Funny thing, not only has the world not ended, but I bought on the low and made some money today.

Snarky comment below:

Why are the rich, rich?

Because they buy low and sell high.

Why are the poor, poor?

Because they buy high and sell low.

I think most of the poor can't buy to begin with.

the world hasn't ended yet

That's just it. Watching Paulson on 60 Minutes last night, I got the feeling he was bluffing. Glad to see Congress called him on it. Disappointed to see Brian Baird voted for it. Will be calling his office shortly to register my disapproval.

That said, we may yet end up with Dow 8000.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml

Blumnauer voted NO.

but I bought on the low and made some money today

I bought short Fri and made more money than you today.

So much for Pelosi !!!!

I pushed a bunch of cash into the market today too based on the theory that the idiots in Congress will eventually pull their heads out and authorize the use of funds. But it is a bit of a risky move, never underestimate the stupidity of Congress. Smoot Hawley, Sarbanes Oxley and all of that you know.

In related new, the House failed to pass AMT fixes. If they don't fix that then you'll be hearing some real complaints come spring time when 20+ million people find out they owe a bunch of money to the IRS.

It's not the end of OUR world it's the end of THEIR world.

That said, we may yet end up with Dow 8000.

The market, the dollar, or both are going to fall. I'd rather have it be mostly the market. Printing more money and handing it to Paulson is going to make a loaf of bread $6 or $7 in pretty short order. I'd rather see only people who already have bread take the hit. So they'll work a few more years to retirement. Worse things have happened.

I think most of the poor can't buy to begin with.

That's funny, because I see them every day lined up at lottery machines investing in their futures.

it's the end of THEIR world

the pig men are down but not out. keep up the pressure!

squeezed said:I bought short Fri and made more money than you today.

You might have, but my short term money is in Ultrashort funds and I am up 20% +/- today.

As Cramer says, there is a opportunity to make money in EVERY situation.

Note to Nancy Pelosi: if you need to woo the oposition to pass 'crisis' legislation, don't go to the floor right before the vote and give a speech railing against the opposition pretending the crisis is all there fault.

Oh....and try getting your own party strongly on board first.

That's funny, because I see them every day lined up at lottery machines investing in their futures.

You are a prejudiced piece of sh**, mp.

The best comment I heard was the politician who said the response of his constituents to the "rescue plan" was 50% "No", and 50% "Hell No."

Squeezed: Classy bloke aren't you.......

Why do low-income people buy lottery tickets?

A new Carnegie Mellon University study determined that poverty played a central role in their spending so heavily on a product that guarantees negligible returns.

"Some poor people see playing the lottery as their best opportunity for improving their financial situations, albeit wrongly so," said ...

Jeez, squeezed. I would think that make sooooo much money would have put you in a better mood today ;-)

"the world hasn't ended yet"

Well, I am being told by banks on two deals I am working that financing is officially frozen.

If there is a better solution, please let us know since no one in Congress, Obama, McCain or Bush seem to have a clue in most people's eyes.

Having said that, I don't like it, but this seems the best solution opposed to doing nothing. Unfortunately, a lot of good deals will get killed by a few bad ones.

If we want to punish Wall Street and get laughs by freezing the guy in the street with a hoouse loan or former job - Cui bono?

As soon as someone comes up with a plan that will help the little guy and at the same time bring the greedy Masters of the Universe back down to earth, I'm sure it will have overwhelming support. And at the moment, I'm confident that it's possible.

Switch board at capitol were out of order from so many phone calls to say NO!

Amen Squeezed.

MP-
The lottery is an easy target because you don't have to focus on what really puts people behind the eight ball.(Personally, I hate the lottery)

I worked hard to get a degree and subsequently worked really hard to stay afloat. I've always lived simply, and I have a small footprint... and yet I'm in debt and haven't had enough breathing room to contribute to a 401(k) in my 32 years. AND THERE ARE A LOT OF STRUGGLING PEOPLE IN THE SAME BOAT.

We are SO glad you're pleased with yourself as you sell short or otherwise pick at the carcass of the American economy. Now, please, go screw yourself.

"As soon as someone comes up with a plan that will help the little guy and at the same time bring the greedy Masters of the Universe back down to earth"

OK, I'm open what is it? Realize who are the biggest contirbutors to Congress and both presidential (I used to think that was an honorable adhjective) candidates. Problem is, it needs to happen farily quick since no one in Congress/White house decided this was worth addressing until it blew up.

