I have a very strong feeling, though, that the democrat extortionists will win out. The republicans on the Hill have an eighteen-year record of compromising with the left, to the point where many of them have actually adopted portions of the left's ideology, seemingly through something akin to osmosis. I guess when you hang around filth long enough, some of that filth begins to rub off indelibly.
I agree, also, that the democrats are probably 'apoplectic' (your word, and a perfect one!) in the fear that more voters will discover the ACORN connection. I don't know that their fear is justified, though. I have heard one or two snippets about ACORN on FoxNews -- the latest during an interview that one of their reporters was doing with John Fund. Oddly, as soon as he mentioned ACORN, the interviewer abruptly announced that she was out of time.
I've also heard it mentioned by Sean Hannity. So Fox is aware of ACORN/crisis/Obama connection. Why isn't the 'fair and balanced' network assigning it headline news status? It seems to me that this connection, especially in light of the democrats' intent to ACORN through their bailout proposal, should be shouted from the rooftops. And if not from the rooftops, then at least reported more frequently than the rest of the fluff that somehow infiltrates its way into 'headline news' status. I strongly suspect that even the most ill-informed voter would find the ACORN connection highly interesting, and worth knowing, pre-November 4th. Whether the mainstream media, Fox included, agree remains to be seen. I’m betting not.
Before the mortgage crisis hit the fan, ACORN was extorting money from banks and mortgage companies. Now they are extorting money from you and me – and using our own elected representatives as the middle man ('hit man' might be a better term).
Your analysis of the cavalier manner in which the special interests (ACORN in particular), and Fannie and Freddie, created and then sold misrepresented paper is spot on.
I believe I’m going to cross stitch the following (in duplicate), and hang it in my den here at home, and in my office:
We'd continue to receive "bills" like this forevermore, unless the CORRUPTION IN CONGRESS ends, and the persons responsible for it are publicly exposed, tried, and punished.
All things considered, I think the best thing Congress can do right now is: Do nothing at all. Let the system blow up. And then people are going to start asking "Why, HOW did this happen?" And then the TRUTHFUL HISTORY of what led to this shocking debacle must be made public ... It looks to me, all things considered, that to pass this bailout would represent the final, complete socialization of America, which would instantly become a reality — in a silent, bloodless coup.
Again, I am in complete agreement (otherwise I wouldn’t be considering going to the trouble of cross stitching) :). If there must be a (n economic) flood, of Biblical proportions, the excruciatingly painful cleansing that would result might just prove to be the painful lesson that sets America back in search of the Founders’ vision. Perhaps, rather than condoning a bailout, instead we need to, somewhat passively, simply watch the corruptors finally receive the horrendous comeuppance that they deserve. That we must suffer along with them is terribly unfair and unfortunate. But sometimes a deep and essential cleansing demands such suffering, on the part of the innocent as well.
A friend wrote to me this week, 'I find myself sitting in a high-stakes Texas hold-em game with a lot of chips in the pot that I cannot remember betting.'
Funny, isn't it? None of us remembers even sitting down at the table.
A final 'aside' ... While driving in the car today, my husband and I were talking about the election, and, in specific, the general apathy and ignorance of the electorate. Which is why I cringe every time I see a 'Get out the vote!' drive – especially the kind aired on MTV and the like, in which celebs use all manner of fluff reasoning to bring voters to the polls.
If one must be cajoled into voting, one shouldn't be voting in the first place.
After a few minutes' discussion, my husband and I decided that, in a perfect world, voters would have to walk ten miles, uphill both ways, in the dead of winter, during a blinding snowstorm, with snipers shooting at them from behind the bushes – and should have to pass a civics and current events test – in order to vote. That way, only those who are serious about voting, and willing to sacrifice in order to do so, would cast a ballot.
We acknowledged that our 'perfect franchise rules' were created tongue-in-cheek, but I suspect that each of us, in some secret corner of our mind, secretly yearns for them to bet instituted. :)
Thank you so much for your always insightful comments, betty.
~ joanie
'It seems to me that this connection, especially in light of the democrats' intent to reward ACORN through ...'
