Wednesday, June 10, 2009

The Perfect Storm

Rarely do you see The Daily Kos, Michelle Malkin, Red State, and U.S. News and World Report agree on something. So when all of these are arguing against a Democrat sponsored bailout of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), we should probably take a minute to hear them out.


This started with a commitment by President Obama to send $108 Billion to the IMF. Now Rahm Emanual and Nancy Pelosi are trying to bully House Democrats into voting for a war funding bill with an amendment attached to provide $108 Billion to bail out the International Monetary Fund. Nancy Pelosi wants Democrats to sneak this bailout through becuase no one believes a bill bailing out the IMF could make it on it's own. The American public has reached their limit of bailouts. Strategists on both sides are predicting losses for elected officials voting for bailouts in 2010.


The funny part is the coalition lining up to defeat this. Red State has listed the names and contact info for the Democrats most likely to be flipped. Eric at Red State is encouraging everyone to call them. Peter Roff writing at U.S. News and World Report has listed the top ten reasons to vote against this. The Daily Kos has gone so far as to write supportive profiles of Democrats likely to defeat those Democrats who might vote for this bill.


In this age of new politics, Republicans and Democrats can unite together to tell Rahm Emanuel and Nancy Pelosi Americans are tired of bailouts. We are tired of bailouts, and we don't want to bailout European banks. If Pelosi thinks this is important, let her put this bailout on a bill by itself. If she can't get the votes for it by iteslf, don't try to sneak it through.

2 comments:

Brandon said...

I understand why Obama committed to helping out the IMF, it's part of his foreign policy, but unless all of the members of the G-20 contribute significant amounts of aid on their own, this is a bail-out that should not happen. It's also a shame that Pelosi attached the IMF bail-out to the war funding bill, it's not worth the political points gained by the bill going down in flames if the GOP can convince enough Blue Dogs and New Democrats to vote with them.

pack04 said...

This brings up an interesting point. "If Pelosi thinks this is important, let her put this bailout on a bill by itself. If she can't get the votes for it by iteslf, don't try to sneak it through."
Should this not be true for all legislation?
One bill, one topic.
Having to sweeten a bill with a promise for funding of another thing to get votes is bribery. This also leads to, the much hated in voice when the vote happens but loved when the money shows up, pork barrel spending.