What's Possible?

Ace:

We have few RINOs left at all, and we'll miss them. It's too late now to say "Support RINOs in liberal-leaning states; they're the best we can hope for," but it's something to keep in mind next cycle, I suppose. We'll have to put up moderate candidates to even have a shot at some of the swing districts Democrats have lately swept us in. It's important to remember politics is the art of the possible.

Yeah - real conservatism actually sucks and just can't win in the Northeast.

1980

1984

And no, I'm not pining for the days of Reagan, or suggesting that the world hasn't changed. But I do believe the facts are different than what the conventional wisdom, especially as conveyed by the media elites on both sides of the ideological spectrum would have us believe. You really think Blue state voters are thrilled with their government, despite it being run by liberals? Really? Ask some Blue state voters about that some time.

Serious fiscal conservatism, an appreciation for some standard of social values that doesn't argue for a government that tries to legislate morality, but argues certain questions are democratic in nature and need to be resolved by the states through voting and legislation locally, would sell in Blue states, as well as Red.

What it most needs is an effective leader who can expound upon it in a positive manner without being painted as a caricature. Heck, they did paint Reagan as a caricature and he still won the nation in, not one, but two slam dunks.

Reagan was for that, not against everything. One of the Right's biggest mistake has been to allow the liberals to frame the argument, leaving us always looking as though we are in opposition to everything and for nothing at all.

Human nature has not changed that much. We need to be for individual freedom in a civil society, a strong, competent military, low taxes and a government that doesn't over-spend, nor over-reach. And I don't believe there is a state or ethnic group that wouldn't support a government that actually tried to deliver it for a change.

Comments

[mark l.]

along the lines of 'gop'* success in the Northeast:

conneticut is a prime example.

jodi rell comes to mind as a fiscal conservative, but social liberal, succeeding in a very blue state.
you also have a foreign policy hawk, joe lieberman, who is also socially liberal winning in the same.

the lesson?
financial conservatism and strong foreign policy are not out of the mainstream. The gop should make it a point of referring all social policy matters to be left to individual states.

along those lines:
they have been stuck arguing 'all versus nothing' on abortion. America still remains dead square in the middle on it...60% wouldn't mind restrictions, 65% want it to remain legal.

if the gop wants the moderate run on abortion-no third trimester, unless life of mother is endangered, let the states argue about 2nd trimester, and accept 1st trimester. (well worth noting that most EU countries restrict after 12 weeks)

while they have, technically, the upper hand on illegal immigration, in the sense that the argument is simple:
should the US govt divert resources to pay for people in our country who are here illegaly?

the gop let the press beat them back on taking a stronger stand with the threat of painting them as less than compassionate conservatives. Had they chose to pursue the matter and fight back, the talking point would have been made easy for the 08 campaign-

'we don't believe that money that could be spent on shoring up social security should be diverted into paying for those who have come to this country illegaly.'

The irony of skipping ilegal immigration is that the reason it is so messed up is becuase unions have prevented the availabilty of work visas. Now in the recent light of obama/pelosi's recent demands for a 'bailout' for the unions, I mean automakers, the nexus between unions and the democratic party are on full display.

[Judith]

I thought the dems won seats in 2006 by pretending to be right leaning dems?

[IslamoLlama]

Wow. You just totally don't get it, do you?

First and foremost, this was a referendum on Iraq. It was really hard to cast a vote for McCain when you disapproved of permanent military bases and endless two-front Asian land wars.

Second, but close behind, was regard for the federal bureaucracy. Georgie Boy bungled it. His FEMA agency screwed up in New Orleans. His Homeland Security had us taking off our shoes at airports, but they didn't have us feeling any safer aboard planes. The FDA let through poisoned spinach and tomatoes. The EPA missed toxic paints on toys. The Treasury fumbled regulations in the financial markets. Passports took longer to process. Roads decayed under our tires. And the Justice Department couldn't go six months without making headlines over its own incompetence, corruption, or latest failure. This was also a referendum on administrative skill and the current administration was found wanting.

The wars and the bureaucracy were at the tops of voters' minds on November 4th. Republicans - embodied by Bush - didn't fail because they weren't nebulously "conservative" enough. They failed because they couldn't accomplish some very concrete goals. They couldn't pay the government's bills. They couldn't win the two big wars. They couldn't keep the air clean or the food safe or the roads sturdy or the laws upheld.

