Ron Paul Discusses the Housing Bailout Bill on FoxNews

[TheEngineer]

Check out http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=2568583&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com . Dr. Paul discusses his opposition to the bailout bill.

While this bill is often referred to in the news as a “$25 billion” plan, the final amount will likely be much, much higher. The Treasury’s previously limited $2.5 billion line of credit to Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac, which in 2001 Ron Paul proposed be abolished, has instead been increased to unlimited.

And, please digg at http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Ron_Paul_Discusses_the_Housing_Bailout_Bill_on_Fox News .

[IPSecure]

Would Dr. Paul take Responsibility...?

[maqsur]

Dr. Paul is against the bailout, which furthur depreciates the dollar and will lead to a worse outcome; yet, he is asked if he will take responsibility if the market crashes. What a dumb question to ask! So now the economic calamity waiting to happen is the fault of those who are trying to stop it? I guess we should just keep bailing out everyone until the government owns everything, and the dollar is worth nothing, and we have a disaster. I have to hand it to Dr. Paul and those of like mind for seeing the writing on the wall, and trying to bring about a smaller correction now, rather than wait until disaster strikes.

[TheEngineer]

Please remember to digg at http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Ron_Paul_Discusses_the_Housing_Bailout_Bill_on_Fox News . Thanks! :D

[CUnknown]

Dr. Paul is against the bailout, which further depreciates the dollar and will lead to a worse outcome; yet, he is asked if he will take responsibility if the market crashes. What a dumb question to ask! So now the economic calamity waiting to happen is the fault of those who are trying to stop it?

Well, I don't think it was so much a dumb question to ask as an unfair one. I think Dr. Paul did a good job of letting people know why it was unfair -- it wasn't his fault! He didn't vote for any of that crap Congress and the Fed were doing previously.

But, as far as the short term situation, the host sort of had a point. It's an unfair question, but it's sort of true ... without this bailout, the economy is doomed, even in the short run. It's gotten to the point where it is so sick that it needs constant drugs, like Dr. Paul puts it, to make it feel better. I'm not saying he should have voted for it. If more people voted like he does, we would have never gotten into this situation. But, in a short-term, narrow-minded way, there is kind of a point to it.

What we need to do, is have the bailout, but then never ever do it again. But, that would never happen, of course. One bailout makes them more likely to just repeat the same mistakes, even if the economy manages to survive through some miracle. And if they repeat the same mistakes, Congress has shown that there will always be another bailout ready. Just bad policy.

[idiom]

"Yes I would take responsibility for the hardship and eventual recovery if this bill had not been passed. As it stands this bill may bankrupt our country and we may not see a recovery in our lifetimes. Who will take responsibility for that now?"

but yeah. dodgy ass question.