Bush on Monday
President Bush sought to assure anxious world leaders on Monday that the United States is taking ‘bold, aggressive, decisive action’ to rescue the crisis-ridden economy with a $700 billion bailout package. ‘The whole world is watching to see if we can act quickly,’ Bush said, prodding lawmakers in Washington to approve his plan.
Bush, January 29, 2003
The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.
Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production.
Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.
The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary, he is deceiving.
What reason do we have to trust this man? Why should we act quickly to bail out his and John McCain’s friends on Wall Street? Passing this mammoth laws without consideration led us into Iraq, passed the PATRIOT Act and more. George Bush saying hurry up is kind of like the bank robber wanting to empty the till before the cops get here.
OW,
I’m not certain any amount of bailout will be enough now or anytime soon. Our financial system is now in a liquidity trap until some foreign currency lends stability to our own paper assets (seriously this will take a while). Follow the dollar spiral down at warp speed soon after this coming bailout. China will have abandon the dollar or take a major deval for no good national reason… they aren’t beholden to Wall Street financial.
Sincerely,
Dick Fuld, esq.
Not only has our Leader proved to be a hustler and a liar, OW, but he wants to give Paulson greater power than anyone since Caesar. Consider this from Seeking Alpha:
Okay. Let’s leave no room for ambiguity here. The Treasury’s draft plan for saving the world is breathtakingly awful. It would give the Secretary of the Treasury entirely unchecked discretion over up to 700B dollars. Even that “limit” has a loophole big enough that you could drive a truck through it, so the Secretary could in effect spend up to 1.8T dollars, right up to the newly raised Federal debt ceiling, without further Congressional action. This act would be such a wholesale delegation of the power of the purse that I wonder whether it is even constitutional. Of course, the act explicitly puts the Secretary’s actions beyond any judicial review, so perhaps questions of legality or constitutionality are merely academic.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/96583-treasury-s-plan-is-breathtakingly-awful?source=wildcard
One would think your usual cabal of trolls would be commenting on this post, Oliver. Are they hiding because what you are saying here cannot be denied?
Of course, the act explicitly puts the Secretary’s actions beyond any judicial review, so perhaps questions of legality or constitutionality are merely academic.
How do they have the stones to even suggest such a thing? Seriously. In any other country, I think this would be considered a coup d’etat.
Why do cons hate America and freedom?
Of course, the act explicitly puts the Secretary’s actions beyond any judicial review, so perhaps questions of legality or constitutionality are merely academic.
That alone, despite everything else, should set alarm bells buzzing and get any right-thinking (or anyone who just thinks at all) to oppose this. Why does it need to specifically outlaw judicial review? Is there any possible reason for that other than the folks behind it want to knowingly break the law??