[Peace-discuss] senators who voted against the $800 B +++ bailout bill...

[John W.]

On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 1:26 AM, E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag> wrote:

 If you havent heard anyone suggesting no bailout whatsoever you really
> have your head in the sand, Jenifer.
>

As usual, Wayne, you're a bit confused.  Jenifer isn't referring to the
common people, many of whom are of course  unqualifiedly against the
sellout....errr, bailout.  She is referring to our legislators.  There are
only a very tiny few, like Kucinich, who are flatly against the bailout.
Most of 'em simply want more perquisites for those whom they perceive to be
their constituents.  This is why a simple 3-page bailout bill, granting
absolute powers to the deity Hank Paulson, has become an omnibus bill, with
pork for every single legislator.

Imagine....the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law is urging its supporters
to call their Representatives in DC and say, "I'm calling to ask that the
Representative vote for the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act that
includes needed mental health and addiction parity legislation."  Now where
did THAT come from?  What on earth does mental health parity have to do with
economic stabilization?  (Beyond, of course, the fact that we and our
children and our children's children are all going to NEED mental health
care to prevent us from committing suicide when the bill for the Economic
Stabilization Act comes fully due.)  Isn't there a better way to achieve
mental health parity (like, say, UNIVERSAL SINGLE-PAYER HEALTH CARE) than to
subject generations of American taxpayers to crushing debt so that
investment bankers and their lobbyists can continue to "party hearty"?



> Where you think the money is going to come from?  You want to add to
> the national debt?  Further inflate the currency?  Devalue the dollar?
>
> Who and where is the bailout going to?
>
> What about the $100 billion of junk the
> bailout has been loaded with?  Who will pay for that?
>

Why are you asking these questions?  Jenifer and I, and most readers of the
peace-discuss list, know the answers to these questions.  We're ON YOUR
SIDE, Wayne.  But our legislators are most assuredly not.




> Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
>
>   I haven't heard anyone suggesting no bailout whatsoever... Most seem to
> believe that some rescue really is necessary tho' the extreme rush has been
> overstated... but that the corps and execs who screwed up should get
> stiff penalties, along w/ strict oversight and very good breaks for
> Mainstreet, etc etc.
>  --Jenifer
>
> --- On *Thu, 10/2/08, E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag> <ewj at pigs.ag>* wrote:
>
> From: E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag> <ewj at pigs.ag>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] senators who voted against the $800 B +++
> bailout bill...
> To: jencart13 at yahoo.com
> Cc: "Peace-discuss" <peace-discuss at anti-war.net><peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
> Date: Thursday, October 2, 2008, 1:28 PM
>
> I have to rather firmly disagree with you on this one, Jenifer,
> although that is a fairly standard partisan explanation that you provide.
>
> Many of those who voted against it whether R or D, did so because the
> measure is fundamentally flawed,
> and they see the only possible remedy as allowing the failing institutions
> to collapse and be liquidated,
> following which event the economy will recover.  Propping up these
> institutions by printing more
> money will not do anything for the long term and will further add to the
> continuing inflation and collapse of the dollar.
>
> Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20081003/b4c6ad64/attachment.html