Third-party unity against bailouts

Bob Barr (Libertarian Party) calls Treasury Secretary Paulson’s $700 billion gift to his Wall Street friends the “bailout from hell”:

The Bush administration played this game before, using 9/11 to ram the Patriot Act through Congress, and then misused its authority while resisting court oversight. Never again should Congress allow itself to be duped in this way.

Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader calls it “the Goliath of domestic panic legislation”:

Over the years, every time Congress acted in haste, it was an unsuccessful boondoggle, from the $3 billion synthetic fuels legislation of 1980 to the 2002 Iraq War Resolution. The proposed $700 billion blank check is the Goliath of domestic panic legislation. It’s a triple whammy on the American people as taxpayers, consumers and workers.

Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party) calls it “sugar daddy government“:

Our entire financial system is based on an illusion, with a foundation built on quicksand. We spend more than we earn, we consume more than we produce, we borrow more than we save - and we cling to the fantasy that this can go on forever. The glue that holds this crumbling scheme together is a fiat currency called the Federal Reserve Note, created out of thin air by an international banking cartel called the Federal Reserve.

And Cynthia McKinney (Green Party) offers 10 steps (now expanded to 14) Congress can take instead of signing a blank check for $700 billion. Here is No. 11, for example:

Appointment of former Comptroller General David Walker to fully audit all recipients of taxpayer cash infusions, including JP Morgan, Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG, and to monitor their trading activities into the future.

9 Responses to “Third-party unity against bailouts”

  1. Roscoe Says:

    Since none of these worthies will be elected, they can take whatever unrealistic position they want. Ron Paul, Libertarians and others have been warning about the consequences of fiat money, deficit spending, the unintended consequences of big government regulation for years. Now we are saying the consequences won’t be severe if the financial system collapses??? They will be and history guarantees that the people will not be turning to us if it collapses! They will turn to strong men who promise to bail us out, and that bail out will be far worse than what is being contemplated in Washington today. If you can’t comprehend the effect on your life, then go have a chat with the Treasurer of your employer. Ask her what happens if Employer can’t get credit, if 20% of his receivables go bad, if the pension fund sinks 30% and needs a cash infusion, if customers cancel 25% of their orders?

  2. Hallmonsters Says:

    I suggest everybody call up their representative immediatley. I called mine on Wednesday and I had a lot to say about the bailout. Point out the fact that a vote for the bailout is clearly against the interests of the majority. I made it clear that I will not vote for any politician that will be bullied by the Fed.

    Really, what I should have said was, “If you choose to bail out these bankers against the voters wishes, you can expect to be bailing my foot out of your ass in the near future.”

  3. Jonathan Says:

    Here is an article I wrote on unity

  4. Pamela Says:

    Vote Cynthia McKinney!

  5. Galileo Says:

    I thought Barr was against Third party unity?

  6. No McBama! Says:

    I thought Barr was against Third party unity?

    Possible explanations:
    a) Bob Barr v2.0 was against Third Party Unity before he was for it.
    b) That’s not the Third Party Unity that Bob Barr v2.0 knew for twenty years.

  7. Rob Says:

    Third party unity never works. It’s been tried in other countries. I read your article, it had no examples, no case studies, honestly not even a theoretical basis of any kind…

    it’s almost as if none of that matters, because you were talking about your FEELINGS

    I’m sorry it just occurred to me, maybe you have lots of feelings and I just hurt every one of them! waa waaaa.

    C’mon do better. I give your article an F.

  8. Jonathan Says:

    another past article worth reading

  9. Richgriffin Says:

    I have no interest in unifying with Libertarians nor with Chuck “moral majority” Baldwin’s Constitution party. I do however support having ONE progressive party that true progressives can join and participate in fully.

Leave a Reply