packsaddle Posted September 26, 2008 Share Posted September 26, 2008 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/business/26bailout.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin I have to tell you, I've never even heard of anything the like of this. Words are not adequate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwd-scouter Posted September 26, 2008 Share Posted September 26, 2008 Depending on which news channel, and in particular which news program, you watched yesterday the blowup was predicated by McCain and his political posturing. Or, the blowup was predicated by McCain charging in to save the day with his outstanding leadership and Country first sensibilities. Meanwhile, again depending on whom you listened to, Obama is clueless and proceeding ahead in his campaign with no regard for the American people. Or, Obama is proceeding ahead in his campaign and the debate tonight because folks in Washington are handling the situation and political posturing shouldn't play a part. Of course there's always the point that the President should be able to handle more than one thing at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beavah Posted September 26, 2008 Author Share Posted September 26, 2008 Yah, da media are useless. I was nearly furious last night flippin' from channel to channel. Here we're lookin' and da biggest socialist proposal since the new deal tryin' to be rammed through in two days by an incompetent executive. And da biggest bank failure ever on the same day! And all the media is yappin' about is petty presidential politics. I was even treated to an exasperatin' Sarah Palin / Katie Couric interview. Who cares? Da role of the 4th estate is to inform the public on matters of public interest, like the nature of the crisis and the details of the bailout proposal and da risks and benefits of those. Not to be People Magazine paparazzi tryin' to catch snapshots of interpersonal drama. B (This message has been edited by Beavah) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwd-scouter Posted September 26, 2008 Share Posted September 26, 2008 Re the Sarah Palin Interview: depending on which side of the fence you prefer, this exchange either made you cringe or made you proud: Sarah Palins foreign policy chat with Katie Couric: COURIC: Youve cited Alaskas proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that? PALIN: That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and on our other side, the land boundary that we have with Canada. It its funny that a comment like that was kind of made to cari I dont know, you know? Reporters COURIC: Mock? PALIN: Yeah, mocked, I guess thats the word, yeah. COURIC: Explain to me why that enhances your foreign policy credentials. PALIN: Well, it certainly does because our our next door neighbors are foreign countries. Theyre in the state that I am the executive of. And there in Russia COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations, for example, with the Russians? PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We we do its very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where where do they go? Its Alaska. Its just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to to our state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted September 26, 2008 Share Posted September 26, 2008 Da role of the 4th estate is to inform the public on matters of public interest, like the nature of the crisis and the details of the bailout proposal and da risks and benefits of those. Not to be People Magazine paparazzi tryin' to catch snapshots of interpersonal drama. Hate to tell you this, Beavah, but in our "capitalist" system the role of the Fourth Estate is to create a product that generates viewership/readership numbers that are then used to generate advertising revenues, which is what produces most of the profits for the shareholders of the media companies. That is why a large percentage of the "news" is People-magazine-type celebrity style garbage, or Hannity arguing with Colmes, or O'Reilly bloviating, or Geraldo clowning around. They figure out what people (meaning, must of us out here in the country) want to see, and they give it to us. You and me and probably most people on this forum are in the minority, because we actually want to know the important stuff that is going on, and why. We are not where the big numbers are -- the big numbers are in the drivel that makes up much of the news. Now, I believe that most journalists are in the business because they actually want to tell people the important stuff that is going on, and why. But that is not necessarily what they are getting paid to do. Any real news that gets produced, especially by the big media companies, is just an accidental byproduct of the system. I just read what I wrote, and gosh, have I really become that cynical in my old age?? Maybe not quite that bad, but I'm getting there. Unfortunately, I think that what I have written is fundamentally correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoutingagain Posted September 26, 2008 Share Posted September 26, 2008 The more I read, hear, see about this fiasco the more I become convinced we're better off with the government staying out of it and letting the chips fall where they may. I'm convinced anything the government would do as run by the current bunch of yahoos from either party would mess things up even more than what the natural market reactions will be. The Dow was up over 1% today. No one can tell me the markets up because they have confidence in any government plan. It's up because collectively investors are seeing the entire sky won't fall, the sun will come up tomorrow, while many have lost money, many others wake up and go to work, pay their bills and life goes on. I'm growing convinced this is a "crisis" because rich people with access to the powers that be in Washington from either party are losing their jobs and money and want someone to bail them out. It wasn't a crisis when people were losing their homes. In the last 8 years we've lost tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs in this country representing billions maybe trillions of dollars in payrolls. That wasn't a crisis. Those people were told, tough luck. Suck it up. Find something else to do. Flip burgers or something. They didn't have the option of calling their congressman, senator, president and saying can you help me out here. I have no problem admitting I'm more cynical now than I think I've ever been. SA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now