Weber and Armey pro and con on the bailout

Paul Nachman sends a selection of recent articles on the bailout and other subjects:

Vin Weber on the financial decision (interesting historical viewpoint) and why he would have voted for it. Of course he doesn’t say anything that counters someone’s (your?) point that if the Repubs had opposed Bush when so often warranted, things would be vastly better now.

Dick Armey on why he was against it, including:

Granting the Treasury broad authority to buy troubled assets from private entities poses a significant threat to taxpayers and fundamentally alters the relationship between the private economy and the federal government. Despite the sweeping breadth of the proposed bailout, there is virtually nothing in the bill that addresses the underlying problems that created the housing bubble and the oversized and over-leveraged financial services sector that grew with it. Taxpayers have become Wall Street’s newest financier, with little more than a promise—and a report to Congress on “regulatory modernization”—that Congress will not let this happen again.

Regarding the promise of “Never again,” just consider the 1986 amnesty for “reassurance.”

And Armey does lay a significant fraction of the blame on affirmative-action mortgages.

Astonishing: Accountability in a public school system! Teachers being fired on the basis of only (strong) circumstantial evidence.

View 2-minute video over on right side.

If we were a serious country, snipers would be taking out the rock throwers. (But if we were a serious country, it would never have deteriorated to this.)

What is it with the Jews? By Dennis Prager

Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 30, 2008 01:14 PM | Send