OBAMA: BAILOUT CAN BE TWEAKED LATER

[ClarkUSA]

Sorry about the caps but this is something I've been saying for days to deaf ears here and now Barack is saying
the same thing, probably because he wants to reassure the Democratic grassroots who are unhappy about the
passage of this admittedly imperfect bill that this will not be the final version if he has anything to do about it.

From MSNBC's First Read:

LA CROSSE, Wisc. -- As he prepared to head to Washington, DC to vote on a package to rescue the country’s financial system, Obama stressed his promise to review the plan if he becomes president and pledged that taxpayers would
never again have to put their money on the line to pay for the irresponsibility of Wall Street executives.

Obama said his chief priority if elected would be protecting tax dollars, and that he would demand a full review
of the $700 billion rescue plan to make sure that it is working for taxpayers.

“If you – the American taxpayer – are not getting your money back, then we will change how this program is being
managed. If need be, we will send new legislation to Congress to make sure that taxpayers are protected in line
with the principles that I have put forward,” he told a crowd of more than 15,000 people huddled on a chilly fall
morning in La Crosse, a city near Wisconsin's border with Minnesota.

He repeated his call for what he calls a Financial Stability Fee on the financial services industry to repay Americans
in case the rescue plan results in losses.

“As I modernize the financial system to create new rules of the road to prevent another crisis, we will continue this
fee to build up a reserve so that if this happens again, it will be the money contributed by banks that’s put at risk,”
he said. “Let me be very clear: when I am President, financial institutions will do their part and pay their share, and
American taxpayers will never again have to put their money on the line to pay for the greed and irresponsibility
of Wall Street.”

Obama also spoke about the need to reign (sic) in spending in Washington, in part by increasing government
efficiency and ending the war in Iraq. He emphasized that an idea he proposed yesterday morning, raising the
FDIC cap to $250,000 from $100,000 proposal, was included in the rescue bill and again called on members
of both parties to support the legislation “even if it’s not popular” for the good of the country.

On KO tonight, Paul Krugman said the legislation would probably be revisited as soon as February 2009 under
an Obama administration to tweak it, ostensibly to remove parts offensive to Democratic sensibilities.

[hatrack]

1. "Tweaked"? How about "meat-axed"?

Sheesh.

[ClarkUSA]

4. Krugman's word, not mine.

Whatever word floats your boat is fine with me.

[vaberella]

13. He will. You know Obama looked like he was moving

towards nationalizing the damn system and putting some crazy regs.

Kerry is manipulating the shit too. Kerry donated 1 million dollars to the DSCC so that Dems running for Senate can have control of the Senate. 60% he wants so they can control---everything they say goes at that point.

As for Obama, I definitely think he's going to make serious changes. Most everything he's put out from healthcare, to his regs for this bail out to education---calls for a lot nationalizing all social programs. They're aggressive and pretty far left in the scheme. I like however that he runs as a moderate to progessive.

Here's a thread I started for Bernie Sanders a Senator was talking about taxing the rich to pay for this nonsense. And even though we don't see that reflected in this paticalur bill Obama definitely installed it in his tax plan which is doing exactly as Bernie wants. Bernie is an Independent.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7271318

[ClarkUSA]

83. More about what Krugman said on KO about why he supported the bill...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7273551&mesg_id=7273551

[femmedem]

2. This is good to read--but a lot of people will lose their homes by Feb. n/t

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

5. More would lose their jobs by Feb without it. (nt)

[moodforaday]

9. Yes, just like Saddam

would have nuked New York if he hadn't been taken out. "Economic Pearl Harbor" my ass - they didn't even bother to invent new, scarier propaganda, just reused the old one, since it worked so well the first time.

[ClarkUSA]

18. I'm sure you know more than Warren Buffett, Robert Reich, Barney Frank, and Paul Krugman combined.

:eyes:

[Curtland1015]

21. No shit. I'm tired of hearing how EVERYTHING that happens is some sort of mass conspiracy.

Sometimes shit just DOES happen. This will be bad. It would have been MUCH worse without it. Get over it.

