The Democrats have been trying mightily to turn attention away from their failed economic policies as millions upon millions remain unemployed. Their latest technique over the past few months? To tell us how much better off we are that they gave billions away to save banks and auto companies.
Good segment with Neil Cavuto yesterday discussing this very thing:
All I know is that after spending hundreds of billions to rescue banks for getting reckless, a lot of them are still reckless. And a lot of em’ still aren’t lending.
Same with auto companies. We spent nearly a hundred billion smackers for them to do what they could of done on their own in bankruptcy. Shed losing divisions and restructure. Only in this case, with OUR money for a makeover. Doing the one thing they said they wouldn’t do. Restructure like a bankruptcy.
He points out that the Democrats are trying to say hey! Imagine what would of happened without the bailouts?
We’re down a net 3 million jobs, as Neil points out, but things would of been so much worse without them?
Please.
The bailouts along with Socialized health care, the sunsetting of the tax cuts, and the anti-business attitude of Obama’s only aided in allowing this economic thunderstorm to hang around so much longer than it should have. They have no one to blame any longer. No Bush to bash. (but some are still trying)
They own the economy AND the bailouts.
Pat Toomey:
All these bailouts, takeovers and spending sprees leave us with a weak economy without job growth and with a mountain of debt for our kids.
See author page
CURT, hi, I guess you did not like my idea of starting a UNION of FA bloggers:
I thought that it was a good idea; because, YOU would have been elligible for a BAILOUT
bye
The only bailout I want is from Obama and his policies. 😆
As I recall, the entire cycle of bailouts began with the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, put together by republican Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and strongly supported by President George W. Bush. This was quickly sold by inducing a state of near-panic, with assertions coming quick and fast that the nation’s entire financial system was in imminent danger of complete and total collapse, and that this was a virtual certainty without immediate intervention. Wide-spread fear was heightened to such a degree that the DOW plunged over 700 points in a single day, initiating a continuing decline that gave every appearance of being terminal.
A lot of fear was needed to overcome opposition, because the proposal was so extreme. The initial Paulson proposal would actually have given the Secretary of the Treasury unlimited power to spend whatever he deemed necessary, without being subject to either Congress or judicial review. I can’t recall any proposed democratic that’s ever sounded quite as dangerous as that.
It’s wasn’t Obama or the democrats who initiated the cycle of bailouts. That trajectory was set, locked in, and initiated by Paulson and the Bush White House before Obama was even elected.
Recent polls show that nearly half of all Americans incorrectly believe that TARP was the work of democrats and the Obama White House. I suppose that’s one indicator of the effectiveness of republican propaganda.
Paulson and Bush are certainly guilty of supporting the bailout(s). As regards Republicans generally, however, you are mistaken; while opposition crossed party lines, more Republicans than Democrats opposed it. Look at the voting history for HR 1424 for example. Republicans almost killed it (with help from some Dems, obviously, since they were already the minority party in 2008). And regardless of the role Bush played (which many conservatives excoriated him for), it’s still true that opposition to government support for industry is historically associated with conservatism. I might add that I generally include the stimulus package, federal reserve purchases of MBS, and the government bailout of Fannie and Freddie under the heading of ‘bailout’, i.e. it’s not just TARP.
I actually think that by the usual measures (unemployment, GDP, corporate profits) we would indeed be worse off (short term, which includes today) without the bailouts. Hangovers are a bitch, and the financial sector wouldn’t have undergone such a large set of bankruptcies without causing quite some collateral damage. But I’d rather have justice, and at least we’d be on the road to a better future than we are now.
Keep in mind too as regards GDP, that federal spending is added to it while the federal debt is not subtracted. Growing GDP while adding a trillion in debt every year is an accounting gimmick.
@Greg:
There seems to be a bit more that you aren’t recalling. As, how the votes went down, who controlled the purse after the Act was made law, and who President Bush generously involved in, not just financial discussions, but all important matters prior to his departure. For months he had all leading candidates briefed and kept current in just about everything.
Indeed it was and I’m sure you believe the hapless democrats just got sucked into something they had no clue about and were left holding the bag, a bag they quickly stuffed trillions more into to blow on all their pent up socialist dreams. Yeah sure, those poor little things. Except, we now know that only half of the TARP funding was released immediately during the last months of the former president’s term. On January 12, prior to Inauguration Obama’s team, in a letter, requested the rest of it be released so they could hit the ground running on day one. Well, well, well:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/05/welcome_to_the_long_run.html
And, Fannie and Freddie have their hands out again thinking there’s should still be some cash left in the bag, should be. 🙄
There’s that “don’t recall” again. Fear??? look what’s coming down the pike now:
More:
http://www.investorsinsight.com/blogs/forecasts_trends/archive/2010/07/27/financial-reform-or-government-takeover-revisited.aspx
Obama and the democrats were involved in this early on, from meetings he attended or was briefed on by the Bush WH, about Paulsen’s/Bernanke’s, and Geithner’s information, and later making Geithner Treasury Secretary and putting Bernanke in his cushy office. Democrats then wrote the law and voted for it. And wasn’t that a nice touch for big mouth Chuckie Schumer to crash that bank shortly before it all came front and center.
BTW, it was/is Obama and the democrats that are doing and have done the bulk of the bailouts, remember, last March CBO estimated TARP to cost $109 billion, not $750 billion, where’s the rest of the money? I know, the Republican’s are forcing the dems in power and the dem that puts his John Hancock on the laws into spending, spending, spending, on top of that, they have a damn good propaganda machine cranked up too. Alas, what’s a democrat to do, the evil Pubbies have them by the tail, they got the House, they got the Senate and Obama is really on their side. 🙄
Missy, beautiful job pointing out to Greg what an idiot he is. Don’t hold your breath for an intelligent response. If Greg’s IQ where 1 less he would be a plant. Fact remains that 0-bama spent billions to stimulate the economy and has failed beyond belief. The blame Bush campaign strategy will fail and come November America will send 0-bama and the other out of touch Democrats a clear message that they can no lonber blame Bush or hide behind the liberal MSM who failed to be honest with America regarding the fact that 0-bama was less than qualified to be a janitor at the Whitehouse.