The “best tested negative ad of the campaign” or the simple truth resonating with voters?

I choose to believe the electorate can reason things out for themselves if they are provided truthful information.

The problem in this campaign is gaining traction as it applies to honest commentary and debate.

Will we have the first President of the United States elected who is under scrutinized other than by those on the Right and taken at face value due to consistent favorable media coverage? Could be.

Another school of thought (in plain English) on the current Wall Street issues:

Pouring 700 billion of our money into failing financial institutions seems akin to throwing spaghetti against the wall. Keep throwing until something sticks. They tell us that credit will dry up if we don’t inject cash. No credit would be disastrous for the economy, but they have not explained well enough why the banks have failed so suddenly and drastically that emergency room surgery is required. Knowing why would help us poor taxpayers feel better about how the problem should be solved. Ever wonder how many other bank failures are out there waiting behind the curtain to take their bows? Are we going to throw even more money at them too?

Should we consider a solution that requires no money, or at least a lot less? Here’s one. Have the SEC suspend the accounting rule called mark-to-market. By a relatively simple accounting adjustment, troubled banks’ assets and capital could be increased and credit kept available. Accounting purists, cover your ears. Eyes glaze and minds wander when I say balance sheet, so let’s use the acronym BS, a more appropriate description. BS’s have two sides: assets on the left, liabilities and capital on the right. Banks are required to maintain certain levels of capital (the difference between assets and liabilities) in order to make loans. When assets shrink, capital shrinks. When the ratio of capital to assets drops to a certain level, (think ten-to-one), banks are not allowed to make loans. And if it drops too low, they can be classified as insolvent. This can happen overnight, and it did.

[emphasis-mine]

Perhaps the highlighted section is one of the major problems Americans have with this entire concept.

Check out the rest of the article at American Thinker.

Ran across this over at RedState.

How much proof is needed (in their own words) before folks realize Congress had the heads up long ago that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were run by corrupt individuals and headed for serious trouble?

This is a bit long but the comment at the very end from President Clinton is most telling.

According to the Washington Post:

Congressional leaders and the Bush administration last night struck a historic accord to insert the government deeply into the nation’s financial markets, agreeing to spend up to $700 billion to relieve Wall Street of troubled assets backed by faltering home mortgages.

Negotiators emerged from a marathon session in the Capitol about 12:30 a.m. to announce that they had reached agreement on a proposal to give Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. broad authority to organize one of the biggest government interventions in the private sector since the Great Depression.

Is civility disappearing totally from government?

Has this financial crisis created an atmosphere so unhealthy that we now have the Speaker of the House referring to Republicans as “unpatriotic” for their not attending a scheduled meeting?

Perhaps she should have conferred with Senator Dodd prior to uttering those words:

More from the House GOP offices:

Well, we didn’t go to yesterday’s meeting because they didn’t invite us. Dodd even said on NBC nightly news last night that they just forgot.
It’s pretty infuriating.

[emphasis-mine]

Interesting that the Democrats were so anxious to pin the failure of the original deal on the financial bail out on the Republicans and John McCain when it appears it was their own Presidential candidate who inflicted the damage at the White House meeting:

…..This according to Bob Schieffer of CBS.[emphasis-mine]

Paulson called Lindsey Grahamnesty and said, “Look, I need the House Republicans. I need Republicans on this. We can’t get anywhere without them. You’ve gotta call McCain. He’s the only one that can do it.” So that’s why McCain goes to Washington, and they end up having a four o’clock meeting at the White House yesterday. They all think they’re going into a negotiating session. The president, in order to let everybody be heard, deferred to various Democrats, and every one of the Democrats — Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, and Frank — declined to speak and deferred to Obama. So Obama became the official Democrat spokesman in the meeting. This was to hype Obama’s leadership and presidential aura and so forth. What happened next, the first thing out of Obama’s mouth — Paulson is in the meeting — is he starts ripping the House Republican proposal and asks Paulson what he thinks of it.

This led Boehner and the other Republicans in there to think they have been sandbagged. We found out this morning that Obama had no clue — because he was in transit doing other things, he had no clue — what the House Republican position was. What happened was that on the way to the meeting sometime during the day, Obama’s staff received an e-mail from Treasury Department employees who work for Paulson detailing the House Republican plan. So when the Democrats deferred to Obama, he launched into that. He had no clue what it was. That’s why he asked Paulson for his comments. I don’t know what Paulson said, but this is what led to the fireworks. This is what led to everything breaking down in there. This is why Dingy Harry walked out, ’cause it didn’t work.

[All references to Senators by other than their proper title are those of Rush Limbaugh]

Remember it was the Democrats who insisted the insertion of presidential politics was not helpful in this debate yet they allowed their candidate to speak on their behalf.

If this is indeed what transpired, then not only did the Democrats stretch the truth at the completion of the meeting, but it was extremely disrespectful to the President of the United States.

What egos these Senators and Congresspersons must have to place themselves and their politics above the Executive and the country which it serves.

If memory serves, both McCain and Obama are Senators first candidates second and they should be in Washington in their official capacity as such in an attempt to move this process forward, not garner political points.

There is plenty of blame to go around in this financial mess but deliberately falsifying facts (on either side of the aisle) and calling members of the opposing party “unpatriotic” serves no purpose and the effects will no doubt be long lasting.

*For those who would like to read the thoughts of an international auditor in the insurance industry regarding this crisis check out the piece at the link. Quite an interesting and enlightening read.