You had federal bureaucrats outing CIA agents, with zero accountability. You had bridges crumbling in Minnesota while deficits went through the roof in DC. And you had Bush up at the mic with that ridiculous smirk snickering through one clusterfuck after another.

Your rhetoric was worthless. McCain promised taxpayers the moon and the stars and no one trusted him. Palin terrorized voters with threats of angry Obama-sponsored muslims banging on their doors, and people didn't tremble. You can promise to be more conservative, but that doesn't mean a damn thing when the guys in office can't get the basic job of running the country done. People don't want "conservative" or "liberal". They want results.

Get some reliable and popular governors. Get some laws on the books that Americans can appreciate and enjoy. Put judges on the bench that don't screw over working women or minorities or the poor. Maybe then you'll win some elections. Beyond that, it's all talk. Hat less the cattle. Dog and pony minus the show. It's worthless. And voters will reject it.

[jharp]

Islamolama,

Pretty scary that the final numbers were only 52%/46%.

Don't know about you but I feel that was frighteningly close. In any sane country it should have been 75%/25%.

[mark l.]

"First and foremost, this was a referendum on Iraq."

actually it was 04. bush won.

[Bordo]

Ordinarily, I enjoy making sport of this site, but today there is a nugget of truth that cannot go unnoticed. To wit, conservatism today is seen as what people are against, rather than for, which is a recipe for electoral irrelevance. When conservative priniciples are espoused by a friendly, positive leader like Ronald Reagan, they have a good chance of competing in the marketplace of ideas. When those principles are espoused by sour-faced, angry louts like those running the GOP today, they do not.

The core Republican base is shrinking. Until the party learns how to relate to better educated voters, minorities, immigrants, women and other segments of society, it will be a regional party of lower income whites from the former Confederacy. Good luck winning elections when you write off everything except the underpopulated plains states and Dixie minus North Carolina, Virginia and Florida.

[templar knight]

Bordo, when you claim to be fiscally conservative, yet spend like a liberal democrat, let's just say your credibility becomes the issue. When you claim to want to clean up Washington, but become as dirty as the ones you wanted to clean up, your credibility becomes the issue. Until Republicans, of which I am a new one, become credible again, we will not win elections. But our ideas should appeal to all people who want honest, limited government, regardless of race or gender. A government wanting to provide all things to all people doesn't appeal to me, and will collapse due to loose fiscal policy. It was true in Aristotle's day, and is still true today, which is the reason the FF provided us with a Republic, not a pure democracy.

[ET]

--First and foremost, this was a referendum on Iraq.

First and foremost, you are totally off base regarding Iraq. Thanks to the success of the McCain/Petraus surge, the Iraq war was marginalized as an election issue, and the economy trumped national security in the final months. McCain lost both of his strongest positions, allowing barry to fill the void with false promises of economic welfare for the masses.

BTW, what is uncle barry's position on Iraq today? It has changed so often in the past 18 months I can't keep up. When will he pull the troops out? 16 months from when? Will he bring them home or send them to the "real war" in Afghanistan?

My prediction is that uncle barry will keep troops and bases in Iraq for his entire 4 year term. You were duped if you ever thought otherwise.

McCain, principled as he is, said he would rather win a war and lose an election. That is exactly what he did, and I respect him for it.

[mark l.]

25 billion for auto companies.
why not just have the companies ask 300 million americans to mail them a check for 83 dollars?

[mark l.]

GM's market cap is 1.7 billion.
25 billion? why not just buy them outright, paying shareholders holding a stock at three dollars, 40 dollars?
didn't the dems want these guys out of business for making 'inefficient cars'?

I am building my obama index as we speak:
chicago based companies that have donated to emmanuel or obama. It's a jackpot.
I'll also have to look at Brinks(BCO). If this auto bailout is just a taste of things to come, I have a feeling that the 'redistribution of wealth' is going to have to rely upon a company to deliver the cash.

[mark l.]

25 billion/263k employees...
it works out to about 95k per employee.

I'm sure gm is valuable company, but providing 95,000 dollars per employee is not even close to sanity.

for the 25 billion, pelosi could pay 800k americans 30k a year just to stuff envelopes for the dnc and save a billion.

[Scrapiron]

Just hang loose. Hussein O is a known empty suit. Let the terrorists start killing more Americans and his left wing anti-american cowardly base will force him to retreat from the WOT and then several American cities will go up in smoke.

