So, what's going to happen with that bailout bill? Now that McCain's come to save ruin everything, who the fuck knows! Bushie is speaking at 9:35 which is sure to be interesting but while we wait, I highly, HIGHLY suggest you listen to this clip from Bill O'Reilly's talk radio show last night, in which he expresses his feelings on the rescue package. For those who can't (I think there are people who can't, I don't know), I've transcribed it below, which wasn't even that labor intensive because I've listened to it many times, with pleasure. Note: this is a two and a half minute monologue. There is no one else talking.
"Most talk radio is conservative dominated ideologues, or kool-aid drinking idiots. Idiots.
Screaming at you "This is socialism, this is this this is that"
"It's Clintons fault, it's Clinton's fault." It's Clinton's fault? Clinton hasn't been in office in 8 years.
It's Bush's fault, it happened on Bush's watch. He could've prevented this. He could've gone easily and said Merrill Lynch is dealing in bad paper he could've said that.
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac they're dealing in bad paper, so you the investor, don't invest in those companies. You think they would've continued to deal in bad paper? No they would not!
But let's get back to this talk radio stuff
These idiots are misleading you they're lying to you
They're rich, these guys
Big cigars, all of that! Private jets, "Oh yeah, my private jet!"
And they're saying "No bailout, no no uh uh no way"
Hey! You're going to get it, not them
That foreign investment pulls out, we are toast
And they'll pull out if that bailout doesn't happen
Are you getting the message here?
Walk away from these liars, these right wing liars
Walk away from them, they're not looking out for you!
I don't even want to talk about the far left
Barney Frank? Disgusting!
Pointing fingers?
It's you you big fat toad, YOU!
Frank!
You!
Dodd, sittin' there
[incomprehensible impression of Dodd]
It's you Dodd, you! You knew!
I swear to god, if they were in this room right now, I would hit them
Dodd and Frank
The house finance and senate finance
They knew!
Don't point a finger at anybody, I'll break that finger off
So! you got corruption on the right, and corruption on the left
And who gets it? You get it, you, the hardworking person
The next politician that gets up their and points a finger, I'm go after them myself
Shut up! Fix it! These are people's lives
I got enough money in the bank. Unless a bank fails, I'm fine
But you're probably not fine
I'm lucky
I'm tired of these charlatans on both sides
Lying to you, because they're ideological kool-aid drinkers or corrupt toads
And I'm talkin to you Barney Frank
Who's the guy who was saying,
"If you don't lend money to poor people you're a bigot"
Who was saying that barney, WHO?!
[pause] I gotta take a break"
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:18AM
A bit ridic, but it's true, we shouldn't of been pushing mortgages on the poor to make ourselves feel good about helping the underpriviliged.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:19AM
Sweet Jesus, I kind of agree with him. Hell is now freezing over.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:23AM
Too long, didn't read.
Posted by diablo , Sep 26, 2008 9:25AM
Was this the most articulate defense of the Paulson bailout plan ever? If that's true then Paulson needs to find some new friends. Thank for making me waste another minute of my life!
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:25AM
Is there any merit to the notion that a temporary lifting of the "mark to market" accounting rule for rancid securities would help the situation and be more effective than a $700B bailout?
I've heard "experts" say that a stroke of the pen would be much more effective and far less costly than a bailout.
Thank you.
The Guy from Delaware
Posted by RAW DOG , Sep 26, 2008 9:26AM
Bill is right. He (usually) always is. The no spin zone baby.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:27AM
Investors Business Daily is blaming Clinton (Bill, that is) this morning on their front page. LOL
Posted by Madmoney , Sep 26, 2008 9:27AM
Kind of looks like a poem - Bill O'Reilly poetry slam.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:29AM
This is madness. I always thought the day I agreed with BillOH would mean I had lost my soul. Well I do and it feels wrong. And dirty.
But sweet jesus he is correct.
Posted by Bess Levin , Sep 26, 2008 9:29AM
@diablo- first of all, did I hold a gun to your head and say read or I shoot? No. Second of all, this was worth the minute and you know it.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:30AM
that would be true if the problem was exclusive to subprime loans. There's more than enough blame to go around. Save that for later. We are quickly running out of runway to get this damn bill passed.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:30AM
Wasn't it Bill O'Reilly who used to call a female assistant and talk suggestively to her on recorded phones?
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:31AM
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has 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.