Please help a confused political idiot...is there going to be a big depression and should I go get my money out of the bank or are they just trying to scare me?

The GOP alternate universe (con't): Today McCain blames Obama for the defeat of the bailout! Maybe it's a good thing the House rejected it; maybe it's a bad thing -- but blaming the Dems? Wow. The vote in the House was 228 to 205, with 95 Dems and 133 Republicans voting no -- including all 8 of Arizona's representatives (4 Dem, 4 GOP) -- which shows how much influence McCain has with his hometown colleagues. So how does that add up to Obama being to blame?

OK, I'm open what is it?

Well, let's see, for $700 billion, the federal government could just start making direct loans to ordinary folks for homes, education, and small businesses.

"Well, let's see, for $700 billion, the federal government could just start making direct loans to ordinary folks for homes, education, and small businesses."

It's not quite the same but FNMA and FMAC were doing that in the secondary market with mixed results.

It does boil down to making loans appropraitely priced for risk which I don't think a govt institution would do any better at than the private sector.

Micheal Moore must be thanking the Republican party today.

Monday, September 29th, 2008
The Rich Are Staging a Coup This Morning ...a message from Michael Moore

Friends,

Let me cut to the chase. The biggest robbery in the history of this country is taking place as you read this. Though no guns are being used, 300 million hostages are being taken. Make no mistake about it: After stealing a half trillion dollars to line the pockets of their war-profiteering backers for the past five years, after lining the pockets of their fellow oilmen to the tune of over a hundred billion dollars in just the last two years, Bush and his cronies -- who must soon vacate the White House -- are looting the U.S. Treasury of every dollar they can grab. They are swiping as much of the silverware as they can on their way out the door.

No matter what they say, no matter how many scare words they use, they are up to their old tricks of creating fear and confusion in order to make and keep themselves and the upper one percent filthy rich. Just read the first four paragraphs of the lead story in last Monday's New York Times and you can see what the real deal is:

"Even as policy makers worked on details of a $700 billion bailout of the financial industry, Wall Street began looking for ways to profit from it.

"Financial firms were lobbying to have all manner of troubled investments covered, not just those related to mortgages.

"At the same time, investment firms were jockeying to oversee all the assets that Treasury plans to take off the books of financial institutions, a role that could earn them hundreds of millions of dollars a year in fees.

"Nobody wants to be left out of Treasury's proposal to buy up bad assets of financial institutions."

Unbelievable. Wall Street and its backers created this mess and now they are going to clean up like bandits. Even Rudy Giuliani is lobbying for his firm to be hired (and paid) to "consult" in the bailout.

There is enough blame to go around..from not keeping one's eyes on the ball to legislating bad loans to paupers and minorities. This may be a good time for a few shareholder's suits against the crooks who ripped off huge chunks of cash from failing companies. There are a few of those getting to trial lately.

It does boil down to making loans appropraitely priced for risk

We're way past that. Right now the only legitimate government interest here is insuring that loans are reasonably available for core needs. The banks are hoarding the cash because they know a run on them is coming. If they won't play ball, then the government should start doing their job for them.

But not handing them $700 billion and begging them to do their jobs.

Today's Business Journal headline: "WaMu execs could get cash severance totaling $38 million." Well, why not? They ran a multi-billion dollar company into the ground. Ain't capitalism grand?

"Wall Street and its backers created this mess and now they are going to clean up like bandits."

That remains to be ssen since the details on a buyout haven't happened yet. I don't think they will buy the loans at par and some are trading at $0.10 on the dollar. That's the secret sauce that isn't clear. It's like having a sale during an ice storm. If no one shows up, it doesn't mean your assets are worth nothing, you just have no buyers.

"Right now the only legitimate government interest here is insuring that loans are reasonably available for core needs."
That will take more than $700B depending on what you define core values are. Does that mean a retiree trying to sell so he can afford to go on, a first-time buyer with iffy credit, someone trying to expand business and hire more people which is riskier?

I realize we are way beyond that, but it's like showing up at an drunk driving accident and not providing help until we come up with a way to enforce drunk driving laws better.

The equity markets are going down because the duration and severity of the recession are much higher without the $700,000,000,000 of government liquidity.

The real problem isn't inflation (which is a non-threat), dollar depreciation (ditto), or equities. The real problem is an injured/cautious banking sector which is reducing consumer and business access to credit. It's already hurting PSU, and lots of other centers of education, healthcare, and social welfare.

