The US has waged a long and successful war in Iraq, so the bailout, therfore it has to effect the US economy and although difficult to swallow this not new to this country.
I am hearing a lot of mocking the Republicans for being hypocritical, comparing obamas spreading the wealth to be no differnt, however there is a big difference, the bail out is only a one time payment, while Obamas plan for his friends and those he labels as poor will be reoccurring and taking money from those who rightfully earned it. If I understand correctly the bailout McCain supported was to purchase sub prime loans, so in effect its not a handout but a purchase of debt.
The only thing that effects McCain then is the public lack of knowledge of American history, its lack of knowledge to tell the difference between a bailout purchase, and Marxist handouts, transfer of wealth, and its continued ascertain that McCain acted erratically which was untrue, he tried to intervene in the talks while Obama just stuck his head in the sand.
Hamilton was a lover of of strong central government and the British monarchy, while Jefferson favored small, limited government.
If I understand correctly the bailout McCain supported was to purchase sub prime loans, so in effect its not a handout but a purchase of debt.
Just because a welfare payment is one-time doesn't mean that it's not a welfare payment.
The "bailout" set up a terrible precedent, and the question of where the line ought to be drawn has been raised. Will the Government buy student loans next? Auto loans? Personal loans? Credit card receivables?
The persistent manipulation of the financial markets by the do-gooders and nanny staters in our Government is what distorts the business cycle by interfering in the choices of individuals and other entities in the marketplace (through the introduction of new risks and uncertainties). The end result is the amplification (or reduction) and the prolonging (or shortening) of various financial events.