[GeorgeGist]

31. obviously they haven't learned ...

that capitalism doesn't work.

[moodforaday]

38. Buffett

is the last person who should have anything to say in this, since he invested 5 billion in Goldman Sachs. He not only has a personal stake in the bill, but apparently he believes in Paulson. Who knows, maybe he even counts on Paulson to continue presiding over the treasury under McCain/Palin, since Paulson will certainly not allow anything bad to befall Goldman.

[ClarkUSA]

48. Buffett is no corporate whore -- he campaigned AGAINST Bush tax cuts for the rich years ago.

You're so full of shit, it's funny when you try to equate a good guy like Buffett with Paulson. His pumping $5B into GS probably
prevented GS from collapsing and helped keep the market afloat long enough for the recovery plan to be debated this long.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[moodforaday]

33. Go on, let it all hang out.

Your arguments are compelling!

[Fridays Child]

10. Was there was any real choice, though?

I think the specter of a credit market disaster (however fabricated it may or may not be) had a lot to do with this vote. Obama is right. Push it through, now, to head off doom and gloom speculation, and fix it, later.

[1corona4u]

17. You know, I have to tell you, people need to work through this.

Yes, some will, but let me tell you a story. My neighbor bought his villa in the middle of the bubble. He paid $249 for it. I bought mine in 2002, just pre bubble. I paid $99,000, for the same model, except that I have a full 18X40 screened enclosure.

Last year, he was working 2 jobs, day and night trying to afford it. Obviously he bought high, and his interest rate was an adjustable, which was 7%, 2 yr arm, and it hit last year.(not sure what it went to) But, a few weeks ago, he had quit both full time jobs, after his wife left him. He went back to school and he basically called the bank, after being 2 months behind, and told them that he wanted to give the house back to them. They REFUSED and worked out another mortgage that he could afford. He is now working part-time, and he's still in the house. You know things are bad when you try to give the house back, and they refuse, LOL.

The point is, consumers actually have the edge here, because NO BANK wants to sit a house they can not sell, and even if they try to short sell it, that is not working. No one can get a mortgage right now, unless they have a 750+ FICO, OR otherwise perfect credit and a stable job. My best friend is a realtor, and they have been trying to work a short sell for TWO months now.

Believe me, if people call their mortgage companies, they will work with them.

[femmedem]

26. Thanks for relaying that.

I don't know if the bank will be so quick to refuse my house--I bought in 2005, but it was underpriced and I probably still have some equity. But your post gives me hope.

[1corona4u]

34. I really think they will work with anoyne right now, so don't give up hope...

and you have to ask!! Very important. They are not going to offer it up. :-)

[femmedem]

39. You're a peach.

I'll remember this post in a couple months, when mine resets. :)

[msallied]

44. They'll work with them now. Six months ago they were impossible to even reach.

It was pandemonium in Countrywide. Their personnel was turned upside down. They would assign us one case manager and then, when we'd try to contact that case manager, the case had been passed on to someone else and we'd have to start all over again. Nightmare.

[msallied]

40. We tried to short sell my house before it fell through...

We lost the sucker. Of course, we had a good conventional VA loan, but that wasn't the problem. We were already struggling and were sold on a home equity line that basically doubled our mortgage payment. We tried for months to work with Countrywide, but we knew we bit the big one when my husband's hours were cut back. We put it on the market, and had three offers on the table. Two of them couldn't get loans big enough and the third they were pre-approved, but we still had to do a short sale. Countrywide sat on it for two months and the house was auctioned off in a trustee sale without a word. It was a nightmare.

My mom is a realtor in Dayton, OH and has been seeing empty houses owned by banks sit on nearly every street in her town. The listings for sheriff sales are crammed with hundreds and hundreds of properties.

It's a very ugly scene out there that has touched everyone in some way. My own street has four empty houses on it. The house I'm living in was on the market for a year before the owner gave in and put it up for rent. And even that's hard to do because the rent prices have to be so high to cover their mortgage payments. It's out of control.

