DISQUS

AMERICAblog: Bailout feeds oil increase, dollar decrease

  • tbhull · 1 year ago
    Whipsaw indicating someone appears to have the balls of the world economy in a sling. Hopefully oil prices will back off dramatically tomorrow. Otherwise, not good.
  • tlsintx · 1 year ago
    OT - but the freepers are still freeping the PBS polls...

    http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/...
  • An_American_Karol · 1 year ago
    tisintx, rigging a poll is not going to help her win.
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 1 year ago
    PBS and others need to learn not to do unscientific online polls. i'd be embarrassed.
  • KarenMrsLloydRichards · 1 year ago
    Somewhere, in an undisclosed location, upon receipt of this news, Vice President Dick Cheney responded with a twitch of his giant testicles...
  • Wild_Weasel · 1 year ago
    Socialize losses.

    Privatize gains.

    Hmmmmmmm . . .
  • Andrew · 1 year ago
    Todays financial gyrations are really very easy to understand, but how will our representatives handle it? If the jump in both gold and oil which are hedges against inflation go as high as they did today with just the hint that Congress is going to bailout banks for a paultry 700 Billion, where do you think prices are going to go when the actual figure for the bailout comes closer to TWO TRILLION dollars and that doesn't even take into account the 5.2 Trillion we're on the hook for for the ultimate bailout of Freddie and Fannie.
    Let your conscience be your guide when you go to the polls to vote this November. If your rep'sells you out, regardless of party, VOTE THEM OUT!
  • lucky hussein · 1 year ago
    don't forget we have a 9 trillion national debt also - ouch!
  • Busboy · 1 year ago
    I'd be amazed if gold doesn't go to $2000/oz. Right now it doesn't look like any kind of bailout is possible. Government has no business having it's hands on the wallet of semigov't corporations like Fanie mae. Most of us can stand the hit. Just let them go under and never let the gov't strong arm mortgage companies to lend money to deadbeats again........
  • mikep · 1 year ago
    I think it's already over 10 trillion, and that's before the bailout. But hey, what's a trillion here and there. It's only money.
  • tbhull · 1 year ago
    Dems voting for the bailout detract from Obama's chances at the White House.
  • interlude · 1 year ago
    NR conservative endorses Obama, blasts Neo-Cons

    http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/09/form...
  • nsr · 1 year ago
    The reverse Midas touch strikes again. Afghanistan, Iraq, Katrina, education, "helping America vote", Russia, "homeland security", now Wall Street. A few people get rich and everyone else gets screwed. At least Bush is consistent.
  • tbhull · 1 year ago
    Aside for the bailout being in so many way, dems supporting it could very well usher the corpse McCain into office and help Congression repubs as per TPM links: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

    If the current feckless sissy bicth dems approve any form of bailout they will further confirm that they are an elite bunch of limousine transported gaggle of fops and cowards that could imperil the best and most honest candidate the dems have had in generations.
  • tbhull · 1 year ago
    being wrong in so many ways ...
  • Clatech · 1 year ago
    Why wait for that promotion, just start at the top!


    Barrack Obama started campaigning for President only months after being elected senator. This is representative of our �I want mine now!� culture. This is exactly why tax payers are bailing out greedy stock traders to the tune of $700,000,000,000. Do we really want someone who believes in his untimely entitlement in the White House?
  • Steve_in_CNJ · 1 year ago
    that's rich. let's elect somebody who doesn't want to be president. maybe you should run. but then that would mean you did want to be president. help me out here.
  • petefitSD · 1 year ago
    Anyone who is contradicting 26 years of their official record in an effort to win the white house loses all legitimacy as far as I'm concerned.

    Furthermore the legitimacy of the presidential electoral process was destroyed by Fl in 2000 and Ohio in 2004; right now it's no more than a 'dog and pony show' popularity contest. We all know that both parties are controlled by corporate interests anyway so this whole electoral process is a sham to make us feel like we have a voice...guess what, we don't.

    Madison was correct in Fed 51--"Ambition must be made to counteract ambition" and Jefferson was right to say that we need a revolution every 200 years to keep republican (not the party) democracy alive.

    By my account we are about 11 years overdue...
  • petefitSD · 1 year ago
    As opposed to someone who has run for president once before and is now contradicting and lying about 26 years of his record in the US Senate? Our first mba/ceo president has wrought this mess so it makes sense to let a community organizer from the south side of chicago have a crack at it. At this point I'd prefer Ralph Nader or (God help me) Bob Barr before we put another republican administration in our white house.
  • OneManComotion · 1 year ago
    if you borrowed a million dollars and paid back that loan at $1,000/day you would pay that loan in about 3 years. Now if you borrowed one TRILLION dollars and paid me back at the same rate of $1,000/day it would take you 300,000 thousand years.


    300,000 years!!!!!!!!!!!

    Is anyone out there getting this?