RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Gingrich on the Bailout: Before D.C. Gets Our Money, It Owes Us Some Answers
September 21, 2008 5:12 PM
Writing on The Corner, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., has some questions about the Bush administration's proposed $700 billion taxpayer bailout of the financial sector.
"We are being reassured that we can trust Secretary Paulson 'because he knows what he is doing.'
"Congress had better ask a lot of questions before it shifts this much burden to the taxpayer and shifts this much power to a Washington bureaucracy.
"Imagine that the political balance of power in Washington were different.
"If this were a Democratic administration, the Republicans in the House and Senate would be demanding answers and would be organizing for a 'no' vote. ... Congress has an obligation to protect the taxpayer.
"Congress has an obligation to limit the executive branch to the rule of law.
"Congress has an obligation to perform oversight.
"Congress was designed by the Founding Fathers to move slowly, precisely to avoid the sudden panic of a one-week solution that becomes a 20-year mess..."
Read the whole thing HERE.
- jpt
September 21, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (68)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The only answers Republicans deserve is hearing the door slammed in their faces.
Posted by: Saddlesablazing | Sep 21, 2008 11:00:12 PM
Would be great, but that would necessitate an investigation. I would suggest investigation be added with possible indictment conviction of abusers of system for greed. I am familar with the corporate greed and decision making through out all of our systems even in medicine. Bailout does need to be approved with oversight and rules of anyone who is paid out over this.
Posted by: Sharonklim | Sep 21, 2008 9:51:24 PM
Lots of comments I see. No answer yet from Washington group if decision made. We can argue all we want - I will wait to make any comment until decision made. I do want answers why?? Want protection??? No big CEO/executive payouts!!
Posted by: Sharonklim | Sep 21, 2008 9:41:09 PM
I think it should be pointed out that Newt needs to figure out something:
Before DC gets our money...etc,etc..
What he means is before DC adds more debt to what we the taxpayers owe...and as MrCoffee said what our children, granchildren and great grandchildren owe
The government gets it cut out of your paycheck before you do. If you look at their cut, you work until April to pay them before you actually start collectin "your" part!
Posted by: Independent | Sep 21, 2008 9:21:20 PM
Why is this needed? All the sudden Paulson says on Meet the Press today that " liquidity is frozen- this has to be done and be done soon to get things moving".
Why can't anyone get a specific answer- are several banks going to go under next week if this is not done- or are more big Wall Street firms going under this week. They all keep talking about main street but they are doing nothing for main street- those of us in the real world have known for some time that credit has practically frozen- investments are way down, etc. Have they been that asleep at the wheel? When is the media going to ask some hard questions and demand some real facts- why the urgency now?
Posted by: Angela | Sep 21, 2008 8:32:35 PM
notafool,
Reality seems to have little to do with your assessment of the situation. Do Republicans take responsibility for ANYTHING??? Like even the basic tenants of their financial philosophy of deregulation?? Somehow it is the Greedy Deregulating Democrats that did this.
Posted by: Leonard Peltier | Sep 21, 2008 8:30:45 PM
This whole finacial mess results from the left gaming the system to get what they can't get at the ballot box.
No sane voter would agree to making loans to people with abysmal credit histories.....so Barney Franks and his fellow nuts used stealth government regulation to get it done.
The 1 Trillion Dollar Bailout is about what the taxes would have been if it had been done above board.
This is a small taste of what Obama will give you. Just wait for the "tax cut" for 95% of "Americans". Ever wonder why they don't say "for 95% of tax payers". Because 40% of taxpayers PAY NO TAXES. So the ephemeral tax cut is just another income redistribution scheme called something else to trick you, because you WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR IT.
And then, wait for "Cap and Trade".
And then, wait for American aid to the world.
And then.....and then....and then.
By the way, 1 Trillion is the total amount of Federal Taxes collected in 1 year. So the price tag, for those of you who actually pay taxes, will be a year's taxes plus interest. Sweet, no?
Posted by: notafool | Sep 21, 2008 8:27:02 PM
PaulWI,
Let me update you:
Obama's speech included seven specific stipulations for any bailout that happens.
1.) No blank check: Americans are going to be on the hook for almost $1,000,000,000,000. It's taxation without representation to just write blank checks without being accountable to taxpayers.
2.) Taxpayer money should not be paid to reward CEOs. Period.
3.) Taxpayers are incurring a great amount of cost and risk. The investments should be protected, and they should be able to eventually recoup the losses.