[elocs]

3. I was in the crowd at La Crosse today and heard Obama say this.

He also said in the long run that it is possible that we could make a profit on this.

[ClarkUSA]

8. How did the rally go?

Did you take photos? How close did you manage to get? How'd the crowd welcome what Barack had to say? :)

Oh, and I definitely think taxpayers will end up making a profit. It might take a few years, but Sweden went through
something very similar in 1992 and that's exactly what happened. Sweden's bank debacle ended with net zero outlay
by the government and a net profit by taxpayers.

[FrenchieCat]

11. Here's a pictorial....

Includes Obama in Wisconsin..... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7270402&mesg_id=7270402

[ClarkUSA]

20. Thanks, C!

:hi:

[elocs]

22. Yes, I took pix ( I was only about 10 yards from Obama), but the paper had better ones:

http://www.lacrossetribune.com/shared-content/gallery/?galleryid=17&gallery_page=0&album_page=0&albumid=29

The crowd was only supposed to be around 4-5,000 and it turned out to be about 15,000. It was absolutely huge. I waited in line and in the crowd for 4 hours to hear Obama speak. There is also a video at the paper's site of his entire speech.

[ClarkUSA]

32. Thanks for the link! 10 yards away must've been worth the wait, eh?

One more question: how do things feel to you on the ground in WI?

[elocs]

45. Seems good here in La Crosse and people are enthused.

The crowd today was at least 3 times what they expected and it was a fall-like day with the morning temp only in the 40s with a NW wind coming right off the Mississippi (only 1 block). I glad that Obama had spent the night at the Holiday Inn just yards from where he spoke since he then flew back to Washington for the vote tonight. My 56 year old legs were very tired by 11 a.m. and it was hard to walk after standing for so long.

[ClarkUSA]

59. Nice.

Sounds like a perfect day in La Crosse. Isn't it nice that we have a presidential candidate who's so down-to-earth
and watching our donated dollars that he stays at an Holiday Inn when he's travelling? I like that. David Plouffe
pinches pennies like crazy.

Hope you have your feet up now. And thanks for your personal report. It makes my day. :)

[elocs]

60. Obama spoke right in front of the La Crosse Center, our civic center

where a sold out concert would be one with 8,000 people and that would be with them standing on the floor (putting his rally crowd of 15,000 in perspective in a city of 52,000). Obama did stay at the Holiday Inn across the street, but he probably could have stayed at the Raddison right next to it.

[ClarkUSA]

62. Wow. "15,000 in a city of 52,000"?

Either folks must've come from miles around or your city took an Obama holiday! Probably both happened. :)

I remember when he stayed in Iowa, he stayed at a regular guy motel in Des Moines with his family, including his sis
and her family. It was nothing fancy and I thought, "I like his sense of economy. No ego."

Did you see this on Team Obama's blog?

[elocs]

84. Thanks for the link, I bookmarked it.

It was said that Obama spoke longer than usual, about 40 minutes. His speech was important due to his having to return to Washington afterwards to vote on the bailout bill. Since this rally was right in the downtown area there were a lot of merchants happy with the increase in sales.

[moodforaday]

6. Yeah, like FISA

and the Patriot Act.

By Feb there will be none of the 700 billion left. And the thing I'd like to know most at the moment is: does the Senate bill include the words "700 billion dollars AT ANY ONE TIME", that were in the original Paulson bill?

[ClarkUSA]

14. Apples and oranges.

How do you know what will be left by February? Do you have a crystal ball?

Oh, and what's your plan, genius? :eyes:

[moodforaday]

27. Answer: Yes it does

"limited to $700,000,000,000 outstanding at any one time."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4147701

Ain't that grand?

[ClarkUSA]

37. So what? There's oversight that limits outlay and transparency as to how much is paid for what.

What's grand is your Palin-like grasp of the issues.

[moodforaday]

43. What guartantees

that oversight will not be conducted with the same, ahem, judicious care the bill was passed with in the first place? Now that would actually be change, but we have yet to see any of it.