I recommend that no one join the military. You will be serving under another cut and run like Dimmy, Hanoi John Kerry (ran out on his unit in Vietnam) and Slick Willie (deserted to England to after he was drafted). You will be short handed and short on weapons after the dhimmi's make their 25% cut in the military. If you are currently in the military, get out at the earliest possible date you can and retain your honor. Don't run like a cowardly democrat, fulfill your current contract. Benefits after service will disappear as they always do under a dhimmi. If you want to see what a 25% cut will do just have every fourth combat troop step out (take their weapon and ammmo with them) and go home at your next formation or your next combat patrol. See how safe you feel with them missing. I served through the Dimmy joke with no ammo to even use on the firing range and no fuel to fly planes/run armor. It will get real scary.
Let Hussein restart the draft and put the left wing retards on the front line with sticks if he wants to fight someone. They have volunteered to do it for free by voting for him.

[kasper]

What's possible? Pretty much nothing.

When you achieve more than 50% of the population not paying taxes ... a majority of the population in government-related jobs .... Supreme Court appointments incapable of recognizing the importance of the Constitution as it was written -- generations of willfully ignorant population educated by willfully ignorant teachers/professor .... and with media unapologetic about their incestuous relationship with the Democratic party -- nothing of a conservative nature is possible.

[mark l.]

I wouldn't panic that much.

The supreme court is only going to feature replacements of the libs exclusively-alito, scalia, roberts, and thomas aren't going anywhere, and it would be hard to find a more liberal justice than ginsburg or breyer. In hindsight, not removing a judicial filibuster from the menu of options when they held power, puts the gop in a very unique situation, very similar to the dems of 02 to 06. can't say I won't relish watching.

It doesn't matter what the tax rate is set at if the country is not making money. If obama wants more money he'll have to help the country grow. If he doesn't produce growth and expands the deficit, his tenure might make a second term, but it will decrease his ability to govern.

"generations of willfully ignorant population educated by willfully ignorant teachers/professor"

if the young genration does nothing else, it seeks to rebel. The tighter the grasp of indoctrination, the quicker they will convert to conservatism. (very similar to the yankees-mets dichotomy that occurs from father to son)

[jharp]

I'm sure gm is valuable company, but providing 95,000 dollars per employee is not even close to sanity.

for the 25 billion, pelosi could pay 800k americans 30k a year just to stuff envelopes for the dnc and save a billion.

Posted by: mark l. | Tuesday, November 11, 2008 at 08:14 PM

You have about the same amount of knowledge about business that you have about polling.

Go take a peek at GM's balance sheet. And then look at who holds the debt.

It is far more complicated then you can imagine.

By the way, mark l, did you figure out the errors of your polling analysis? It seems pretty much every poll was accurate and you were dead wrong. Go take a look at the Coleman/Franken race. You can't be far wrong with it. It's pretty much a tie.

[scarshapedstar]

"We need to be for individual freedom in a civil society, a strong, competent military, low taxes and a government that doesn't over-spend, nor over-reach."

Yeah... about that... what's up with the 8 years of tongue-bathing George Bush, then? Were you all stoned out of your collective gourd?

[mark l.]

"It is far more complicated then you can imagine."

if gm isn't bailed out, unions lose 260,000 members. There, that wasn't so complicated.

why not a bailout for the entire labor force?

151 million workers, @ 95k...

14.3 trillion dollars. I'm sure obama can tax that out of the top 5% of earners.

jharp-

since as you say-

It is far more complicated then you can imagine.

PLEASE explain how we need 95k per (union)worker. In doing so, also explain why other industries, lacking union membership don't fit pelosi's criteria.

[mark l.]

"Deutsche Bank analyst Rod Lache on Monday set a target price of zero, saying that even if GM succeeds in averting bankruptcy, the company’s future path will likely be “bankruptcy-like.”"

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2008/11/10/daily26.html

so why are we saving this company?
why can't it wait 71 days, until inauguration, and let obama save it? all he has to do is declare 'help is on its way'.

If obama wants to throw money down a hole, you'd think he'd have the patience to wait to do so under his own rule.

[jharp]

It is far more complicated then you can imagine.

PLEASE explain how we need 95k per (union)worker. In doing so, also explain why other industries, lacking union membership don't fit pelosi's criteria.

Posted by: mark l. | Tuesday, November 11, 2008 at 11:13 PM

I cannot explain it. However to describe it as a 95K per union worker bailout is small minded and ridiculous.

