A DU Bail-out Poll: Where do you stand?

[debbierlus]

I am curious as there seems to be some tepid support and some out & out anger.

Where do you fall? Now, this is for the bail-out as written today.

(the Bernie Sanders amendment is basically a plan to have the wealthy (top 5%) pay for the bail-out, just wanted to note since it comes up in poll options).

[debbierlus]

1. General opposition thus far ...I thought there was a tad bit more support

I am glad to be wrong

[scarletwoman]

5. The reason it seems like there's more support, is because the authoritarians among us

are the ones busily making all the pro-bailout posts and telling everyone else they're wrong if they disagree.

sw

[debbierlus]

6. From what I am reading and watching, it seems the country is UNITED

Against these bail-outs...

Across party lines - I can't remember the last time I felt the same way on an issue as a Republican.

[scarletwoman]

8. Most reports are saying there's between a 100:1 to 200:1 margin AGAINST it.

I emailed and called my Congressman & Senators all last week protesting this thing, and I'll do it again this week.

It's pretty amazing to me, are they really willing to piss off THAT many voters in this country?

sw

[Two Americas]

10. yes

The truth that a small number of people are working so hard to distract us from and keep us from seeing, is that we have much more in common with the average Republican voter than we do with the handful of domineering and aggressive people who are controlling the Democratic party and liberalism, everywhere and at all levels. I think we are being conned, by "our own" or those who claim to be or have convinced us that they are "our own."

Think of what the Republican leaders are doing to mislead and lie to their supporters. We can easily see that, since we are looking from the outside. But it should now be obvious after the events of the last few days that we are being victimized and fooled in almost exactly the same way; we are subject to exactly the same bullying and dishonest tactics.

All of these arguments that "Democrats" have been using to defend the bailout, if they were coming from Republicans, we would reject them immediately. We put up with a ton of grief, because we think it is coming from those who are on our side. But strip off the label - "Democrat" or "liberal" or "progressive" - and just focus on the message, or imagine that you are hearing it from someone you know to be a Republican and you will experience it completely differently.

Now, here is where it gets interesting - when partisan labels and clues are stripped off of political questions, when surveyed 70% or more of the general public support New Deal type Left wing political positions - the very things that a handful of our "friends" among us are so aggressively trying to destroy!

[Two Americas]

9. yes

Not that this would be all that important by itself, however there is a connection to the national political scene, and also something even more important.

First, the same thing is happening nationally. A relatively small group of people is driving and controlling the national political debate. Some are "liberal" and some are "conservative" but that is misleading, because the two groups have more in common than they don't. We have two wings of the party of the haves, and they are waging all out war against the have-nots.

The other important thing, is that the ends and the means are the same for them. They are promoting a program of national bullying, and they use bullying to promote it. That means that it is all the same battle, here or at the market, in the halls of Congress or at the local party HQ. The battle is everywhere.

That means that standing up to bullies anywhere, even here, helps us all stand up to bullies everywhere. It also means that caving to bullies anywhere strengthens them everywhere.

The haves, and their defenders and promoters, are bullying the have-nots and those trying to defend them. That explains what is happening. Liberal versus conservative or Democrat versus Republican doesn't explain what is happening.

[girl gone mad]

12. I think at least some of them are working for..

banks and/or as lobbyists.

That's just my opinion, based on dialogue with them.

[2Design]

2. kick n/t

[ColbertWatcher]

3. +1 for Sanders! k+r, n/t

[DJ13]

4. I voted for the top choice

But whats not being said by anyone (MSM or anywhere else as far as I've seen) is that, yes it IS a heist, but the wealthy have the capacity to tank the economy if they dont get their bribe.

Its really economic terrorism on a scale that even the Russian mob wouldnt dare try.

[Zynx]

7. I oppose the Paulson plan as it was written. I do support a variant strongly.

The financial system is in peril and those who will get hurt the worst aren't the large investors.

[kiva]

11. Why does DU need to be bailed out? What did Skinner do,

invest all of our donations in the stock market?

