Why is the media focusing on blaming someone for failure to pass the bailout yesterday? Was it a good plan?

[BekindtoAnimals22]

Why doesn't the media focus on the merits and drawbacks of the plan that was presented rather than who is at fault for its failure to pass. If it was a bad bill, it shouldn't be passed. Was it a good bill or wasn't it? Would it result in protections for tax payers or was it a band aid that will have to be replaced in 6 months?

[mr p]

any bailout plan is a bad one

[fuk y]

both sides of the isle put bad things in the bill and thank god it got rejected it needs a re write.

[huckleberryjay]

No it was a very bad plan and the republicans who held out are heroes to their voters for doing so. They have learned that their president is a snake and liar and needs to be spot checked every walk of the way.

[Shriekingfield985]

Scare tactics, Its media manipulation, they're forcing us to accept

[Andrew M]

Because media folks are rich and invested in Wall Street. They want everyone to think that investment banks and stock prices falling off a cliff will be bad for everyone, so we can bail THEM and Wall Street out.

It might be good, but I haven't seen it explained how this will benefit the average person more than some other plan. Isn't this the "invisible" hand, doing what it's supposed to do?

[tsness]

To answer your second question first NO it was not a good plan. They are still trying to throw money at the top to fix the problem when they need to start at the base and work their way up. Below I have added text from somewhere else that have found very interesting and he said to pass it on but basically it states give the money to the people who are going to have to pay for it any way and let it go from there. Could fix over 90% of what is wrong with the economy with this plan but CEOs and bigwigs wouldn't make out.

Here is the info that I found very interesting and a whole lot less expensive, I mean we are going to have to be the ones to foot the bill anyway.

Here's an idea that I read today and it makes a lot of sense. But
I'm sure there's something I'm missing or something that wouldn't
work, I don't know? Read this and tell me what you think? Sorry,
it's pretty long...

Why can't the President think of this???

Now here's a bail out
plan that works!

I'm against the $85,000,000, 000.00 bailout of AIG.

Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000, 000 to America in 'We
Deserve It Dividend'.

To make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000
bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+.

Our population is about 301,000,000 ± counting every man, woman
and child. So 200,000,000 might b e a fair stab at adults 18 and up..

So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billon that equals
$425,00000.

My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a
'We Deserve It Dividend'.

Of course, it would NOT be tax free.

So let's assume a tax rate of 30%.

Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes.

That sends $25,500,000, 000 right back to Uncle Sam.

But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket.

A husband and wife has $595,000.00.

What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.
00 in your family?

Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved.

Repay college loans - what a great boost to new grads

Put away money for college - it'll be there

Save in a bank - create money to loan to entrepreneurs.

Buy a new car - create jobs

Invest in the market - capital drives growth

Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care improves

Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks
who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company
that is cutting back. And of course, for those serving in our Armed
Forces.

If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really do it...instead
of trickling out
a puny $1000.
00 ( 'vote buy' ) economic incentive that is being proposed
by one of our candidates for President.

If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's bail out every
adult U S Citizen 18+!

As for AIG - liquidate it.

Sell off its parts.

Let American General go back to being American General.

Sell off the real estate.

Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.

Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't.

Sure it's a crazy idea that can 'never work.
'

But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party!

How do you spell Economic Boom?

I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion
'We Deserve It Dividend' more than I do the geniuses at AIG or in
Washington DC.

And remember, this plan only really costs $59.
5 Billion because
$25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam.

Ahhh...I feel so much better getting that off my chest.

[justgoodfolk]

Because the corperate media is not objective but defends big business and the financial aristocracy.Not a good plan.

As for the media, the pretense of objective reporting was cast aside. Television news announcers voiced the anger and concern of the major financial interests and sought to apportion blame for what was universally presented as the irrational defeat of an indispensable measure.
The bailout proposal was rejected by a vote of 228 to 205, with 60 percent of the House Democrats voting for it and 67 percent of the House Republicans voting against.
Once again, the Democrats emerged as the most consistent and loyal defenders of Wall Street’s interests.
Obama delivered a speech Monday calling for the plan’s approval. He echoed the remarks of Bush, delivered hours earlier on the White House lawn, aimed at blackmailing the American people into supporting the plan. The bailout, he declared, is “our best and only way to prevent an economic catastrophe.”

Neither Obama nor anyone else, however, was able to explain how this proposal would benefit the American people. On the contrary, he has already admitted that its passage will force the rescinding of the paltry promises he has made in his election campaign and necessitate greater fiscal discipline. This will inevitably translate into an attack on essential social programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
After the bill was voted down, Obama delayed making a statement until he could consult with Paulson. Then he insisted that the proposal was “required for us to stabilize the markets.” He continued: “Democrats and Republicans in Washington have a responsibility to make sure an emergency rescue package is put forward that can at least stop the immediate problems that we have.”
For his part, McCain issued no immediate statement, while a campaign aide echoed the ludicrous claim of the Republican House leadership that the measure’s defeat was a response to a partisan attack in the remarks of Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi before the vote was taken.

The major congressional opposition to the bailout came from the most right-wing sections of the Republican Party, who cast the attempt to effect a vast transfer of public resources to the wealthiest interests in the country as “socialism.”
Representative Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan went so far as to invoke the October 1917 Revolution in Russia, saying that the bailout plan recalled the Bolshevik slogan of “bread, peace and land.”
This right-wing ideology is infused in many cases with racist overtones, scapegoating minority homebuyers, who were disproportionately victimized by subprime mortgages, for the crisis created by Wall Street’s parasitism.
In the end, the program of these opponents of the bailout is one of even more tax cuts for the rich and the destruction of what little remains of a social safety net in America, transferring all public monies to big business, albeit by a different route.
If these imbecilic demagogues are able to exploit the popular opposition that exists to the bailout, it is only because the leadership of the Democratic Party is so solidly unified behind the interests of finance capital and so indifferent to the concerns of the masses of working people. They are utterly incapable of offering the slightest substantive alternative to the demands of Wall Street.
A way out of the crisis—the deepest to confront American and world capitalism since the Great Depression of the 1930s—requires a rejection not only of the bailout, but of the entire framework in which the debate in Washington is being conducted.
The capitalist system has failed, and there is no reason to doubt the warnings from Bush, Paulson, Obama and others that it is preparing a social catastrophe.
Finding an answer to this crisis begins with asking the question: Who is to pay for it? Whatever their tactical differences on the bailout, the answer of the Democrats and Republicans is clear: Working people must give up their jobs, living standards and social interests in order to rescue the financial parasites who created the disaster.
The working class must put forward its own solution. The banks and major financial institutions which now threaten to drag down the economy and plunge millions into poverty must be nationalized, without compensation to their executives and big shareholders.
Those directly responsible for this crisis, the Wall Street executives who oversaw fraudulent forms of financial manipulation that generated multi-million-dollar compensation packages for themselves, must be held accountable. Their assets should be confiscated and they themselves should be subject to criminal prosecution.