I'd Post About David Gergen Calling The House Bailout Vote "Shockingly Irresponsible," But It's Probably Not A Good Idea To Offend Anyone Right Now

Tonight there will be another vote on the bailout — perhaps the most stupidly-branded government initiative since The Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism — and presumably this time they'll get it right. But in the meantime, there were two Very Bad Days that lost a head-spinning 1.2 trillion dollars of share value (though presumably those shares may up in value once this new proposal is passed. But still). The point is, even though the news cycle is spinning more dizzily than the earth over its 6,000 years of existence (Palin joke! Sorry!), the outrage following Monday's total gong show on the Hill is still very much germane.

All this is meant to set-up the best of that outrage, which was embodied by David Gergen on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360, which I caught on the repeat at 1 a.m. Tuesday morning (question: Why does CNN never rerun Campbell Brown's show?). Gergen, who by now has seen plenty of political machinations close-up through various White Houses, was spitting mad after Monday's spectacular flame-out, calling it "huge failure of leadership," and "one of the worse mistakes I have ever seen Congress make and "shockingly irresponsible." I mean, this guy worked for NIXON. So he knows what he's talking about.

Anyhow! Hope the markets can withstand my posting of this video. If not, you can have all the money in my 401(k).

Video below, followed by transcript:

ANDERSON COOPER: David, the President and Congressional leaders insisted that this bill was essential for rescuing the economy. It didn't pass. Who's to blame?

DAVID GERGEN: Well, this is a huge failure of leadership across the board, Anderson. The House members and house Democrats who voted against this ought to be ashamed of themselves. But it's really the house of Republicans whom I think bear it especially tonight. Two-thirds voted against it. You did have - to be fair to the Republicans, it was a Republican president, a republican Treasury Secretary who supported this, who pushed it, but it was House conservative Republican members who derailed it.

Now, they have strong reasons why they voted against it. But let there be no doubt that if we pay a huge price as we paid today, if we basically continue to pay a huge price in the next couple of days, lost a 1$.2 trillion as you said in equity value a day and it may get worse tomorrow and in the days following. Let there be no doubt it was the house Republicans who derailed this. They were against it from the beginning. They made that clear.

This business about Nancy Pelosi making a speech. Yes, she shouldn't have said that and yes that was inappropriate. But the fact that they changed their minds because of that, oh poor babies, she has a few words and the House Speaker, you know, made them run back to their partisan corners. You know, forget that nonsense.

And neither one of the presidential candidates has actually shown much star power in this either. I mean neither John McCain nor Barack Obama has been able - they ought to pitch in now and everybody ought to pitch in and get this done. You know, I usually try to be fairly tempered. But this was one of the worse mistakes I have ever seen Congress make. You always assume that in the crunch, people will do what's right for the country. And time and again, I have seen that and this was shockingly irresponsible.

Comments

[GatoPreto]

(yawn) more booga booga. "What if we lose 1.2 trilion a day? How about 5 trillion a day? MAKE THAT...mmm...600 trillion! YES that ought to do it!!"

This addictive behavior must be brought to a halt. The racetrack metaphor is dead on.

[RichardfromHB]

There is no fee on Wall Street transactions to reimburse the taxpayers for their $Trillion. The core concept proposed by Bush is flawed. Google Sweden 1992 banking crisis. This tried and true equity position is the same as Warren Buffet. The "compromise" tweeking that was done to the big government Bush proposal resulted in a toothless 100 page bill (now 405 pages) that tried to hide its weakness from the voters. Rather than condescendingly claiming that the American people didn"t understand, or that the leadership didn"t explain/sell it well enough, the reality is that public outrage finally convinced members to vote their constituent"s interests.
This bill that previously failed last Monday would not have prevented one of the 10K daily foreclosures, could have been filibustered until Paulson spent up to the increased debt ceiling, would only have made some parachutes non-tax-deductible, merely required a report in five years "suggesting" how the taxpayer will be paid back, and allowed the same bunch of lobbyists to set prices for their trash that the taxpayers would pay. As a final insult, instead of providing more confidence through transparency, the failed bill would allow Paulson to suspend the mark-to-market rule, just like Enron did without legislative permission.

[Marshall Lucky]

The Fed already pumped $630 billion into the banks and the stock market still crashed. This bailout is like blowing next month's paycheck at the racetrack on the grounds that you blew this month's check and surely you can't lose both.

If there's to be a bailout it should be like the one that happened in Sweden 16 years ago.