Think AIG. What's that up to now. 150 billion? Is that one OK since it's not union workers? Bear Stearns? Is that one OK? No union there?

And for the record I don't favor bailing any of them out though I'm aware there is a strong argument for doing so.

And I had no idea Nancy Pelosi had that kind of power. All of this time I thought the Senate, the President, and the House decided these things together.

You are a dunce. And you know it.

[mark l.]

"Go take a peek at GM's balance sheet. And then look at who holds the debt."

they are losing money becuase they promised more in pensions, retirement, and healthcare than they had the ability to pay on...

jharp-
you, of all people, should realize the potential danger of spending more than one can earn. It is the premise of the democratic party's populist message. I'm not hearing anything from any democrat that expresses a concern for mounting debt and its inherent dangers. Should we ignore spending?

[jharp]

I'm not hearing anything from any democrat that expresses a concern for mounting debt and its inherent dangers. Should we ignore spending?

Posted by: mark l. | Tuesday, November 11, 2008 at 11:43 PM

You are out of your mind.

Good grief! Were your ears plugged and have you been blinded while the GOP added $5 tillion in debt the past 7 years?

I have met some fools on message boards but never one who can match your buffoonery.

[jharp]

The good news just keeps on coming. How sweet it is!

Who'd a thunk? A black President named Hussein Obama and Jesse Jackson as a U.S Senator. Praise the Lord. The greatest country in the history of the earth again leads the way!

Jesse Jackson Leads Field of Obama Replacements

A new Zogby poll in Illinois finds Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL) is the favorite among possible replacements to fill the U.S. Senate seat to be vacated by President-elect Barack Obama.

"The survey shows that, given a choice of 10 possible candidates, 21% think Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) should appoint Jackson to the seat when Obama leaves it vacant to ascend to the presidency, far more than the rest of the field.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/11/11/jackson_leads_field_of_obama_replacements.html

[mark l.]

"I cannot explain it. However to describe it as a 95K per union worker bailout is small minded and ridiculous."
in your own words,

you don't understand.

"Think AIG. What's that up to now. 150 billion?"
so are you opposed to the aig bailout?
the bailout bill was specifcally for financial companies.

aig is actually one of the largest contributor's to the mystery 2 trillion. I don't see obama calling for any transparency...

when the financial firms bought the subprime mortgages, the 'insured' their bet. AIG was the chief insurer, domestically and abroad. France alone had 300 billion insurance against the subprimes. To not pay out on the insurance would cause the subprime paper to collapse.

as for your gm/union bailout...ANY company that failed, but was non-union should have the right to sue the govt for an equivalent bailout-95k per employee. Supporting a company becuase it features union employees and refusing to help a company in similar circumstance is criminal. If its ok with you jharp, it must be fine for democrats.

[Tommy Paine IX]

JHarp,

"Good grief! Were your ears plugged and have you been blinded while the GOP added $5 tillion in debt the past 7 years?"

And yet the Democrats have been complaining that we weren't spending more, nor were we raising taxes to cover such spending.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

Yeah Dan, I have to go into the RINO GWB spent 8 years f***ing up the GOP and the last two elections were a referendum. Too blind to see that the light at the end of the tunnel was a train, the GOP had only another RINO to offer after eight years to groom an acceptable candidate. The repugnicans aren't quite done in, the country is more center right than election numbers appear, but boy they need a smarter message. One has to laugh about rich people (Rush, Hannity, et al) whining about higher taxes on one hand while other rich people think taxces should go up on the other. Of course the lazy want whatever handouts they can get. SO who is looking out for the middle? GOP and the libertarians (the latter must reign in the kooks) now have at least 4 years to get a better message out. And, if they are going to act like dems spending money and expanding government maybe they should take the nasty tricks pages of their play book too.

[Fred Beloit]

People, people, people, this is a must see. Dana Milbank of the WAPO wrote a short piece titled "Washington's It Guy: John Podesta". Check out the comments. The righties hammered Milbank without stint or mercy. Guess the right is still full of fight.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/roughsketch/2008/11/washingtons_it_guy_john_podest.html

[Fred Beloit]

This is great too. In the comment third from the top of this thread, Islamollama makes the case that we don't "get it". Obama won the election because Bush mismanaged the government bureaurocracy. He goes on and on about New Orleans, Homeland Security, bridges crumbling in Minnasota, etc. etc, the entire BDS litany.
So whom do should be picked to fix all this mismanagement? A guy with zero management experience. A guy who was an editor (lots of management challenges in that job, got to keep those paperclip cups full). A guy who was a community organizer (a teacher of victomhood to the neighborhood). Islamo is much funnier than Al Franken.

