Bob Herbert: When Madmen Reign

[babylonsister]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/opinion/30herbert.html?ref=opinion

When Madmen Reign

By BOB HERBERT
Published: September 29, 2008


I’m not holding my breath, but I would like to see the self-proclaimed conservative, small government, anti-regulation, free-market zealots step up and take responsibility for wrecking the American economy and bringing about the worst financial crisis since the Depression.

Even now, with the house on fire, the most extreme among them won’t pick up the fire hoses and try to put it out.

With the fate of the Bush administration’s desperate $700 billion bailout of the financial industry hanging in the balance, Representative Darrell Issa, a Republican from California, stuck to his political playbook like a man covered in Krazy Glue. He pronounced himself “resolute” in his opposition to the bailout because to be otherwise would amount to a betrayal of party principles.

To deviate from those principles, in Mr. Issa’s view, would be like placing “a coffin on top of Ronald Reagan’s coffin.”

We are in very strange territory here.

snip//

Voters have to shoulder a great deal of the blame for the economic mess the country is in. Too many were willing, for whatever reasons, to support politicians who spat in the eye of economic common sense. Now the voodoo that permeated conservative economic policies for so many years has come back to haunt us big-time.

The question voters should be asking John McCain is whether he has stopped serving his party’s economic Kool-Aid, which has taken such a toll on working families, and is ready to change his ways. Is his sudden populist transformation the real thing or just a mirage?

In the gale force winds of a full-fledged economic hurricane, it’s fair to ask Senator McCain whether he still considers himself a conservative, small government, anti-regulation, free-market zealot. Or whether he’s seen the light.

[GetTheRightVote]

1. I am not willing to accept blame to something I was not a part of period

No Bailout for Fat Cats.

[babylonsister]

3. He wasn't talking about you, it's those other nuts. nt

[depakid]

12. Well, in your impetuousness you and others may well end up responsible for plenty

of economic consequences that could have been avoided- but for your knee jerk reactions about fat cats.

Like many who post things like this- my bet is that you'll be singing a much different tune once yours or family or friends' jobs are gone.

Then your mantra will be: why didn't Congress do something when it could have?

Oh, yeah- I forgot, I hated a few "fat cats" so much that I was willing to crash the economy, and hurt everyone else just to "get 'em"

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

2. This para is a keeper:

Voters have to shoulder a great deal of the blame for the economic mess the country is in. Too many were willing, for whatever reasons, to support politicians who spat in the eye of economic common sense. Now the voodoo that permeated conservative economic policies for so many years has come back to haunt us big-time.

[babylonsister]

4. Yes. I just hope the idjits who voted against their best interests

these past few years can grab a clue. But I'm not hopeful.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

6. They're just moving onto the new talking points.

Even though those tp's are 180º opposite of the old tp's.

[RainDog]

5. In other words, fuck you, DLC

because they are part of the problem.

[orwell]

7. If some Dems or Cons didn't like the bill...

...they shoudn't vote for it. That is their responsibility, to vote as they see fit after weighing the language of the bill, constituent concerns, their own ideology, and all the available facts they have at hand.

What is the big deal? Either change the bill to bring more on board, write a new one from scratch that will truly address the situation at hand instead of this shotgun-wedding bill largely crafted by Paulson et al., or do nothing. I don't see how excoriating members like Issa for voting against what they see as a bad bill is going to change anybody's mind.

A lot of people don't like this legislation including most Dems. I would bet if there wasn't a lot of arm twisting and fear mongering by the powers that be this bill would have never seen the light of day.

There is a large problem. It deserves a thoughtful solution. Thoughful solutions require time and input from many sources.

We don't need to pass something just to pass something.

[babylonsister]

8. Issa couldn't care less about the bill; had it been defined

along his party platform, he would have voted for it. It's all about party politics with many rethugs, not what is in the best interests of Americans. And they've been outed for it.
But you're right; now the bill should be recrafted to benefit the most. We tried playing nice.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x389101

[orwell]

9. I disagree somewhat...

...I live in California. Issa's history is that he believes exactly what he said in front of the cameras yesterday. You're probably right that he may have jettisoned his principles if there was a strong party line vote, but he really does believe in free market solutions to his core.

[Slyder]

10. Republican friend of mine is down and out

He is an architect who just completed working on a large luxury hotel. His company was to move him to another state to begin work on another. He called me last night to tell me the new project was canceled, and he had been laid off. He is 63. His retirement was in "safe" investments, and he has lost his shirt or at least part of it. He is going to have to find new work, if he can, and not retire at 65 as planned. But he remains an unabashed free marketeer and devotee of Fox News and their Kool-aid. He is blaming Clinton for the financial debacle due to Clinton and Democratic opposing the redlining of neighborhoods in offering mortgages. Never mind that ending redlining practices did not necessarily lead to sub-prime mortgages. Wall Street greed had nothing to do with it. Deregulation had nothing to do with it.

Have no doubt, in the next weeks immigrants (legal and illegal), poor folks demanding mortgages, Jews, Latinos, Democrats, liberals, Muslims, foreigners, "Puerto Rican nationals" (I saw this one in a Malkin column a couple of years ago), treehuggers, Gay/ Lesbian newlyweds, intellectuals, The Elites, poor people in general, non-Christians, the media, and anyone else in close range identifiable as a group. And I fear people may get hurt as the anger grows.

[Waiting For Everyman]

11. McC question #1: Is he willing to give up his tax cuts for the rich now?

That's really the only question that needs asking of any politician. And the ones who are brave enough to reverse the process, as the Dutch started to this week (taxing the top), have the guts to be the next leaders. Pretty simple litmus test.

Repeal 'em and reverse 'em. Put a tax on trading, and a graduated death tax. Betcha we'd be back in the black someday, and sooner than we think. (If we started a National Bank of the US to hold our own mortgages, I guarantee we'd turn this around - cutting out the profit of the middlemen is always cheaper. If that wasn't enough we could nationalize the oil companies, as we should've long ago - they had their run, it's enough. As it is, our oil is sold on the world market, and it shouldn't be.)

If the rich then choose to go elsewhere, good. Buh bye, don't let the door hit your butt on the way out. At least then we'd be operating in a productive way, and the predators would be denied the use of our military.

As FDR said the last time the "banksters" (as he called them) threw a party, we still have the means to recover. All we need is the guts to do it.