Obama wants a bigger bailout?

[Jeremy]

I just saw a little piece on the news about the bailout and there was a clip of Obama talking about how teachers should get money too. lol wtf? he was like "not only bankers, but teachers, and" etc

the crowd cheered, so he got what he wanted

I'm wondering where he'll get that money to hand out. This guy is so out of touch with reality it makes me fear for my life that he'll be our next president. I'd rather have Bush

[dsentell]

I hear ya.

Bush is awful, but at least he is not a total and complete socialist like Obama.

[Otter Mii-kun]

How much more money must the Federal government keep spending on schools? Federal spending could rise several-fold next year and it STILL won't be enough!

[cheapseats]

TWICE during the quote-unquote debate, Barack Obama declined to answer the pointed question as to WHICH things will NECESSARILY have to go on a back burner in light of what both sides of the public trough agree is a crisis.

If Obama is to win, America and the market will be better served by Republican-controlled houses. Conversely, if McCain is to win, America will be better served by a Democratic-controlled Congress. It being abundantly clear that neither one knows what he's doing economically, gridlock is better than tailspin. It's a sure bet that neither will the genesis of an economic upswing.

In light of BOTH candidates having morphed since "prevailing" in the primaries, and since BOTH candidates displayed cowardice unbecoming an officer by abstaining on a telling vote, it seems to me that the People might want to file a class-action suit per state, demanding the right to insert a standardized WRITE IN choice on every ballot. Voting consumers are ALL about choice.

Put judges on the spot.

Not least because the root of the root of our trouble is Big Law.

[Jeremy]

TWICE during the quote-unquote debate, Barack Obama declined to answer the pointed question as to WHICH things will NECESSARILY have to go on a back burner in light of what both sides of the public trough agree is a crisis.

If Obama is to win, America and the market will be better served by Republican-controlled houses. Conversely, if McCain is to win, America will be better served by a Democratic-controlled Congress. It being abundantly clear that neither one knows what he's doing economically, gridlock is better than tailspin. It's a sure bet that neither will the genesis of an economic upswing.

In light of BOTH candidates having morphed since "prevailing" in the primaries, and since BOTH candidates displayed cowardice unbecoming an officer by abstaining on a telling vote, it seems to me that the People might want to file a class-action suit per state, demanding the right to insert a standardized WRITE IN choice on every ballot. Voting consumers are ALL about choice.

Put judges on the spot.

Not least because the root of the root of our trouble is Big Law.

Most of McCain's friends are dems though

[cheapseats]

Most of McCain's friends are dems though

I sense that John McCain misidentifies perfunctory regard for his military service as friendship. Whereas HE thinks he has friends on both sides of the Grand Canyon, I think he is well liked on neither side. The devil you know versus the devil you don't know.

Democrats are less likely to get swept up (again) in imperialistic passions. They'll be too busy fighting him to direct all that money toward THEIR preferred people.

More efficient now and more effective later than trying to orchestrate a Congress at odds with a President, I think, would be to galvanize public passion for a meaningful alternative ticket.

In view of all the money we have ALREADY been throwing away with both hands, and now all the money that Seven-Hundred-Million-Dollar Paulson proposes to funnel to his favorites, the cost of printing new ballots is chickenfeed.