[Fred Beloit]

I would be remiss not to ad this to my comments about the Milbank item. Milbank pulls a neat trick at the end of the piece:
"But here the former Clinton White House chief was yesterday, in gray flannel suit, his white dress shirt unbuttoned to reveal the white undershirt beneath. The questions were shouted from every corner of the packed room. And, for nearly three quarters of an hour, Podesta regaled his adoring fans with endless variations of his theme song: "We're taking a look at a variety of options, and when we have something to say about it we'll let you know."

[Fred Beloit]

Here is a taped radio interview with Sen. Dodd that was censored by the Connecticut radio station that made it but is available now. Scroll down to the speaker symbol. Dodd admits money sent to banks by Congressional authority was being used by the banks to buy other banks rather than for the purposes intended. Oops, Congress. It seems Congress needs better managers than Reid and Pelosi. Also Dodd tries to weasel out of a simple suggestion.
http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2008/11/exclusive_censo.php

[WAHOO WILLIE]

Fred; you're commenting to yourself again.....and if you'll re-read Lame LLama's comments you will likely agree as I do. It's like Barney Frank said..paraphrasing "yeah we f'd up the economy, but the republicans let us" Where to agree with LLama is not to say it's all George's fault that this or that happened. It's his fault for not fixing it. Fred, he hired a G.D. horse groomer to head up FEMA for pity sake. I had first year rookie firefighters who could've done a better job than "Brownie" did.

[Fred Beloit]

Well, somebody hired him, Wahoo. And when he was tested and failed he was fired. But a question still hangs in the air over Desire Street. How much was Brownie at fault for the mess and how much was the fault of the governor and the mayor.

But I have a worse thing to do here and now. A conscience is a load to bear. I must admit I got Dana Milbank's piece wrong. He was making fun of the media gaggle around Podesta (robotman I calls him). Milbank's piece was facetious, not serious. I missed it long enough to slam him before I realized what I had done. Publishing without an editor can lead to embarrassment, in this case mine.

[Fred Beloit]

"Where to agree with LLama is not to say it's all George's fault that this or that happened. It's his fault for not fixing it."
In addition, Wahoo, one has to recall the alternatives to Bush who were offered us at the time, Gore and Kerry.
Will you make the case they would have been better under fire than George? Or could Islamo make the case?

[WAHOO WILLIE]

Oh don't get me wrong, there's more than plenty o' blame, waaaaay more to lay on school bus Nagin and Blanco and all the way back to Huey Long. NO politics make Chicago look like the Quakers no doubt. Still, when Blanco finally got around to realizing she had to ask FEMA to step in "Brownie" was as confused as a drag queen in a whore house.

Takes a big man to admit he was wrong.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

No, Kerry's bravery under fire is proven to be, "oh I cut my arm on this gun turret, give me a band aid and a purple heart so I can go home" Gore would've spent more time laying blame than bailing water. Which is really a bit unfair because we cannot know what they may have done. Let's not act like demonrats here. Frankly vis Katrina, I dont think there is or has been a leader in history who would be prepared for that mess.....better prepared? YES, hell yes.

While I agree with LLama when she makes sense, I admit that I have to wade through her savior fare attitude and seeming total hatred for everything......yeah, everything. Be that as it may, she could make a case I imagine. Whether it made sense or was BDS puking points I can't say.

[Fred Beloit]

So much for "change". Make it "same same". Obama it seems plans to drag out every old wheezer from the Clinton administration.

From WAPO (no links to them from me):
"[Sam] Nunn and [Warren] Christopher would be part of a national security brain trust for Obama that is heavy on former Clinton administration officials, including possible national security adviser James Steinberg, a former State Department official.
At the Pentagon, the large transition office would likely include former Clinton Navy Secretary Richard Danzig and former Clinton-era Pentagon comptroller Bill Lynn, officials said. The announcements are expected later this week."

[WAHOO WILLIE]

Well, he's recycling Jimmah Carter's speeches...why shoudln't we go back to an under armored/equipt military too?

[Concerned Citizen]

Have you seen this site?