(Fingers moving faster than brain.) :)
~ joanie
Amen. Our Founders would have expected nothing less:
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Recall, our Founders and their followers were far from a majority when they signed this bold AND historic document. If memory serves, most of them suffered dearly performing what they felt was their Divine Duty. Are there enough of us left made out of the same stuff???
If one must be cajoled into voting, one shouldn't be voting in the first place.
Without a doubt that is so true, so very, very true!
You do know (yes, I know you do -- rhetorical only :)) that the Founding Fathers stipulated that only those who had both knowledge of and a valid citizenship interest were permitted to vote? The biggest problem, as I see it, is the abject failure of our vaunted public education system's lack of teaching basic citizenship skills. That is hilariously evident when one of our late-night comedic idiots runs around the streets asking 'normal' people simple questions about the government that runs our lives. "Who is the Vice President?" Better than a third have no idea, or answer some actor in a movie they saw last month. "Who does the President report to?" I guess the guy that said "God" was closest than all the others, who had no idea that he reports to the People through Congress.
Socialism has been making inroads into our society and government since the late 1800s, slowly infecting the body politic, and instituting its rules in the government workplace. It hasn't helped that the corporations, using the courts and lobbyists, have usurped the status of the voter in the position of Public in the minds of the legislators, thanks to an invalid and illegal synopsis by a USSC Court Reporter.
If this 'Bailout Package' passes, in whatever guise they may cloak it; I fear the end of the Grand Experiment is at hand, and the next feudal dictatorship Dark Ages are just over the horizon. God help these United states.
Of course you may very well be right about this, joanie-f! I can envision a scenario where even the staunch, fiscally conservative members of the House could fall for the argument: If you don't fall in line, then you'll hurt your presidential candidate; because he suspended his whole campaign to come back to Capitol Hill just to get you-all on-board. And so you'd show him up as a "failure!" And then you'd get Obama!!! How'dya like that?
Or: It's for the ultimate good, "the general welfare" of the nation to "put a floor" under the housing market! How could you be such a flinty scrooge as to deny this wholesome outcome?
As if anybody alive today could tell you with perfect certainty that this bail-out bill could ever put a floor under anything, least of all the sheer moral corruption, the moral breakdown that has led to this horrendous debacle.
Or another tack might be, jeepers, if we don't so something, immediately, then the entire world financial system would come crumbling down!!! And then you'd be to blame!!! Speaking as a taxpayer who has been underwriting European security guarantees for five decades now, with nothing to show for it in terms of the sort of cooperation we'd expect to get from such folks in, say, confronting the nuclear threat from Iran, then — why should I care?
Speaking as a taxpayer, perhaps the best thing in the long run is simply "to let nature take her course."
And yet. And yet, were I a fiscally-conservative (read: Republican and maybe Blue Dog Democrat if you can get them on board), I would find the fact that there is only 24% support for this bail-out from the public a most sobering fact. The overwhelming majority of the public (read: taxpayers) utterly detests this package. I say this on the basis of the poll numbers I've seen, and on the basis of conversations I've had with numerous folks of my acquaintance, every single one of whom is hopping mad over this, despite party affiliation.
Fox has been mentioning ACORN all day today, but not in connection with the housing market meltdown, only WRT their corrupt voter registration practices, "which favor Democrats."
It really is frustrating that even the "fair and balanced news channel" is timid about presenting the entire set of facts that relate to ACORN, including its role in bringing about the meltdown of the housing/mortgage market in the first place.
I'm putting all my hopes in the fiscally-responsible House members to vote against this bill tomorrow. They are representatives of "the People's House," and as such expressly delegated to look after the interests of the People. They should resist being rushed into half-baked and questionable "solutions" that would only set a precedent for further raids on taxpayer wealth.
My, but we do live in interesting times, don't we joanie???
I'm just waiting (with bated breath) for the next shoe to drop! LOLOL! I guess that'll come tomorrow. :^)
Stay tuned!
Thank you ever so much for your excellent (as usual) essay/post, joanie-f!