It's not "us" vs. "them". This will very quickly impact the entire world: the wealthy are simply more isolated from the worst effects.

The market will continue to fall, oil will fall, and the dollar will get stronger over time. The writing has been on the wall for years now. We will live to tell stories about it to our grandchildren. No one is going to die.

So far as a bailout is concerned: Give some $ to ordinary Americans, which will in turn give it back to the G in the form of taxes. No bailout plan will pass until the perception of helping out the average voter exists. Whether or not the aid to citizens turns out to be a lie championed by the media or becomes an actual reality, will be seen in the coming weeks.

Try calling your representative; their phones are jammed. The people are watching and will vote accordingly come November.

No one is going to die.

I hope the rest of your predictions are more accurate. In fact, everyone is going to die.

"The real problem is an injured/cautious banking sector which is reducing consumer and business access to credit."

So what brokerage or financial services company do you work for Tee?

My credit union has plenty of dough to lend me. Its not the consumer financial system that is frozen - it is the shadow banking system. The financial sleaze who created this leveraged monster should not be rescued. The high financial system needs to be written down to zero and restarted with strict regulatory control. The swedish or FDR models would, IMO, protect the interests of the tax payer without bailing out the supposedly "more isolated from the worst effects" wealthy holders of financial paper.

dollar depreciation (ditto)
ROFLMAO! Not only is your post straight out of Hank's talking points but you repeat the same randian economic voodoo that got us into this mess. Inflation does not matter. A depreciating dollar does not matter. WTF matters to you?

Dennis Kucinich voted NO. That is good enough for me. He is one of the few honest people in Washington DC.

"WaMu execs could get cash severance totaling $38 million."

Its time for class warfare. The wealthy few have raped this country and it is time for them to pay!

We're way past that. Right now the only legitimate government interest here is insuring that loans are reasonably available for core needs. The banks are hoarding the cash because they know a run on them is coming. If they won't play ball, then the government should start doing their job for them.

Jack you're usually a smart guy but you're dead wrong on this one.

The banks are hoarding money because they are required to--the "mark to market" budgetary system means that they have to reprice the value of the assets and liabilities on their balance sheet. If their "assets" (outstanding loans) suddenly are devalued, then they have to increase their capital requirements.

This has nothing to do about protecting a "run."

Money is NOT available for basic loans. Contrary to squeezed's uninformed comments, the price of a car loan has jumped 1-2% in the last week. Many businesses with good credit have been unable to obtain any loans.

What is your proposal? Should the government become a big bank and issue consumer and business loans?

Dennis Kucinich voted NO.

So did DeFazio, Blumenauer and Wu. Good on them!

In response to paul g., there are other ways to recapitalize the banks without taking their bad investments off their hands at an inflated price (which is implied by your observation that the "market price" of these investments leaves the banks without capital on which to lend).

Paul G,
"Money is NOT available for basic loans."

BS.

http://www.bankrate.com/brm/rate/auto_home.asp

On of the basic metrics of credit stress is an increase in interest rates. I see a few basis points -- hardly anything to panic about.

"This has nothing to do about protecting a "run."
Are you seriously trying to argue there has not been a run on money market accounts and swaps?

"The banks are hoarding money because they are required to--the "mark to market" "
Mark to model (or Hank Paulson's whim) is what caused the credit bubble (mis-pricing of risk) in the first place. Are you really advocating that we should continue to fuel an economy based on fictional valuation. Something tells me that you are of above average income and want your credit bubble back.

Waaaaahhh! Mommy!

""Money is NOT available for basic loans."

BS."

I've had two RE deals frozen with banks saying they are not qualifying new loans right now. The assumption is that as time passes it will get tighter if we do nothing. The issue is NOT the rates (which are pretty good) the issue is getting qualifying and approval on loans.

"., there are other ways to recapitalize the banks without taking their bad investments off their hands at an inflated price"

OK, how? The issue is they have yield instruments that right now they cannot sell since no one knows the value. Normally they'd sell these, but there is no market due to the valuation issue. They may be worth $0.10 or par to the dollar - which is my big question with the $700B fund is how much do they pay for these loans. However, they are worth something.

I could go along with some kind of rule like if the fund buys your paper bank X you will not pay perf bonuses until you buy back all paper you sold. However, being vindictive and rewriting history isn't going to do the average guy any good.