Supposedly from the desk of Michael Reagan:

http://www.reaganaction.com/

[WAHOO WILLIE]

CC: looks like a scam to me

[IslamoLlama]

I like Mark I's assumption that the only reason the automotive industry is getting a bailout stems from the fact that its workers are unionized.

Which union were the members of AIG and Bear Sterns a member of?

[IslamoLlama]

"-- In addition, Wahoo, one has to recall the alternatives to Bush who were offered us at the time, Gore and Kerry.
Will you make the case they would have been better under fire than George? Or could Islamo make the case? --"

Quite easily. The working tax credits Obama offers today were being offered back under Gore eight years ago. The Surge! strategy McCain finally sold to Bush in 2006 was the same strategy that Shinseki was proposing right before Rumsfeld had him fired. The move towards energy independence and carbon limits that Al Gore championed back in the nineties were hallmarks of McCain's 2008 Presidential run. Greenspan embraced mortgage backed securities and sub-prime loans while Nobel winning liberal economist (and potential Kerry adviser) Paul Krugman loudly warned strongly against them.

The Republican Party has been slowly embracing ideas that the Democrats were championing ten years ago. They have only now begun to embrace those ideas because of political necessity.

Had Democrats been in office implementing ideas that Republicans are only now embracing, we'd have been spared a great deal of pain. If Obama's administration is a success - if the economy recovers, Iraq political resolution is achieved, and the bureaucracy regains respect domestically and internationally - I'll be vindicated.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"Greenspan embraced mortgage backed securities and sub-prime loans while Nobel winning liberal economist (and potential Kerry adviser) Paul Krugman loudly warned strongly against them."

So what you're saying is that had the dems been in control, the dems wouldn't have pushed the banks to make these loans because the repugs would not have been there to let them do it? I can only presume that this is because no one would've called the dems racist for not pushing the banks to loan to people who they knew wouldn't pay it back. And if your "IFs" do materialize, I will be the first to congratulate you. I've already said my sympathies are with the children who were sold a pig in a poke.....just in case they dont materialize.

[templar knight]

It's useless to argue with the fool, Willie.

And how is it going with you, my friend? I see you are waxing eloquent trying your best to educate the ignorant. I will say this, you are persistent. I'd have given up long ago. You're an admirable fellow! Lol.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

TK: I actually like DaLLama. When she's lucid, she makes some decent arguments. I dont usually agree with her, especially when she uses her hatefilled BDS rants, but every now and then when she isn't googling and cutting and pasting someone elses opinions she's fun. Wish she were a little more open....but then that leaves loads o' room for speculation. As for trying to educate anyone. Nah, nah, nah I just try to throw out another side, or another opinion and sometimes make people think. Can't change a mind that's made up.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

Now Harpie is the hopeless one...but he's a decent chap and I'd drink a beer with him.

[LOL]

instead of pretending that you know what the american voter wants, Dan, maybe you should take some time to educate yourself on what americans want. I think you, and your wingnut me-toos in the comments, spend too much by themselves and not enough time in the real world.

[templar knight]

Seems to me, Dan, that 46% of the people deserve a person like you speaking on their behalf. The nutroots seem to think 52% gives them the right to a dictatorship, and I thought they were against such things before it now turns out they were really for them. Laughable.

[Todd]

Here is a taped radio interview with Sen. Dodd that was censored by the Connecticut radio station that made it but is available now. Scroll down to the speaker symbol. Dodd admits money sent to banks by Congressional authority was being used by the banks to buy other banks rather than for the purposes intended. Oops, Congress. It seems Congress needs better managers than Reid and Pelosi. Also Dodd tries to weasel out of a simple suggestion.
http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2008/11/exclusive_censo.php
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Wednesday, November 12, 2008 at 09:17 AM
-----------------------
Strange how you don't hold Hank Paulsen accountable, Fred. Or is he just an innocent bystander in this whole bailout thing?

[Todd]

"GM's market cap is 1.7 billion.
25 billion? why not just buy them outright, paying shareholders holding a stock at three dollars, 40 dollars?"
--------------
Market cap only includes the value of the stock. Enterprise value for GM is $31 billion, including liabilities on the balance sheet. David Faber on CNBC reported that there are questions about the ripple impact in credit markets if GM and Ford would go bankrupt. No one really knows, and following the credit market repercussions post-Lehman-failure, it's a pertinent question.