[rpannier]

13. He had been buying up shares of AIG and investing with Lehman Brothers

I also heard he's been investing in grease futures.

[scarletwoman]

14. Pork belly futures -- and then he tried to put lipstick on them. (nt)

[intheflow]

15. Seems to me if the private banking industry was bankrupt by the banking execs,

while those execs were banking some serious ching, they can reinvest in their own brilliance and save themselves.

[Hidden Stillness]

16. This is the Straw That Woke the American People Up

I believe the torrent of anger across the country, against this thing, comes about because on issue after issue, no matter how desperate it gets, we have been hearing, "Oh, but we simply cannot interfere with the sacred markets, as we define them, just to appease you little people and your debts..." When gas and oil prices shot up incredibly high, for no reason, unrelated to demand (which is down), or the season, or weather, etc., even when proved to be speculators bidding against each other and driving the prices up, and refiners taking it off the market to drive prices up, they would not act: Bush, "I can't wave a magic wand," etc., will not interfere with the "free"markets, etc. When people could not afford to heat their homes during Winter and some froze to death, they would not force prices down in the case of a dire need, "will not interfere with the markets," etc. No excess-profits tax on corporations, (once common), no price-freezes, (once common). As insurance rates have become merely price gouges themselves, and increasingly reduced coverage, penalties, fees, unrelated to anything, "we will not interfere with the markets," etc. Pharmaceutical prices are exploding, hundreds of times over, and people die because they cannot buy needed drugs--yet, "we will not interfere with the markets..."

Even a thing like the totally unecessary conversion-to-digital-TV, which was forced on people, then given this disgusting "framing" treatment, like, this will be good for US, (they are forcing this huge commercial product-buy "because the picture is better"?), shows how completely corporate-lobbyist-oriented they are. Now poor people who can't even pay their bills are saddled with having to spent limited funds on this damn techno-add-on, and install it, an item they actually have no use for, except that it was interfered and forced on them. Congress, etc., have no interest as to how much of a hardship this is for many people.

As for the huge fear that this or that hedge-fund may go under--whole industries, sectors of the economy, notably union-level manufacturing jobs, have completely collapsed or moved elsewhere, leaving people destitute, and there has been no action at all.

We will not help you with this, it may affect a "market," we will not help you with that, it may affect a "market," yet all of a sudden, they JUMP to bail out a worldwide network of investment banks, with no new regulation, no plan, no prosecutions or even investigation, on crimes committed, and no way to monitor the results. There have been some great comments on the floor of the House by Marcy Kaptur, Dennis Kucinich, both Ohio, and Brad Sherman of Calif., on how there are no reforms, it will be impossible to even trace the profit activities of these split-up, offshored entitiies that hide their dealings under series after series of front-corporations. This will be a God-damned nightmare to try to "control," and of course, it will not be. The assets of the American people have been totally thrown away, with no benefit, then claimed that this "helps" or "saves" US. I have even heard assholes on the corporate media--which of course, completely supports it--"reassuring" us that now "we will not be foreclosed," "our" assets are safe. What are they talking about? How does this pay the mortgages, debts, etc., of anyone other that the speculators? It is unrelated; this gives no money to any of us!

When the Roosevelt Admin, encountered corruption, insider trading, etc., during the Depression, the crooks were not "bailed out," they were prosecuted, new laws and regulations passed, the Securities and Exchange Commission invented, and the savings of US, in ordinary banks, were insured. All of a sudden, after all the neglect of us--even Katrina/Rita victims were ignored--they leap to steal our tax money to pay for the crimes (which they will not regulate or prosecute), of the firms they hope to join as lobbyists after their pseudo"political" careers are over.

[johnaries]

17. Against it in principle, but it is necessary.

The system needs to be fixed by a return to caveat vendor consumer protections with oversight and a return to Keynesian (bottom up) economics. But we can't do that if the whole thing collapses first. So, we must do something to save the system (and ourselves) before we can fix it.