I'm personally confused about it all.  McCain has no life in him whatsoever.  I disagree with Obama that "Joe the plumber" should be taxed to "spread the wealth".  I just don't know, I am sick to my stomach after the debate.

We appreciate all the input on the site.  If and when you do find an issue, please be specific when describing the issues so when can work to fix the problems.

Thanks everyone for participating!

Also -- how to track forum activity?  An email should be (optionally) sent when there's activity on a thread in which you started/participated.  This brings people back to the site.  The times that I've been here, if there's something in the 5 entries on the homepage that i recognize, then I look/reply -- otherwise, I will not usually see it again.  This thread is a prime example...

The login redirect has been fixed -- still no option to stay logged in, though. 

lol, ten -- opening up security holes is an advantage only to script kiddies and malicious websters.  I guess you might as well be using internet explorer, too!  ;)

By no means do I take these forums to heart,  I enjoy the debate and agree 100% that these blogs allow us to become better informed about issues that will hopefully lead to "change" for the better in our society.  What concerns me about both McHugh and Oot as well as many other member of congress and the senate is the fact that they truly do not understand our markets, especially when it comes to printing out more money.

When the government needs money, they create "paper" treasury bonds and sell these to The Federal Reserve, the fed then prints paper money and sends it to the govt all done electronically. Our govt agrees to payback this "loan. This loan cycle can go on forever. The understanding of how our money is created is wrong.  Every time more money is printed we have inflation.  How can we stop inflation with inflation? 

There has been a 96% deflation in our dollar since 1913. If everyone paid off their debts including our government not one dollar would be in circulation and the last time our national debt was paid off was in 1835 when Andrew Jackson shut down the central bank.

Printing more money creating more inflation just doesn't seem like the correct long term solution to our countries financial woes.  I feel that both "bail out" bills should not have been passed because no one is looking for the real root of our problems.

This is the problem.  First, let me say that I applaud the fact that people are engaged and concerned and demanding change and accountability in this election.  However, I must strongly disagree with your conclusion and say that it is overly simplistic.  Let me preface my argument by saying that this is not personal, these blogs allow all of us to better informed and I think that is how we advance as a society.

To say that the first bill voted on was a blank check is factually incorrect.  What was a blank check was Sec. Paulson's 3 page bill that he sent to Congress and urged immediate passage without investigation.  Sound like the run up to the Iraq war anyone?  After hearings and closed door meetings, a bipartisan bill came forward that was in NO WAY PERFECT, but did give taxpayers vital protections on their investment.  The bill outlined limits on executive pay, established independent oversight to make sure that Paulson, or any future treasury secretary, could not spend the $700 billion anyway they wanted.  Congress implemented different strategies to ensure that we were not just buying up bad debt, instead we would be making equity investments to ensure a return on investment for the taxpayers.  So, why is this bill important.

Besides the fact that the Dow was down 18% last and 40% for the year, the worst losses since the great depression, the real issue is the credit markets.  The credit markets stopped moving, banks were/are not borrowing from one another and commercial paper transactions have stopped.  This has a disaterous effect throughout the economy.  When companies cannot borrow they cannot make payroll, this means layoffs, and lose of jobs.  When companies cannot borrow, they cannot produce the goods that make our economy work, whcih means layoffs.  When companies cannot borrow money, they cannot afford to pay their employees health insurance, which means we  as taxpayers have to foot the bill for more people.  When the market tanks, people lose their life-savings, especially those who are in their retirement, meaning more need for governement assistance. When credit stops between businesses, it makes it nearly impossible for individuals to get loans for their cars, homes, or any other unforseen need.

For those of us who have been responsible in our borrowing, as unemployment increases, people who had good debt will quickly learn that they cannot afford their mortgages and more people will be out on the street.

That means action was needed and that is clearly why Mike Oot would have voted for the first bill.  He took a principled stand against the second bill, because on top of the enormous amount of money authorized to help stabilize the economy, they added $150 billion in PORK, meaning money for things that have nothing to do with the purpose of the bill. 

For example here are some earmarks:

New Tax earmarks in Bailout bill

• Film and Television Productions (Sec. 502)
• Wooden Arrows designed for use by children (Sec. 503)
• 6 page package of earmarks for litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident, Alaska (Sec. 504)

Tax earmark “extenders” in the bailout bill.

• Virgin Island and Puerto Rican Rum (Section 308)
• American Samoa (Sec. 309)
• Mine Rescue Teams (Sec. 310)
• Mine Safety Equipment (Sec. 311)
• Domestic Production Activities in Puerto Rico (Sec. 312)
• Indian Tribes (Sec. 314, 315)
• Railroads (Sec. 316)
• Auto Racing Tracks (317)
• District of Columbia (Sec. 322)
• Wool Research (Sec. 325)

McHugh voted for this additonal pork and clearly illustrates fundamental differences between the two candidates.  What we need now is strong measured leadership with a focus on the middle and low income people of this nation.  I am placing my faith and my vote in Mike Oot.

The first plan presented gave the secretary of treasury a blank check, which both would have voted for!  A blank check IN MY OPINION is the same thing as PORK.  I must agree with Matt they are both the same. 

Concerning Mike Oot's decisions with the rescue package --

Mike, had he been able to actually vote on the bill, says that he would have voted for the bill as first drafted and reconstructed during the first house vote.  He said that he is not happy having to do that, however, with the scope of the crisis and the necessity of infusing liquidity into the markets he felt it was necessary for government action, so as to avert a protracted crisis on Main St.  Mike, however, very clearly stated that he would have voted against the second bill.  The bill, in his mind, was full of pork and special interest add-ons, and was not the legislation that was needed.  When Washington is facing a serious problem, like the crisis in our economy now, we need swift action from our government that guarantees tax payer protection and government oversight, not pork.  To say that Mike is no different than McHugh or the current Congress, is truly misleading.  We need leadership and people who are looking out for the middle and lower classes in our society, not leadership that tacks on $150 billion in pork just to get a bill passed.  Mike has worked tirelessly as an attorney representing worker's compensation and social security disability, and his focus is to continue to help people like that, not the top 1% of the country that McHugh seems to care about the most.  Mike has not taken any money from corporate or special interest PACs, and he pledges to continue that type of fundraising effort.  If you want someone who will lookout for your interests, Mike is the man for the job, if for no other reason than your interests are the same interests that he and his family share.

No problems for me!

I guess it's another advantage of being an out of date "oldie".  Anyone else having problems with the login or the font sizes?