Lawmakers are probably not going to hear about how important it is to bail out Wall Street, back in their home districts - unless, of course, their district is Wall Street.

Not that many people even have 401Ks. More people have mortgages. My bet is the lawmakers hear from them, and about considering a bailout from the bottom up.

Of course, there's always the nationalization solution. I'm seeing it suggested more and more. It's worked in other places throughout the world, whereas the Herbert Hoover solution of bailing out Wall Street - well, we know where that went.

Buy yourself a newspaper, aka "Hoover blanket" - winter is on its way.

Frankly, what amazes me is that I haven't heard any of the Republicans try to pin the economic crisis on Bill Clinton yet.

I'm taking it as a sign of just how shell-shocked and demoralized they are.

But seriously - it's time the Democratic leadership started talking to some economists. No kidding; people with a clue have not been called in to plan the solution.

And just dump the Republican side. They're out to spin this thing for maximal political benefit to themselves. They've blocked a "Democrat" bill that spends Your Money™ (a trademark of the GOP.) Big win for the Republicans! Democrats won't get many of their votes, regardless of what they propose, and bone-headed Repub demands, like lowering the capital gains tax (!?!? who expects capital gains this year?), just make a poor bill worse.

So scrap the attempts at compromise. What Would FDR Do? should be the operative question. Nationalize the failing financial institutions? Go for it! Roll back the deregulation that started in the 1980s and put in 21st century controls? Yeah!

Pass progressive legislation with essentially ZERO Republican votes, and keep reminding the voters of who wouldn't play ball - because Mean Old Nancy hurt their widdle feelings.

This is the first time in the last several years that I can recall seeing the phrase "rein in" spelled correctly. Today, everybody writes "reign in". Like, you know, to rule like a king or something.

That just shows you how old McCain is. His first car was probably an oat-burner.

This was Garrison Keillor's take. Let's see how Hollywood would have done it:

SCENE: The fleeing car careens down the freeway, swerving from lane to lane, cutting off cars, sideswiping others, its fenders scraped and rearview mirrors flapping along, held on by their cables. Ahead, some woman in a business suit and high heels, clutching a purse, stands beside her stalled car. Maybe she's waving futilely at the passing vehicles, trying to get someone's attention. BLAM!!! The speeding car clips her off at the ankles, tossing her high into the air. The audience roars with laughter - look at her go! - and the cameras follow the car down the freeway, towards more happy violence and destruction.

I've seen it; you've seen it; it's the way Americans like their movies. Dehumanized destruction and violence; the dead are left behind, unremarked, unclaimed. Nobody ever pays.

Personally, I prefer Mr. Keillor's approach. You should never watch a chase scene without thinking of his essay.

Personally, I was impressed by the way Rep. Frank just kept hitting back, regardless of the bullying and interrupting and talking-over from O'Reilly. He kept it up until they cut to a commercial. Never let O'Reilly have the microphone unopposed. Never let O'Reilly's untruths stand.

All Dems need to be able to hit back like this. "... but maybe you weren't intelligent enough to understand ..." Brilliant!

The scare tactics on the war aren't working anymore? So what? They've now got The Economy (aka "Wall Street") to scare Congress and the public with now.

And they're using it to bludgeon their way through another $ Trillion or so.

""Irrelevant" to whom? To the next 4,000 dead Americans? The next 100,000 dead Iraqis? The next $100,000,000 given to the war machine?"

Sorry, kitt - I shouldn't have been flippant on this issue. The cost in death and mutilation and borrowed money is horrific, and there's no question about that.

But if the Wall Street Terror gets McPain into the White House, instead of The Terrists and Eye-Rack, we've still got the same results:

The occupation continues. And probably with a few more "splurges" of troops, since the first one supposedly worked so well.

Good observation. I've always thought that Mr. Krauthammer looks like a cheap ventriloquist's dummy.

This is one of those scam Internet letters. Snopes.com has not yet determined conclusively its status, but reports that the woman who appears to have "signed" it denies ever having written such a thing, or been on Turtle Island, or met John McCain.

Here's the link:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/mccain/vacation.asp

Don't forward everything that comes into your INBOX. You don't know where most of it's been.

Thanks for the extensive quote from the Rolling Stone article. It's a good one; I recommend it, too.

On the other hand, if I dispute the accuracy of some Internet email garbage and supply a link to a Snopes article debunking it, it doesn't mean I "love" John McCain (the third), or that he's "my hero." And when did I ever say anything about McCain winning ANY wars?

Seriously - there's enough dirt on McCain from the simple facts about his life and actions. Nobody needs to try to make anything up. Lies discredit the liar, regardless of whether the ultimate goal is "right." Just like McCain's lies condemn him more than the ridiculous nonsense posted about his fictional vacation on Turtle Island.

From a historical point of view, Jews and Moslems have largely gotten along, while Christians have relentlessly persecuted Jews. Often, Moslems have protected Jews from Christians. The last 60 years have been a major aberration in Moslem-Jewish relations, of course.

Still, you can't blame Jewish voters from being suspicious of a right-wing Christian fundie. They've got nearly 2000 years of history that supports their concerns.