what we will have to do if Wall Street burns down, however psychologically gratifying that may be too some.

This was a turkey of a bill. No band-aids. Half arsed solutions like this bailout only delay problems.

Congress needs to act and get something done right, but if it isn’t right, don’t pass it. I don’t need another rushed crap sandwich like the Patriot Act or the MBT here in Michigan.

What I’d like to see is the government
tighten up their own spending before they come raiding the communal wallet. I don’t see how throwing our good money after bad business is any sort of answer.
How about tax policy changes, call off the
capital gains taxes for a couple of years, cut corporate taxes and, could I be so bold as to suggest, a strong move on a flat or fair tax?
Moves like that would free up billions of dollars and bring it in to our economy.
Instead ALL we hear are more and more examples of how they are going to saddle our families for generations with huge never ending debt.

since most of our members voted against the bailout? Reasonable people can differ here. As of right now, the only bright prospect for Republicans is in the House, and that largely is because of this and the energy issue. And that “bright spot” is less seat losses than anticipated.

McCotter may indeed be grandstanding. Then again, after hearing people told to suck up the negative effects of free trade or whatever, and then watching those who uttered those very words cry for Daddy and beg like streetwalkers the moment things went south, he may just be nauseous.

We may need some form of a bailout. One way not to get votes for it is to call for the heads of those who opposed the last package.