"hk" wrote in message
. ..


More than a year ago, the financial sector was issuing very serious
warnings about the problems of these sorts of loans, along with the
problems of the sales of subprime mortgage instruments. A more engaged
administration might have expressed enough interest and concern to see
if something needed to be done. Being "cheerleader in chief" isn't
enough when the economy is heading into the crapper.




Eisboch wrote:

The POTUS isn't a babysitter for our personal lives and investments. Or
at least he/she shouldn't be. In a free society, adults are
responsible to research risks, weigh the advice of experts and be
responsible for their choices.

If those collective choices lead to a significant risk to the *US*
financial structure as a whole, then the POTUS should act, as Bush did
this weekend, supporting the sale of Bear Stearns.

Eisboch


I see. Help the rich retain what they have, screw the little guy.



This is the core of conservative versus liberal philosophy differences.

Liberals tend to put the responsibility for their personal welfare on the
government.
Conservatives tend to assume responsibility for their own personal welfare.

The role of the government is to ensure those choices continue to exist.

Eisboch