Why not use some of the parliamentary obstructionist tricks we've been groaning about for years to kill this monstrosity? I'm thinking a hold might be pretty crafty. Insterested? Follow me below the flip:
I was thinking. Haven't we bitched and moaned at length about mystery holds on legislation in the senate? Some senator has a gripe with some legislation and instead of working out a compromise they pull this obstructionist move.
Well, this bailout move is terrible and I'd definitely like to obstruct it. So why don't we find a senator who wouldn't mind putting a hold on the bill? They don't even have to be courageous. They can do the silent hold thing.
I saw this quote from Sen Sanders:
"For years now, they've told us that we can't afford—that the government providing healthcare to all people is just unimaginable; it can't be done. We don't have the money to rebuild our infrastructure. We don't have the money to wipe out poverty. We can't do it. But all of a sudden, yeah, we do have $700 billion for a bailout of Wall Street."
—Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont).
Maybe Bernie could do it? He's an independent. No parties would take an election day hit.
And if we really wanted to recruit a "holder", we could pledge to donate ca$h to them. That's something we're really good at. And it'd sure cost us less than $2,000/citizen.