And what guartantees that there won't be another firestorm of fearmongering as soon as the oversight bodies start to clamp down on the spending?

[ClarkUSA]

51. President Obama, VP Biden and a larger Democratic majority, that's what's guaranteeing it.

What strikes me is how damned fearful you are. Why don't you take your Chicken Little self and roll up in a corner somewhere
and wait for the worst to happen while the rest of us rebuild America with President Obama and a Democratic Congress? I have
hope and I trust Obama and his advisors and the Democrats in Congress to do the right thing. Republicans won't be able to
stymie anything anymore after Nov. 4. Democrats will be in charge and we will repair the damage with transparency, if you
dare to look it up.

Your Bah Humbug routine is getting old, by the way. :eyes:

[Beacool]

36. My exact same thoughts!!!

Yeah, it can be "tweaked" later on. Right.......

[ClarkUSA]

42. Like you know anything about it. BTW, how'd Hillary vote on it, do ya know?

Since you still have her avatar and all, I thought you'd know. I'll bet she voted for it -- maybe you know something she doesn't?

[Beacool]

49. She voted yes.

So?

As for my avatar, it will remain there. Got a problem with it?

[ClarkUSA]

54. Of course she did.

Why don't you ask her whether the bill can be tweaked later on? Call her office. I'm sure they will tell you, "Yes. We. Can."

[Beacool]

56. I don't need to call her office.

I know enough people in the campaign to call them directly, but thank you for your suggestion.

[ClarkUSA]

64. Even better.

And you're welcome. :)

[Cha]

7. Obama told us in his speech

yesterday from Reno that they had to put out the fire first and then they could work on what needs to be done so it won't happen again.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7257342

[moodforaday]

12. And maybe he believes that.

I don't care who believes what since it's unknowable. Just look at what they do.

In his speech Obama also listed four things he wanted to put in the bill, to assure oversight and protect homeowners. Except those things were not in the bill. Do words really mean more than deeds?

[GrizzlyMan]

16. Sort of OT, but do you really live in Poland?

[moodforaday]

85. Yes.

I almost feel American though :) It's a long story.

[vaberella]

25. Apparently they were in the bill. Secondly there's a separate homeowner bill

coming up..Obama wanted something separate for them.

And he has said in the past he wants to wait to deal with that issue. You can't patch everything...just one at a time.

Further more I believe 3 of this 6 initiatives were met slightly and Obama will change them. He has no real power now and they are dominated by Repubs. They need to have more power nad control and Obama will make serious waves.

http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_10598208
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/obama-says-bailout-bill-s_n_129482.html

[vaberella]

15. Thanks Zidzi...we're basically protected by Obama. n/t

[mckara]

19. That Could Be the Understatement of the Year!

n/t

[Imagevision]

24. Tweaked, exactly - now let's get back to serious business and send McCain back to his day job...

[lostnotforgotten]

28. Sorry, But I Have Little Confidence That This Would Ever Happen

eom

[Imagevision]

67. lostnotforgotten> when you learn Obama landslided McCain? remember you heard it here first...

[lostnotforgotten]

71. And Your Point On Topic Would Be What?

eom

[lostnotforgotten]

29. Dupe - Sorry - nt

eom

[boppers]

30. "reign (sic) in spending"

Nice subliminal dig by MSNBC, there.

[ClarkUSA]

55. LOL

Either that, or they have the same spelling skills as Dubya (remember when he got the word mixed up in a note he wrote himself?).

[jeanpalmer]

35. By the time they tweak it

we, er our kids, will be in debt another $700 billion. And the tweak will be -- spend another $700 billion. Ad infinitum.

[msallied]

47. We'll have to see what happens after the first $250 billion.

By the time comes around to grant the next chunk, we will have a new administration and a new Congress.

[Eric J in MN]

72. In six months they will probably ask for $500 billion....

...since it will sound relatively small compared to $700 billion.

Then after Congress has gotten used to this, they will ask for $850 billion.

