JR Dieckmann
Bush bailout derails Democrat election tactic
By JR Dieckmann
Why did so many Republicans vote for a socialist bailout bill that goes against everything Republicans have always stood for? More to the point, why did President Bush push this bill so hard and even refuse to consider any alternatives, such as bankruptcy or the alternate private sector market solution proposed by House Republicans?
Despite what the Democrats and their media have been trying to put over on the public, and in spite of a number of major threats to our country and the free market, the economy has been in relatively good condition throughout the Bush administration until now. Granted, President Bush's methods of keeping the economy out of recession have driven up the national debt and served to keep an artificial bubble inflated, but the economy has stayed strong, up until now.
Is it really any coincidence that economic troubles always seem to pop up in an election year when a Republican president inhabits the White House? And each time, Democrats make the same claim; that it's all the president's fault and the answer is more socialism in America. It's interesting to note however, that when you look below the surface, you usually find Democrats at the heart of the economic problem.
In 2004, George Soros attempted to crash the stock market with financial manipulation, media appearances, and op-eds aimed at scaring investors out of the market. He nearly succeeded but the market was too resilient and rebounded from his attempt. He even threatened to spend half of his fortune to defeat George W. Bush. His intentions for that money went far beyond just advertising.
This year saw gasoline prices peaking after Soros had moved his investment money from oil production to oil speculation. There were many contributing causes to the high oil prices; India and China were increasing demand; speculators holding oil supplies off the market; weather and world affairs; and speculation that the world was running out of oil, to name a few. High gasoline prices in the U.S. could be connected directly to the blocking of energy and oil development by Democrats in Congress which have forced us to depend heavily on foreign oil from unfriendly countries.
Now we have this mortgage crisis, and once again, it's the Democrats who are behind it. This is not the fault of the Bush administration or of Wall Street CEOs and executives, or of bank presidents who were only doing what government mandates told them to do. It was a direct result of Democrat policy to put low income, high risk minorities into houses they could not afford. Under the pretense that "all Americans should be able to own a home," Democrats gave them one with the help of Barack Obama's close associates and former employer, ACORN, and backed up by corrupt Democrat socialists running Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Although the problem with Fannie and Freddie has been brewing since the Clinton administration, just as the 911 terrorist attacks had, the question is; did the collapse have to happen now — just before the election? Or with the inevitable collapse on the horizon, did Democrats sacrifice Fannie and Freddie before the election, in hopes of blaming it on Bush and the 'greedy capitalists on Wall Street?" Did they take a page from the George Soros play book to once again, try to collapse the economy just before an election?
We can debate whether this bailout package was the right approach to dealing with the economic crisis. We can question whether the bailout was constitutional or not. We can even wonder if it will prevent the economy from sliding further into the abyss. But what is also important right now in this politically charged season is the election and the future of our country. An economic collapse now would certainly be blamed on Bush by the Democrats and the media to throw the election to Barack Hussein Obama.
The last thing Republicans need right now is the chance that the economy could go into the tank, or at least slowing down so that voters would suffer. The $700B bailout was the best chance for Bush to assure a stable economy before the election. Any private sector alternatives would take more time. This is probably why Bush pushed so hard to get this passed. It was to derail the Democrats plan to use it as a political wedge to get themselves elected. This is why it is so important to get the word out of who is really responsible for the mortgage collapse.
In short, there are many reasons why this bailout should have been opposed by Republicans, but only one good reason that it should, and probably was, supported by many of them; to derail the Democrats' October surprise long enough to get through the election.
Yes, it's true that it wasn't the bailout that many in Congress wanted. They voted for the pork barrel earmarks, "sweeteners," and perks that Ms. Pelosi attached to the bill as a bribe to entice them to change their vote. Oh, but who really cares about $1.3 billion tacked on to the bill to bribe Senators and Congressmen into voting for it? We know this is the most ethical and honest Congress in history because Nancy Pelosi said so.
Now these ethical and honest people in Congress — Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, John Kerry, and the rest of the radical left — are telling us that it was Bush policy and greedy Wall Street executives who caused the failures of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We know Bush Policy had nothing to do with this, and the greedy executives were all working for Fannie and Freddie. We also know that Fannie and Freddie were 100% Democrat operations from the ground up, all the way to the Democrat legislators and the Black Caucus who were charged with oversight of the two organizations.
So why would we believe anything these people say when their integrity, character, and financial management skill is now on display for all to see? Bush knows that the mainstream media cannot be trusted to tell the people the truth before the election, so his only recourse was to take matters into his own hands to save the economy from a Democrat caused disaster, and to save the nation from an even worse disaster on election day. What Bush and Congress did was awful. What the Democrats have done is unforgivable.