Ain't capitalism grand?

Capitalism is the worst economic system in the world, with the notable exception of all of the other economic systems.

I feel there is little the average guy can do. So in anticipation of the expected crisis Mrs Gibby and I started our recession diet tonight. We are starting the evening with chicken thighs, brown rice, green beans, and a very inexpensive bottle of Oregon wine. We realize it could be a lot worse, and probably will be soon. Greater measures to save will be have to be taken as the dow sinks deeper. I may have to splurge for some finer wines before I am totally busted. Loosing a few pounds wouldn't hurt me anyway. Bon appetit!

OK, how?

Well, the usual way is not a garage sale. New equity is more conventional. Short of that, the government can step in as a lender to provide liquidity. That's preferable to making a gift of tax revenues through overpayment for devalued assets (I almost forgot the "t" in that last word, which would have made it no less valid.)

"Short of that, the government can step in as a lender to provide liquidity."

I believe that is what the Fed Reserve does. The issue still remains that they have capital tied up in unmarketable instruments.

"a gift of tax revenues through overpayment for devalued assets"

You're right, the biggest question is what price would the fund pay to take the laon portfolios. So we are looking at Chrysler or RTC again?

TKreug

Why don't you try reading the whole thread before you open you fat mouth.....

"I bought short Fri and made more money than you today."

Posted by squeezed | September 29, 2008 12:36 PM

Looks like Pelosi had some key Democrats who were vulnerable vote no with the confidence it would pass anyway.

But as it turns out Republicans championed a successfull no vote.

I think Pelosi was trying to get an even vote to pass it with plans to later blame Republicans for the bailout while at the same time protecting vulberable dems.

I saw, several times today a MoveOn ad that's BEEN running which dumps on McCain and the plan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ordae-NBf7c

A large majority of the Republican caucus, along with a minority of democrats, voted against the plan.

So MoveOn is aligned with Republicans?

AND THERE'S THIS

Why the crisis?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o

AND THIS
1999 NY Times Article
September 30, 1999 article by Steven A. Holmes
Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.
It will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans.
They've been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.
The government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's."

I don't know what to think any more. This started years ago, and it appears that there are many guilty parties. I fear we are skrewed no matter what. We do a half baked bail out, and we're skrewed. We do nothing, and we're skrewed. The politicians are grandstanding, and it's SICK. CEO's that rammed companies into the ground walk away with millions and no one says anything about real consequences. These are not private corporations with an
owners who threw in their own capital, started a business, took the risk to lose it all, etc...these are publicly held companies. No one would bail the private guy out. I'm all for high earners and capitalism for those honest hard working risk taking souls, but not THIS.

I truly do not know what the answer is. It took many parties to eff it up, and now we are depending on CONGRESS to fix it? The lowest rated Congress ever. Oy vey!!!

One thing that has gotten way too little distribution and discussion is that the 100s of billions would be in increments and would be buying the security along with the bad loans.
However devalued, the real estate will still exist. The feds will hold title untill the loans are bought back from the bailout, with interest, or they are paid off by the borrowers.
So even if the whole $700 billion is utilized it is likely to be buying at least a couple $100 billion in real estate paper.
And as the market swings back into appreciation, someday???, some additional value will return.
So while both parties try and make sure they get some benefit, and the other doesn't, from any plan, I'm with Gibby, Have a nice dinner.

Well, the way I see it is this is the opportunity of a lifetime. Good solid stocks are being dragged down with all the others. I've been buying.

I did the same thing after 911, but things went down even more. I got scared and sold at a loss. I won't make that mistake again.

You can pick up companies like IBM, precision castparts, schnitzer, etc. etc. for rock bottom prices. This market will come back; it may take a while but it will come back.

I wouldn't gamble the farm, but putting some money in now, I think, is a smart move. Especially if you can wait a few years for the return.

While the real estate will still exist, it's clear that much of it is going to require a lot of work to make saleable or even inhabitable. It apparently doesn't take long to trash or gut a property between the time the owners are driven out and the long-distance financing company gets around to taking physical possession. Neighbors are already appearing on the news with distressing regularity, complaining about trash-filled yards, homes emptied of copper pipes, woodwork, carpets, furnaces, etc. - even million dollar homes.

If a local banks had held these loans exclusively someone would probably have been out there dealing with the properties after default or abandonment but that's not the case. Ironically, it would have been a much smarter move to allow the owners to remain, if only as renters, just to protect the properties.