[ClarkUSA]

75. Is that you, Grover Norquist?

:rofl:

[Eric J in MN]

78. We've already experienced this with Bush asking for war supplementals...

...every six months.

[ClarkUSA]

80. So you're now equating an Obama administration's intentions for "We The People" with BushCo's??

Wow. Just wow. :tinfoilhat:

[mzmolly]

41. My thoughts as well.

:hi:

[ClarkUSA]

63. GMTA

:hi:

[closeupready]

46. I trust him on this - I have no reason not to.

:)

[jillan]

50. Exactly - it needed to be done, but Obama has said over and over

once he gets into the WH, he will go over all of the legislation that was signed over the last 8 years with a fine toothed comb.

[ClarkUSA]

57. And I'm sure Biden will be right beside him, as he has said he wanted a partner in decision-making.

Some people here have been made so paranoid and fearful from the past eight BushCo years that they forget
that an Obama/Biden administration will not be out to fuck us over in the same way. Must be some sort of
political PSTD happening.... :shrug:

[democrat2thecore]

52. I'm sure a President Obama will make BIG changes -nt

[ClarkUSA]

65. Yes, and he'll make sure the public's access to any proposals is transparent before moving forward.

No more secret cabals made up of industry lobbyists.

Man oh man, Yes. We. Can.

[gblady]

68. and, in his speech today....

he spoke of the necessity to put out the fire of the immediate situation...

he also said and I quote: "There will be time to punish those who set this fire"

I think he has a plan...and being the poker player that he is...he is keeping his cards
close to his chest for the meantime.

Priority #1....get elected. Only then, can he take action.

[Eric J in MN]

53. So we're going to make permanent that any corporation which...

...makes a bad investment can turn to the government to buy its "troubled assets"?

Obama: "we will continue this
fee to build up a reserve so that if this happens again, it will be the money contributed by banks that’s put at risk,”

[ClarkUSA]

66. Considering the Financial Stability Fee would be donated by banks for banks, your point is...???

What do you think the fee is for, anyway? :eyes:

The government would simply hold the monies in escrow, so to speak.

[Eric J in MN]

69. The government shouldn't prop up businesses....

...by intentionally overpaying for their worst products.

It's crony capitalism.

Businesses which make bad investments should have to absorb their losses.

[ClarkUSA]

73. So you're a free market kind of guy, eh?

Figures. Say hi to New Gingrich for me.

[Eric J in MN]

76. Corporations should be regulated.

Not rewarded for their bad investments.

[ClarkUSA]

79. Do you always speak in such simpleminded and meaningless Palinesque platitudes?

:eyes:

This is not the time to be such a self-righteous prick. The reality is, no matter who is to blame,
a recovery plan is needed to stabilize the economy so here's the Cliff Notes form for ya: banks
will be partially nationalized and so will their profits. And they will be paying a fee in order to
pay taxpayers back every dime and more within five years.

[bvar22]

58. We'll fix it later,

*The check is in the mail....

*It won't cost you a thing....

*This will only take a second....

*It'll never happen again...

What do all of the above have in common?

When has our government EVER gone back and fixed somethig later after getting the money up front?

[Eric J in MN]

70. Good point. NT

NT

[ClarkUSA]

74. Either you trust Obama or you don't. And we know where you've always stood.

Now go and ruffle your dainty Chicken Little feathers somewhere else. :eyes:

[PVnRT]

82. Well, go vote for McKinney, then

Then you can help her find the thousands of dead prisoners executed during Katrina.

[barack the house]

61. If folks only listn to Barack intently >

they will know Obama has been hugely reassuring. It's time to stay calm a follow a next great leader. As he is demonstrating the work of a master in progress.

[iiibbb]

77. Obama should donate President's salary to the national debt... he can make enough from his own $

I know it's next to nothing, but it would be a gesture.

[ClarkUSA]

81. Well, he's not mega-rich like Bush and Cheney, so I wouldn't expect him to do that.

I do expect him to work hard for us, though -- which would be a nice change from the past eight years.