In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:33AM
Tim Robbins: Let me explain to you how this works: you see, the corporations finance Team America, and then Team America goes out... and the corporations sit there in their... in their corporation buildings, and... and, and see, they're all corporation-y... and they make money.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:34AM
Forgot Chuckie Schumer. The other one who kept loosening the rules for FNM and FRE even when they were in trouble.
He's as bad, if not worse than Frank.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:34AM
Bess pls post audio of you doing O'Rey's impression. Thanks - The Readers
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:35AM
13- Go find a chart of GSE share of orignations by year for this decade...you will see that in the peak bubble years they were losing market share hand over first. Hence the term private label RMBS, which was the guano for CDOs.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:36AM
at @8
That's what I was thinking, too. No meter that I can detect, though. Maybe it will go down as our civilization's Beowulf.
Posted by Henry Ryecroft , Sep 26, 2008 9:38AM
Bush about to speak... CNBC
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:38AM
"The American financial community will come back stronger then ever. Like Lance Armstrong. But with two balls."
~Ari Gold
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:39AM
Wow, for once one of O'Reilly's "bloviations" wasn't fucking moronic.
I would make a clever joke about the "No Meat Spin Zone" but I don't quite have it in me this morning.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:39AM
Dems can't pass this on their own now that McCain is in town, because if they do Repubs will start running idiotic "the Dems gave your money to Wall Street" ads.
House Republicans are a bunch of bible-thumping retards.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:40AM
That's why we gave Bush 8 freaking years - to reverse Clinton's stuff. The local radio show in LA ran clips of Bush, and there are many, where he bragged about all the help Freddie and Fannie were giving people who otherwise would not qualify for loans. Bush mentioned all time home ownership rates in nearly every State of the Union. Come on.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:46AM
President Bush talking about home ownership in June 2001:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010608-7.html
It's not exactly a topic the main stream media wants to go into...
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:47AM
What was Bill's point?
That politicians were bought by FNM? That a small agency meant to create a 2ndry mkt for mtgs for lower income became a $2 trillion Jabba the Hut?
That it's the gov't fault for not stopping this? They might have, except for the dereg binge that started under Reagan, continued through Bush I and Clinton and carried on today by Bush II. The SEC was gutted, Glass-Steagal died - so it is their fault - those Rep/Dem administrations.
Except that Americans believe in less regulation, small government and free markets, don’t we? And regulations never work anyway.
Must be them Wall Street types - trust them with the keys and they drive the global economy into a ditch. Except, as noted above, we like our markets free and Wall Street exists to maximize profit.
So it has to be sub-prime mortgages at the bottom of all this. But mortgages, sub-prime or otherwise, work out just fine as long as the borrower pays back the loan.
Which would put the blame back on… hang on, I don’t like the way this is headed.
We have met the enemy and he is us – our stuff, our trust of experts, our unwillingness to sacrifice anything.
We are an opinionated country. We would be much better served by becoming informed. Step one would be taking away Bill's pulpit.
But he sells ads -
TD
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:48AM
"This is madness"
"Madness? THIS IS CONGRESS!"
Paulson bill kicked into the pit of death.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:48AM
The Republican Party went "full retard". You never go "full retard".
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:49AM
Clinton hasn't been in office for 8 years.
Might as well blame Reagan.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:50AM
27 They've been full retard since the arrival of Rove. He should be jailed for treason.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:50AM
Take that Barney Frank
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:51AM
Doesn't all this reinforce Glass-Steagal being repealed and the too big to fail argument. None of the big combined banks (C, BAC, JPM) have failed. The government letting LEH fail set the lower limit for what is too small, and bailing out Fannie, Freddie, and AIG gives guidance on what size is needed to get a bailout. If I was a financial services CEO, the incentive is to get as big as possible.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 9:56AM
@24
listen to this nanny state socialist mofo -
"...the American Dream of being a homeowner. More Americans than ever before are experiencing that dream. But it still eludes too many people. For instance, while the rate of homeownership amongst all Americans is nearly 68 percent, the rate among African-American and Hispanic families is under 50 percent.
These numbers are troubling because homeownership lies at the heart of the American Dream. It is a key to upward mobility for low and middle income Americans. It is an anchor for families and a source of stability for communities. It serves as the foundation of many people's financial security. And it is a source of pride for people who have worked hard to provide for their families."
Great - whether they can afford it or not. Socialist. Bush.
Bartender!
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:01AM
Too long, didn't listen
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:04AM
For a good time call John Carney. Trannies only.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:17AM
@20,
Ari, why stop at 2?
