Display:
I disagree.
Nothing in Paulson's past decisions or remarks suggests such an intent would be likely for him. I speculate that the language was added by members of congress who recognized what he did not- that the plan was dead on arrival as he conceived it- and that draconian action would eventually be necessary. They just gave him the tools to do it, when, not if, circumstances forced his hand.

--The US financial community is being dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.


Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Thu Oct 9th, 2008 at 03:38:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Indeed; 'our owning something for our money' was one of the several points that were forced into the bailout by the congress critters who condescended to the whiney masses who called and wrote complaining of the bailout. The last point that 'we' wanted (as long as 'we' were going to do this thing at all) of allowing judges to make changes to mortgages in threat of foreclosure, didn't make it.

You'll have noticed that McLame pitched a variation of this as as his idea in the debate the other night, making him the leader of the common man. One presumes that he didn't want it bad enough to twist the arms of those who prevented it, his 'afraid of socialism' rat-bastards.

Never underestimate their intelligence, always underestimate their knowledge.

Frank Delaney ~ Ireland

by siegestate (siegestate or beyondwarispeace.com) on Thu Oct 9th, 2008 at 07:10:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series