Debates and Bailouts
what's in it for you?
2008-09-30
By DeAngelo Starnes

I hope this past week inspired you to become more involved in the political process.  If not, count yourself as an Apathetic, which ain’t a compliment.  Not here to insult but to agitate your involvement.  Which is necessary because this thing ain’t moving in the direction that benefits you and me, unless you belong to the One Percent and read this space for amusement.

First, let’s examine the debate between McCain and Obama:

The debate actually was really ugly.  McCain was rude.  He never spoke to Obama and he addressed him in a condescending manner.  He never looked in Obama’s direction even though Obama directed his remarks towards him.  Body language is important and McCain’s was horrible.  Obama beat McCain so bad it reminded me of a boxer getting pummeled on the ropes with the ref having to step in, which is what Jim Lehrer did more than once.

McCain relied on tired clichés: POW, Reagan, and cutting spending.  “Cutting spending” is code that says reduce governmental spending on the things that matter to the middle and poverty classes but is silent on the massive spending we do on the military and Wall Street.  As Obama said, the problem with a spending freeze is attacking the problem with a hatchet when what you need is a scalpel.  Damn right.  Figure out where we’re wasting money and where the money is well spent.

Example: McCain made a great point when he said we need to reduce or eliminate earmarks because earmarks corrupt people.  Amen.  But Obama said eliminating earmarks and supporting tax policies that only benefit those who are already doing well isn’t enough to pull us out of this rut.  He said that the Congress approved $18 billion in earmarks but illuminated the fact that McCain supports $300 billion in tax cuts to big business.  This is where Obama needs to press the attack.  Use McCain’s “experience” against him.  McCain’s experience includes a track record of supporting deregulation, voting against veteran’s benefits, and the Keating Five.  Barack is too busy trying to be a nice guy.  Gore and Kerry tried that approach, but lost in a race that was so close that it allowed the election to be stolen.  Sad truth is McCain has no economic plan that would help the majority of us, but Obama is not pressing the issue hard enough to make the choice clear.   

Another example: money we’re spending on the Invasion better known as the Iraq war: We don’t need a bailout if we stop spending money in Iraq and Afghanistan (Afghanistan and the need to attack Pakistan is where I part company with Barack).  Nevertheless, on this issue, Obama hit this one out of the park in touching all bases: the cost in terms of money, the cost in terms of lives, whether we should have even gone in, and the fact that the original mission was getting bin Laden, which we haven’t.  And the cold fact is we are so far away from the original mission and keep addressing issues that wouldn’t be issues if we weren’t in Iraq in the first place.  McCain wants to debate the success of the surge, which isn’t an issue.  Like Obama said in what had to be scored as a knockdown, McCain acts as if the invasion started in 2007. 

But that’s the debate.  On to the bailout.  I hate to quibble with my main man, Eric Easter, but I’m not quite sure this bailout is necessary.  If $700 billion is the solution, we’ve had problems for a long time.  But that’s not what we heard.  And to me, you can’t grovel for that amount of money without having a series of conversations about the dire position the economy is in.  I know there’s a problem.  Most of you know there’s a problem.  But that’s not what we’ve been told.  So if you tell me “the fundamentals of the economy are strong” one minute but need $700 billion a minute later, you got some ‘splaining to do.

And that’s the problem.  There is a dearth of explanation.  We keep hearing there’s a cliff we’re about to drive over.  Last week, a three-page proposal that committed $700 billion to the sole discretion of the Treasury Secretary became a 120-page bill that got voted on with no hearings or debate.  The former chairman of Goldman Sachs asked for Super Bowl-level cash with no questions asked.  And the cash is our money but there are no protections for us.  A classic conflict of interest problem is posed as a solution.  You should be pissed off -- which we must be because the bailout got rejected.

McCain is an ass.  His statement that Obama injected “partisanship” into the process is belied by what happened.  Republican House members rejected this thing.  Babbling lies will eventually grind his candidacy into the ground.  The bill was the Patriot Act Redux.  Thank God the scam wasn’t handed over to the Administration.

To the extent we need this bill, we need help for the people.  If the bill does not contain that, it deserved the beat down it got.

My question is why are we continually subjected to fear mongering?  It worked before, but I’m glad we’re beginning to use our brains because that’s the only way we’re going to get out of this mess.

DeAngelo Starnes is a writer and attorney living in Denver. He is a regular contributor to ebonyjet.com.