And all of you kool-aid drinking leftards out there? This is YOUR mess. deal with it.
Commie retards.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:21AM
Maybe Bush should declare war on wall street. Then he could get the 700bn, otherwise wall street is toast.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:23AM
35 How did this become the problem of the left? Oh, I remember now. Bill Clinton made Fan and Fred do it. You right wing nut cases are amazing. You should all move to Alaska with that trailer trash whore Palin and her slutty daughter.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:28AM
35 Amazing. Bush has been in power eight years, with an R congress for the first six. I would say its a R mess. What little prosperity occured during that long and disgusting reign was from the R pump and dump of the housing sector, which then spilled over into consumer, the engine of the US economy. You're the retard.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:28AM
Ok. So I'm a cretin. But could somebody explain to me, using simple words, why the House Republican's plan (which I understand to be a government insurance program) is worse than handing Paulson a $700b blank check? My instinct tells me the Repubs might be more right on this one...
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:31AM
39 Cause the house R's are basically clueless (in general, and less than clueless when it comes to economic issues) while on the other hand Paulson is an experienced and intelligent finance guy. I would give him the benefit of the doubt over them.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:32AM
bess: you would hit them? If I ask nicely would you spank me too?
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:33AM
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&scp=1&sq=freddie+mac+clinton&st=nyt
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:34AM
@39 because the House republican plan centers around cutting capital gains taxes for assets that would have no capital gains in the first place. Who the fuck is creating this shit?
It also removes the incentive to sell at a capital loss to offset a gain.
Those guys are fucking clueless.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:40AM
The Democratic plan (which I hate too, better to let it all crash and burn and start anew) is not a blank check. It asks for accountability and gives taxpayers an equity stake in return for cash.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:49AM
@35...
I don't know if you read THE ENTIRE article that #24 linked to. But Clinton clearly spoke about the government providing money to endowments like American Dream Downpayment Fund and Habitat for Humanity. He also mentioned money for housing comming from tax credits and the Dept of Housing and Urban development. The article does not say that Clinton said "well, I think Freddie and Fannie should finance the whole lot of it".
Glad to see that you Republicans read. I guess you people read everything in the same way you read the bible: look at the words, but interpret them however you see fit. Buncha bible thumping morons you guys are.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 10:49AM
http://www.clayaiken.com/
Posted by whatelseisgoingon , Sep 26, 2008 10:49AM
@ 39... A check isn't blank if it is for 700 billion
Posted by mj , Sep 26, 2008 10:53AM
@39, the House Republicans' plan does nothing to restore liquidity to the mkt. Banks and other institutions are no longer able to borrow against this paper and it has metastisized on their balance sheets to the point where there is vitually no short-term liquidity right now. The House Repub plan has 2 parts. They think by turning the gov't into a giant monoline to insure the paper they can prop up the value of these assets, and then they would incentivize private capital to purchase the assets as the second part. But guaranteeing the bare minimum does little to open up the clog in the credit pipeline since it amounts to a trickle rather than a flow of cash to the companies that they would have to pay a premium for anyway, and doesn't make the assets much more appealing to private capital than the are now. Paulson's proposal means that a participating bank can taken a loss but come back and borrow against a book of assets that is smaller but less toxic
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 11:04AM
@48
Good. Have them come back after they have taken all the right downs.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 11:27AM
39 here: Thanks for the multiple explanations, they were very helpful (esp. 48). Agree that most congressmen are clueless (I worked on capitol hill for a few years before becoming a transaction cost) but wondered if it was a case of the blind pig finding an acorn.
Posted by guest , Sep 26, 2008 11:58AM
whatever we do, let's make sure we assign blame before we fix that problem. that is always the best way to fix things. in fact, let's enact a punishment before we enact a plan to fix things.
this whole thing made me want to puke before the politicos got involved. now i want to move to another country.
Posted by Harald , Sep 26, 2008 12:36PM
@5- that would be the true litmus test of how toxic this sludge is. If it's just a matter of liquidity then suspending the mark-to-market rule would solve this problem. But I and many others suspect otherwise
Posted by NotNasser , Sep 26, 2008 4:48PM
"Doesn't all this reinforce Glass-Steagal being repealed and the too big to fail argument. None of the big combined banks (C, BAC, JPM) have failed"
So which argument exactly are you talking about? One in favor of the repeal or against it? Did the repeal of G-S allow these firms to make themselves too big to fail? No. It just redirected how they could go about making themselves big.