i don't recall the media 'scrutinizing' the bu$h* tarp plan

[spanone]

maybe i was too wrapped up in the election...

i believe he got his money in one week with little or no debate

[aquart]

1. Scrutiny? It was URGENT! URGENT! NO TIME TO SCRUTINIZE!

It was absolutely necessary to prevent...everything that has happened since WITH it.

[PDJane]

2. There was no scrutiny.........

I suspect that's because the Bush bunch had a few accomplices in their final looting of the treasury. Of course, they didn't want the banks to fail when he was in office either.........

[benld74]

3. THAT BECAUSE THERE WAS NONE!

[old mark]

4. Because the MSM are owned by the right wing rich. nt

[FiveGoodMen]

8. True. And we can't say it enough.

There are several million instances of the 'media is liberal' lie that we still have to overcome.

[Still Sensible]

5. There was some scrutiny. In fact when it passed

I actually (and mistakenly) thought we knew what was going to be done with it. It was going to buy distressed assets, theoretically the taxpayer would have a chance to recover some or all of the funds (a la RTC) once the economy recovered by reselling the assets. But lo and behold, Paulson comes back ex post facto, pulls the old switcheroo and says "I've got a better idea, let's do this instead." And we didn't even get the complimentary reach around while we were grabbing our ankles!

Of course the oversight for the original TARP funds was never there... best I can tell it was not even thought about much.

So, in short, the "scrutiny" disappeared when Paulsen pulled the switcheroo.

[spanone]

7. talk about the classic 750 billion dollar bait & switch

& they got what, 350 BILLION delivered before they got out of office....with no oversight!!!!!

[boobooday]

6. Or complaining about pork, fraud, waste and abuse in Bush's

Huge war spending bills.

[mdmc]

9. Fear the bailout!~

[librechik]

10. Yep. Them: Opaque and no oversight. Us: Transparent and too much

oversight from those who have no business doing so.