I agree with the caller to CSPAN today who said that she expects to eventually see a bailout bill that she'll support, but not until after she sees some people walked out of Wall Street in handcuffs.

The idea that people of good will got sucked into writing these trash loans and the trash derivatives that got built on them out of confusion or ignorance is a CROCK OF BULLWASH. The idea that even one penny of honest taxpayer dollars should go to saving their expensively depilated and bleached butts is an outrage.

Right on Blumenauer, DeFazio and Wu. Shame on Hooley and the rest of them that rolled.

"I've had two RE deals frozen with banks saying they are not qualifying new loans right now. The assumption is that as time passes it will get tighter if we do nothing. The issue is NOT the rates (which are pretty good) the issue is getting qualifying and approval on loans."

LOL! What part of risk management do you not get?

Mp, I short financials and us indices for idealogical reasons. I also donate more to charity than I spend on my personal needs (including housing). IMO, any one individual who spends more than ~20-30K a year on living expenses is a pig.

idealogical = ideological

Here's an excerpt from Nouriel Roubini's blog today.

"In the Scandinavian banking crises (Sweden, Norway, Finland) that are a model of how a banking crisis should be resolved there was not government purchase of bad assets; most of the recapitalization occurred through various injections of public capital in the banking system. Purchase of toxic assets instead – in most cases in which it was used – made the fiscal cost of the crisis much higher and expensive (as in Japan and Mexico).

Thus the claim by the Fed and Treasury that spending $700 billion of public money is the best way to recapitalize banks has absolutely no factual basis or justification. This way of recapitalizing financial institutions is a total rip-off that will mostly benefit – at a huge expense for the US taxpayer - the common and preferred shareholders and even unsecured creditors of the banks. Even the late addition of some warrants that the government will get in exchange of this massive injection of public money is only a cosmetic fig leaf of dubious value as the form and size of such warrants is totally vague and fuzzy.

So this rescue plan is a huge and massive bailout of the shareholders and the unsecured creditors of the financial firms (not just banks but also other non bank financial institutions); with $700 billion of taxpayer money the pockets of reckless bankers and investors have been made fatter under the fake argument that bailing out Wall Street was necessary to rescue Main Street from a severe recession. Instead, the restoration of the financial health of distressed financial firms could have been achieved with a cheaper and better use of public money."

I did a green eyeshade inspection of all 110 pages of the bill that failed today. My take: way too much weasel language on both executive compensation and transparency.

Nothing will motivate the captains of these sinking ships to solve their own problems like a serious threat to their excessive compensation. Bill that went down didn't provide it.

The transparency thing should be a no-brainer. Any company that benefits from the bailout needs to meet all the transparency requirements of a fully regulated financial institution. You want to keep the fig leaves over your other scams? Solve your own problem.

I love how "partisan" Pelosi is being blamed for the Republican's failure to bring the votes to the plan. Having read the "quotes" of her speech in a dozen articles, I tracked down the text ... the quotes come from the first two sentences; and the articles ignore the rest of what is probably a five minute speech.

Don't get me wrong: I agree with the Republican majority and Democrat minority on this -- no bailout on these terms. I'm just amused that the Republicans are actually blaming a speech for their votes -- I'm mortified that the media is repeating it without question.

Vote it down proudly. I want names of Republicans (or Democrats) who voted "No" simply because of Pelosi's speech. Because they need to be educated in their role as Congresspersons ... or merely reminded that this is Congress, not 4th grade recess (though you might not notice the difference).

Chalmers Johnson at TomDispatch, via Eric Alterman at MediaMatters's Altercations

There has been much moaning, air-sucking, and outrage about the $700 billion that the U.S. government is thinking of throwing away .... In fact, we dole out similar amounts of money every year in the form of payoffs to the armed services, the military-industrial complex, and powerful senators and representatives allied with the Pentagon.

Spending hundreds of billions of dollars on present and future 'wars' that have NOthing to do with our national security is simply obscene. And yet Congress has been corrupted by the military-industrial complex into believing that, by voting for more defense spending, they are supplying "jobs" for the economy. In fact, they are only diverting scarce resources from the desperately needed rebuilding of the American infrastructure and other crucial spending necessities into utterly wasteful munitions. If we cannot cut back our longstanding, ever increasing military spending in a major way, then the bankruptcy of the United States is inevitable.

