I don't think the Public's objection to the bailout will evolve into an understanding of the difference between the two Party's intentions in passing the measure.  It's far too complex to overarch that river with long explanations.

Will our base show up?  Will theirs?  That's the question.  Fatigue and disgust over Congress on every front, not just economics, may bleed into the Bailout zone.....Just sayin'

I am reminded of Creedence....Someday Never Comes.

First thing I remember was askin papa, why? ,
For there were many things I didnt know.
And daddy always smiled; took me by the hand,
Sayin, someday you'll understand.

Well, Im here to tell you now each and every mothers son
You better learn it fast; you better learn it young,
cause, someday never comes.

Unfortunately, Obama seems to regard identifying himself as a Democrat or with Democratic predecessors as anathema. Apart from a brief mention of FDR, he refused to do anything of that sort on Friday, and there's no mention of the Democratic Party in ANY of his campaign literature.

The FDIC said it had entered into a loss-sharing arrangement on a $312bn pool of loans with Citigroup. Citigroup will absorb up to $42bn of losses on the loans and the FDIC will be responsible for losses beyond that. In return for taking on that risk, Citigroup will give the FDIC $12bn in preferred stock and warrants.

So Wachovia has a pool of sketchy loans that are impaired in some fashion.  Instead of just having the Feds buy these loans altogether, a private purchaser (Citi) is getting them at a bargain price, with their exposure capped at $42 billion so they can assign a solid value to the loans for accounting purposes.  The FDIC has provided "insurance" by promising to eat any losses in excess of $42 billion, and in exchange, it receives $12 billion in Citi preferred stock and warrants.

I don't love the plan...but what I'm seeing is a group of people (Republicans) with such a simplistic view of a complex problem that the very fact that they are given credibility by some commentators is amazing.

These guys have no understanding of financial instruments, of markets or insurance, or the ramifications of failure.  Obviously, the world economy isn't going to stop overnight if a deal is not done, but the people who most need ready access to credit won't have it, and that will have a deleterious effect on the economic picture of smaller congressional districts that are largely populated by small businesses or farms.  

This is one of the most disturbing aspects of this election. Both candidates frame themselves in essentially non-partisan or "post-partisan" ways. McCain packages himself as the maverick outsider from his own party. Obama acts as if the Dem brand were a bad smell under his nose...as if someone farted in public, and everyone had to studiously avoid drawing attention to it!

Naively, it seems to me, many people see the post-partisan attitude as a good thing...as if politics was seamy and sordid and somehow socially unacceptable (this might describe politicians - if not politics!). The whole anti-Clinton craziness has its roots somewhere here. In fact, both Clintons are first-rate politicians...which is a compliment. Politics is the process of negotiation in which societies engage in order to address the competing needs of its various participating interest groups. And when we are lucky we have skilled politicians who are able to lead and channel those negotiations in ways that achieve benefit to the majority of society.

This, folks, is a good thing!!!

The whole "post-partisan" mindset is more than naive....it is dangerous. Our system of stable democracies has been premised on the development of political parties with party platforms and accountable organizational structures, which enable us to engage in the necessary political "negotiations" in ways that are (relatively) transparent, and ultimately audited by us - the electorate.

What we are seeing, particularly in the Obama campaign, is the focusing of the campaign not on party values and goals, but on Obama as an individual. The problem with this should not need a microscope for anyone with political nous to see.

I am reminded of the period of the fall of the Roman republic when the traditional political process was undermined by powerful individuals who created personal power bases, including private militias loyal only to them. The result was the end of the political process as the Romans had known it. It ended in tyranny - e.g.the bloody dictatorships of Marius and Sulla - and the eventual rise of the Empire. The Republic was dead.

I am not suggesting that America is tipping into tyranny next week, but rather a century-long decline, in which this election continues the process, begun by Bush's weak and corrupt government, of the devolution of your cherished institutions.

He continues to parrot the hard-line Republican line which has proven to be failed.  Has he changed?...Will he change?  In his terms, Absolutely not!

The Parrot will continue to fail Indiana and our country by appealing to the worst in people, not the best.  The Parrot will exploit issues such as a woman's right of choice, religion in government, war as an answer and an energy policy which is based on, "Drill baby drill".