© JR Dieckmann
Why did so many Republicans vote for a socialist bailout bill that goes against everything Republicans have always stood for? More to the point, why did President Bush push this bill so hard and even refuse to consider any alternatives, such as bankruptcy or the alternate private sector market solution proposed by House Republicans?
Despite what the Democrats and their media have been trying to put over on the public, and in spite of a number of major threats to our country and the free market, the economy has been in relatively good condition throughout the Bush administration until now. Granted, President Bush's methods of keeping the economy out of recession have driven up the national debt and served to keep an artificial bubble inflated, but the economy has stayed strong, up until now.
Is it really any coincidence that economic troubles always seem to pop up in an election year when a Republican president inhabits the White House? And each time, Democrats make the same claim; that it's all the president's fault and the answer is more socialism in America. It's interesting to note however, that when you look below the surface, you usually find Democrats at the heart of the economic problem.
In 2004, George Soros attempted to crash the stock market with financial manipulation, media appearances, and op-eds aimed at scaring investors out of the market. He nearly succeeded but the market was too resilient and rebounded from his attempt. He even threatened to spend half of his fortune to defeat George W. Bush. His intentions for that money went far beyond just advertising.
This year saw gasoline prices peaking after Soros had moved his investment money from oil production to oil speculation. There were many contributing causes to the high oil prices; India and China were increasing demand; speculators holding oil supplies off the market; weather and world affairs; and speculation that the world was running out of oil, to name a few. High gasoline prices in the U.S. could be connected directly to the blocking of energy and oil development by Democrats in Congress which have forced us to depend heavily on foreign oil from unfriendly countries.
Now we have this mortgage crisis, and once again, it's the Democrats who are behind it. This is not the fault of the Bush administration or of Wall Street CEOs and executives, or of bank presidents who were only doing what government mandates told them to do. It was a direct result of Democrat policy to put low income, high risk minorities into houses they could not afford. Under the pretense that "all Americans should be able to own a home," Democrats gave them one with the help of Barack Obama's close associates and former employer, ACORN, and backed up by corrupt Democrat socialists running Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Although the problem with Fannie and Freddie has been brewing since the Clinton administration, just as the 911 terrorist attacks had, the question is; did the collapse have to happen now — just before the election? Or with the inevitable collapse on the horizon, did Democrats sacrifice Fannie and Freddie before the election, in hopes of blaming it on Bush and the 'greedy capitalists on Wall Street?" Did they take a page from the George Soros play book to once again, try to collapse the economy just before an election?
We can debate whether this bailout package was the right approach to dealing with the economic crisis. We can question whether the bailout was constitutional or not. We can even wonder if it will prevent the economy from sliding further into the abyss. But what is also important right now in this politically charged season is the election and the future of our country. An economic collapse now would certainly be blamed on Bush by the Democrats and the media to throw the election to Barack Hussein Obama.
The last thing Republicans need right now is the chance that the economy could go into the tank, or at least slowing down so that voters would suffer. The $700B bailout was the best chance for Bush to assure a stable economy before the election. Any private sector alternatives would take more time. This is probably why Bush pushed so hard to get this passed. It was to derail the Democrats plan to use it as a political wedge to get themselves elected. This is why it is so important to get the word out of who is really responsible for the mortgage collapse.
In short, there are many reasons why this bailout should have been opposed by Republicans, but only one good reason that it should, and probably was, supported by many of them; to derail the Democrats' October surprise long enough to get through the election.
Yes, it's true that it wasn't the bailout that many in Congress wanted. They voted for the pork barrel earmarks, "sweeteners," and perks that Ms. Pelosi attached to the bill as a bribe to entice them to change their vote. Oh, but who really cares about $1.3 billion tacked on to the bill to bribe Senators and Congressmen into voting for it? We know this is the most ethical and honest Congress in history because Nancy Pelosi said so.
Now these ethical and honest people in Congress — Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, John Kerry, and the rest of the radical left — are telling us that it was Bush policy and greedy Wall Street executives who caused the failures of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We know Bush Policy had nothing to do with this, and the greedy executives were all working for Fannie and Freddie. We also know that Fannie and Freddie were 100% Democrat operations from the ground up, all the way to the Democrat legislators and the Black Caucus who were charged with oversight of the two organizations.
So why would we believe anything these people say when their integrity, character, and financial management skill is now on display for all to see? Bush knows that the mainstream media cannot be trusted to tell the people the truth before the election, so his only recourse was to take matters into his own hands to save the economy from a Democrat caused disaster, and to save the nation from an even worse disaster on election day. What Bush and Congress did was awful. What the Democrats have done is unforgivable.
© JR Dieckmann
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
