Explaining the root cause of the Bush Doctrine, a recent study showed that "people with strongly conservative views were three times more fearful than staunch liberals."
That sure explains a lot—and why, I think, John McCain initially asked to cancel this Friday's presidential debate, and why they are trying to cancel the vice presidential debate.
Commentary on Politics and the Culture Wars from Outside the Beltway
Friday, September 26, 2008
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Burn, Baby, Burn
I understand the desire for the proposed $700 million bailout of financial institutions as a necessary safety net for the overall health of the national economy. However, I’ve changed my mind about this bailout for the following reasons:
This crisis is the result of an Administration and an ideology that believes that government should stay out of the way of business, that “government is the problem and not the solution,” and that the market should be allowed to take care of itself.
As such, I do not see why these financial institutions merit being saved when the crisis they are experiencing is the result of their own bad judgment and greed. It seems rather hypocritical to ask the government to stay out of business, then to turn to them for help when they get into trouble. Isn’t such weeding out simply an example of market forces at work?
While I somewhat agreed with the general argument that many homeowners who got themselves into mortgage trouble by overextending themselves and by making bad decisions did not deserve to be bailed out, it follows that the financial institutions who enabled those homeowners and were as much part of the problem deserve no assistance or sympathy as well.
This is cronyism at its worst. These financial institutions have always resented government intrusion into their business and many of the people in this field have resented government intervention programs for the disadvantaged. I say it is time to let these institutions burn down to the ground and let new more prudent ones take their place with the lessons learned.
And if such a bailout is to occur, I would expect the senior CEOs and managers of these institutions either to be fired or, at the least, expect them to be subject to a drastic reduction in compensation, and a loss of property and income. Given the obscene wealth and arrogance these people have demonstrated over the years, it is time for Wall Street to experience the same tangible pain as their victims on Main Street if they expect to beg the American people for their hard earned money to rescue them from their own greed and fiscal mismanagement.
This crisis is the result of an Administration and an ideology that believes that government should stay out of the way of business, that “government is the problem and not the solution,” and that the market should be allowed to take care of itself.
As such, I do not see why these financial institutions merit being saved when the crisis they are experiencing is the result of their own bad judgment and greed. It seems rather hypocritical to ask the government to stay out of business, then to turn to them for help when they get into trouble. Isn’t such weeding out simply an example of market forces at work?
While I somewhat agreed with the general argument that many homeowners who got themselves into mortgage trouble by overextending themselves and by making bad decisions did not deserve to be bailed out, it follows that the financial institutions who enabled those homeowners and were as much part of the problem deserve no assistance or sympathy as well.
This is cronyism at its worst. These financial institutions have always resented government intrusion into their business and many of the people in this field have resented government intervention programs for the disadvantaged. I say it is time to let these institutions burn down to the ground and let new more prudent ones take their place with the lessons learned.
And if such a bailout is to occur, I would expect the senior CEOs and managers of these institutions either to be fired or, at the least, expect them to be subject to a drastic reduction in compensation, and a loss of property and income. Given the obscene wealth and arrogance these people have demonstrated over the years, it is time for Wall Street to experience the same tangible pain as their victims on Main Street if they expect to beg the American people for their hard earned money to rescue them from their own greed and fiscal mismanagement.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Fit for the Presidency?
In my view, the issue isn’t so much whether GOP presidential candidate John McCain’s choice for vice president, Sarah Palin, is qualified to be president in the event that McCain, as president, would for some reason be unable to serve—but rather what Palin’s selection says about the judgment of McCain.
All indications state that McCain’s choice was made on the cuff and impulsively, with little vetting or consideration. Cynical reasons aside, while McCain is known for being his own man and often shooting from the hip, one must wonder whether such recklessness—particularly given the past 8 years—is what this country needs in this moment in history.
Even leading, thoughtful conservatives have questioned McCain’s suitability for the job….
All indications state that McCain’s choice was made on the cuff and impulsively, with little vetting or consideration. Cynical reasons aside, while McCain is known for being his own man and often shooting from the hip, one must wonder whether such recklessness—particularly given the past 8 years—is what this country needs in this moment in history.
Even leading, thoughtful conservatives have questioned McCain’s suitability for the job….
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)