4.) THERE MUST BE A PLAN TO HELP HOMEOWNERS STAY IN THEIR HOME.
5.) Obama pointed out that this is a global crisis, and that other nations need to step in to help secure the financial market.
6.) REGULATE. REGULATE. REGULATE.
7.) This plan must work for Main Street, not just Wall Street.
Posted by: Leonard Peltier | Sep 21, 2008 8:26:10 PM
I just don't know if I agree with Obama's answer to the $700B bailout. Here's the quote from this morning; "um, ah, um, well, ok, um, McCain, um, ah, well, dah! I know some of you think it was really clear but I just don't know.
Posted by: PaulWI | Sep 21, 2008 8:20:13 PM
What's really motivating Paulson's push for a quick new deal for the banks?
We need some answers!
Obama/Biden 08!
Posted by: Common Sense | Sep 21, 2008 8:17:12 PM
Why in god's name is anyone pretending that this money is going to Washington, when it is obviously going to Wall Street? The media is acting like there is a bunch of value that just "dissappeared", when the reality is that it was stolen!
Posted by: Mike | Sep 21, 2008 8:15:28 PM
Obama has really lacked any leadership during this economic crisis. I'm fearful this is how he would act if he were president.
Posted by: Steve | Sep 21, 2008 8:14:07 PM
Has everyone noticed that the republicans are so ashamed of their record since 2000 that you don't see Bush & Cheney ever mentioned here or lauded by them as having a superior administration.
pretty revealing...
mission accomplished
Posted by: Rex | Sep 21, 2008 8:12:48 PM
Captain America:
re: 'how did Obama, the community organizer, become one of the upper 5% in US wage earners?
he's smart enough to write books that people are interested in, and will pay to read... simple economics... you Republicans say you know about that 'stuff'.
Posted by: Jazzman | Sep 21, 2008 8:08:46 PM
A.L. McLeod,
The guy in charge, George Bush, signed off on any and all barrels of pork. He himself appointed all the chief money men in government. He totally and completely destroyed the Clinton surplus all the while. Now what party is this fellow Bush with? What party are you with? Hmmm, that's about what I figured.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Sep 21, 2008 7:59:40 PM
Ron,
This has nothing to do with Carter and Clinton. The Contract on America crew, led by one Newt Gingrich, with a Republican majority in both congressional chambers, rammed through the remainder of de-regulation, beyond the damage that Reagan did. They opened the gateways for standard banking institutions to get into other sectors, including high risk investments. Bloggers, please try to recall at least five minutes of history before you speak.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Sep 21, 2008 7:56:28 PM
This is one time I am with Gingrich all the way. Democrats need to be vigilant and not be scared into doing something stupid. The Bush administration is corrupt and that includes all the republicans who have followed like sheep and done nothing else. Gingrich is speaking with no political motive that he would have had if he were still in Congress. I want Congress to have oversight and act with all the authority they have to protect us.
Posted by: Vicki | Sep 21, 2008 7:54:28 PM
Democrats have been whining recently over the details of the government bailout. The certainly rushed to the rescue of Chrysler in the 1970's..but when the President acts swiftly and responsibly to save our nation from economoc disaster (largely due to years and years of liberal pork barrel spending which has now come full circle to hit us hard), the democrats whine like little children. Their Lilliputian minds (notably Obama and Biden's) just do not grasp the enormity of the disaster and the fact They helped bring it about! Cut the deal..hammer out the details later..America cannot go down because of Socialist Stonewalling!!
Posted by: Al MacLeod | Sep 21, 2008 7:53:32 PM
D.H.,
You would like to see the taxpayers bail out both Wall Street and Main Street? We have met the enemy and they is us. Tell me exactly who would be the winners and who would be the losers in this zero sum game?
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Sep 21, 2008 7:52:35 PM
Clifton,
I doubt seriously that a) Gingrich supports Obama's point of view, and b) that Obama even has a valid point of view. If so, why wasn't Obama vigorously addressing this issue, and engaging in his prophecies even two weeks ago? After all he claims to have predicted the Iraq debacle when he was in the state legislature, right? Has he lost his Mr. Prediction skills of late? LET'S BE CLEAR: Both Obama and McCain were silent in both magnitude and scope of this mess. Is anybody in charge? Fact is, Sarah Palin may be the only one that is trustworthy because she hasn't been tainted as much.
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Sep 21, 2008 7:50:52 PM
Post a comment


