$700 billion from us to save the banks. Good?

"Let's look at the timeline that led McCain to Washington.

It starts Wednesday at 8 a.m., when Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma calls Barack Obama and suggests that Obama and McCain put out a joint statement supporting the congressional effort since so many of the positions the two candidates have on this issue are the same.

Coburn and Obama have worked together before. Coburn says this could be helpful. Obama agrees.

He phones McCain with the idea. McCain says: Not a bad idea, let me get back to you.

In the meantime, McCain phones the White House. He suggests that Bush call a summit of congressional leaders, as well as Obama and McCain, to add support to the legislative effort. Oh, and allow me, Mr. President, to make the suggestion public. It could help my image, one presumes he suggests. Bush agrees.

McCain then calls Obama, six hours after Obama's morning call and agrees to a joint statement.

Within minutes, McCain has called a press conference, suspended his campaign, tried to delay the debate, announced a White House summit. In Florida, Obama is floored.

Senior Democrats are furious as well. Banking committee chairman Chris Dodd calls this effort an "unwarranted three-hour distraction."

Bailout plan will succeed

Thursday, McCain arrives in Washington but never joins the deliberations. Senate majority leader Harry Reid asks for, but never receives, a statement on where McCain wants to go on the issues. Reid later says: "I have asked John McCain where he stands and the only stand I've seen is when McCain is in front of a microphone."

Reporters ask the principals how often over the last days McCain been in contact with them. "Never" and "seldom" are the answers.

McCain does meet with dissident House Republicans, but neither supports or rejects their position. What those Republicans do figure out, though, is that cover has arrived.

They go to the White House and say they will vote no on any package. This package is dead, they tell the media.

Earlier, we mentioned sausage-making. There is no chance this bailout package will be ditched. But its final form is yet to be determined.

Now it's Friday afternoon. Guess what? The debate is back on. Press conferences are indicating that progress is being made.

Recently, polls have steadily showed Obama inching ahead and the issue propelling him is the economy. That fact may have unsettled McCain, caused him to give in to his known risk-taking side. He did get a photo at the White House.

He did make a difference in the process.

It was a negative one."

As far as giving up, the point was to say " let's just hand over the money again and again until they learn their lesson; 'cause we sure don't seem to learn ours!"

Add to this, that Bush seems insistent that taking any time to think things out will cause more damage than good. IF my government is going to throw $700 billion (estimates are that it will eventually come in at a trillion) at a problem not of its' making, then they better take the time and do it right. Haste makes waste, and IV, you said that governments have a tendency to do so.

And Bush saying that he doesn't believe that regulations should be to strict so as not to impede the free market ... well, as the Republican Conservatives are telling him - free markets mean winners and losers. The losers shouldn't be entitled to bailouts because of greed and bad planning.

If the free market needs government bailouts and subsidies, then the government is well withing its' rights to impose regulations to hopefully avoid the same thing happening again. Self regulation didn't work in the S & L scandal, it didn't do a damn thing to stop the Long Term Mgmt hedge fund from blowing up, and the financial and investment industry proved once more this time that they have no clue how to so.

Let's try something new.

The credit crunch came about because banks loaned money to people who couldn’t pay it back. That’s right, the upstanding guardians of our finances, the people we entrust with our savings and pensions, the people into whose system most of our paychecks are fed directly every month, effectively walked into a bookmaker’s with all our money and lost it betting on a 3 legged donkey. Then governments use taxpayer’s money – our money – to bail them out. There was really no need to throw that money away in the first place. The banks were profitable and operating in a time of remarkable prosperity and security, so the only real motive for behaving so irresponsibly was the temptation of a fast profit. Or, to put it another way, uncontrolled greed.

And what of the irresponsible borrowers? Vast hordes of the financially disadvantaged did not storm the City brandishing pitchforks and flaming torches, demanding unlimited credit. No, highly paid experts dreamed up a range of financial products and services aimed specifically at that sector of the market, and then spent huge amounts money aggressively targeting them. People who previously could never have got near a mortgage were actively encouraged to borrow way above their ability to pay back if there was even a minor financial hiccup solely so they could get a toe onto the bottom rung of the property ladder.