A lot of words have been spilled on the current MOAB legislation, opinions flying in all directions like shrapnel, diarists running haphazardly for cover and comments flying on al sides of the debate.
So, like the rational person I am, I thought I'd wade into the fray and receive my fair share of flesh-wounds on the subject, since I am in fact a glutton for punishment and I wanted to test the waters (to mix my metaphors hopelessly).
Join me over the fold and dip those pens in your inkpots...
There seem to be an almost overwhelming number of diaries on the Bailout, more, perhaps, even than (gasp) Sarah Palin. Conspiracy Theorists, hardline, hand-wringing, fearful, bullish, bold, ideological cluster-bombing on a grand scale. From the ones I have read I have put together a general view of the average Kossack, as follows:
Obama cannot under any circumstance vote for Paulson's proposal.
Obama will probably roll over as he did on FISA.
Obama will, therefore, pay the electoral price come november.
We should do nothing.
We should do something.
We cannot allow the economy to tank utterly.
We should let Wall Strteet tank utterly.
Judging from this, it seems to me likely that people are a little confused, perhaps justifiably, considering the awesomely bad news and the complex nature of this situation.
But let's sit back fr a little bit here and try and examine this carefully. Yes, it's a given that the economy is tanking and the chickens are coming home to roost, but nowhere have I seen the slightest indication from the Obama camp that the candidate is even considering approving Paulson's Blank-Check MOAB. Nowhere. Not a comment, opinion, slip-of-the-tongue or single word has suggested that this is the case.
Yes, the GOOPs seem hell-bent on tarring the Dems if the Bailout happens, but the electorate is a little more sophisticated, it seems to me; they weren't taken in by McCain's "if only Obama had joined me in townhalls, the campaign wouldn't have gone negative" comment, and I don't think they'll buy the "Dems voted for a bailout that we Republicans loathed, even though we suggested it in the first place" lie either.
The fact of the matter is that something has to be done; if Wall Street collapses, there will certainly be a Depression. No two ways about it. Not to act, in this case, is an impossibility. The question is not whether to act, but how to act.
In this, Obama has been resolute; no blank check, full oversight, breaks for mortgage holders, relief for those in trouble, equity stakes for taxpayers. He's got the right idea here.
Now a lot of people here seem to want no bailout, which I understand. I, too, am filled with repulsion at the idea of helping people who got themselves into a jam through pure greed, but there's so much more at stake than their Rolls Royces and condos in New York; we have to hold our nose and do it, but do the right thing.
Dodd is working on a counter-proposal; Obama has a specific idea of what he wants to see in it. McCain claims to have released a detailed plan of action (although I cannot find it anywhere), and is trying to play politics (surprise, surprise) with the situation.
We're not going to see a blank-check. We're not going to see Paulson's MOAB happen. There will be a bailout; there has to be now, because the situation has degenerated so far that to not act would be irresponsible. Yes, we should watch carefully and make sure that the proposal that is voted on is fair, equitabe and not overly burdensome, but, people, we can't do nothing.
We're involved; thanks to Obama, we see now that we are the most important part of this country. Our voices should and (I hope) will be heard, but let's try and find someting unified to shout, OK?