"LOL! What part of risk management do you not get?"

These were A+ credit customers with plenty of equity - Loans have just been frozen. If these people are credit risks, then we are in for big trouble.

"any one individual who spends more than ~20-30K a year on living expenses is a pig."

Lets hope you never have a problem in life otherwise. I don't understand why you are squeezed then.

"Lets hope you never have a problem in life otherwise. I don't understand why you are squeezed then."

OK you do have a point-- I think -- but I fully expect we will have nationalized healthcare in a short period of time. I am an investor and my monicker refers to the "short squeeze".

"These were A+ credit customers with plenty of equity - Loans have just been frozen."
My credit union has plenty of capital for well-qualified members. Even larger traditional banks, like WFC and UMPQ, have plenty of credit available.

"credit customers with plenty of equity"
The PDX area is in denial about housing. Their "plenty of equity" will evaporate soon. Banks know this. I suspect your clients are looking for a non-conforming loan with a high DTI. If so, they should suck it up and buy a home they can afford.

Was it a David Byrne or Frank Zappa lyric -- Stop making sense. Or be stopped.

Indian Labor Minister refuses to condemn workers who killed CEO for lay-off. Said incident should serve as a warning to management. Hear! Hear! Here! Here!

Indian govt backs workers who killed boss: police, reports, 6 days ago

NEW DELHI (AFP) — Sacked workers in India beat to death the boss of the Italian company that had laid them off, police said on Tuesday, in a killing the government described as a "warning for management."

...

Police said the company sacked more than 100 workers three months ago but arranged the meeting to work out a possible reinstatement deal.

...

India's labour minister declined to criticise the attack, saying it "should serve as a warning for management."

"Workers should be dealt with with compassion," Oscar Fernandes told reporters in New Delhi, according to the Press Trust of India news agency.

"The workers should not be pushed so hard that they resort to whatever happened."

Media reports said workers at Graziano Transmissioni were dismissed after they demanded pay ...

dyspeptic

Have you taken a look at the Swedish bailout?

As a percentage of GDP, it translates into a few trillion US dollars. Purchase of all the "toxic waste" on the bank balance sheets could cost in the high single digits of trillions of dollars.

Is that where you want to go?

"Is that where you want to go?"

Ya sure you betcha!

How I *really* feel.

http://s20.photobucket.com/albums/b213/MiniDriver066/?action=view¤t=jump.jpg

"I suspect your clients are looking for a non-conforming loan with a high DTI. If so, they should suck it up and buy a home they can afford."

Nope - Straight forward 30yr amort with 10 yr balloon and LTV

Is it safe to come out from under the table. I spent the night there, waiting for the sky to fall, yet it hasn't happened yet. The dow is up 380 +/-. I hope something happens soon as I really need to go to the bathroom.

and LTV
And I bet they are no where near 80 LTV. The days of borrowing without sharing in the risk are *over*.

"And I bet they are no where near 80 LTV. The days of borrowing without sharing in the risk are *over*."

Meant to say

Straight forward 30yr amort with 10 yr balloon and LTV 70%
BY equity, I meant down payment.

PELOSI !!!! What ever happened to her first 1oo days of getting things back on track. What a sham. Harry Reid also absolutely useless !!! This has got to be worst congress ever assembled. And to think these people were voted in office.I appose any BAILOUT . Especially with the added spending ( 150 BILLION MORE )that has nothing to do with this crisis. To think that in a dire emergency our represenatives are adding on their pork is OBSERD. BOTH parties NEED reform across the board.CONTACT your congressmen. Remind them they work for us , the people. Its time we take our country back. ITS TIME FOR REAL CHANGE.
( Not an OBAMA endorsement of spoken change ) Is it by chance that those who are up for elections are the ones who are not voting for the bill. I wonder why. I thought McCain was agaist this added pork ? Lets make these PORKERS KNOWN.
FIRE UM ALL...... Only then will our elected officials understand we are tired of the status qoue.

SHAME ON U BUSH
SHAME ON THIS CONGRESS
SHAME ON THESE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

OUR FORE FATHERS WOULD HAVE THESE PEOPLE TRIED FOR TREASON..

Do any of you see this democratic congress ever being Bi - partisan. I DOUBT IT. PULL PELOSI . PULL HARRY REID. THIS Party has gone too far to the left...

I Gotta headache .. GRRR