Do We Really Want 'Ready, Fire, Aim' Approaches To National Problems?

Much is being made of the Federal Government's [Henry Paulson] 'flip-flop' on the financial bail-out package, but is this justified?
I think not.

Isn't it usually preferable to constantly evaluate complex situations like this one, then use what we learn to craft modifications to early, general plans based upon more complete information and carefully considering alternatives likely to work better?
I think so!

After all, no one knows all the answers about what is likely to be both more effective, fairer and possible politically.
Congress did buy into a major bail-out plan, without knowing all the details.
Is that so unusual?

At least they knew something terrible was brewing that would likely require massive government action to correct before even more egregious financial damage is done.
They also knew that a certain amount of trust was necessary to give the Executive branch the authorization and tools to develop a clearer plan of action.

I believe it is far better to constantly reassess this complex situation if we are to discover those solutions that are simplest and most effective.
In science, these are called 'elegant solutions'.

Do you -or anyone- believe that Congress knows enough about the financial situation to do more than trust experts to do that?

On September 23, 2008, one Senator -Barack Obama- did say that any bailout or rescue plan should include 4 specific conditions;

• a payback plan for taxpayers if the bailout succeeds;
• a bipartisan board to oversee the bailout;
• limits on any federal money going to compensate Wall Street executives;
• aid to homeowners who are struggling to pay their mortgages.

If those four objectives are not met, Mr. Obama said he would recommend that federal and congressional negotiators “go back to the drawing board” to restructure the bailout plan.

Think maybe that some folks have now decided to listen to these ideas?
Nothing gets closer attention than carefully thought out ideas that stand a good chance of actually helping resolve a major problem, especially if those in control are clueless!

Personally, I am gratified that the Bush administration has finally determined it could use some help from outside its circle of ideological cronies.
It is about time!
Or well past it.

Perhaps, out of national necessity the type of intellectual dialogue needed to arrive at the best possible solutions will transpire.
The transition from Bush to Obama is happening with more cooperation than many might have expected.

That is probably as much a sign of sharing the blame for the possibility of failure as it is an admission of the need for help.
But under the circumstances any attempt at true cooperation should be warmly welcomed by all who wish our country well.

Its just too bad this type of collaboration wasn't forthcoming earlier; like when Congress approved $700 Billion for an undefined war against WMD and terrorism, without any real plan!

That one might have been worse than a dumb 'ready, fire, aim' approach!
Maybe more of a 'fire, ready, aim'?

And, think all that that federal government printed cash helped anything to do with our economy, except the military-industrial complex, including Halliburton, Blackwater and Big Oil?

More likely that stupid borrowing for a patently unworthy cause that deceived the populace, ruined our international reputation and embroiled us in another intractable quagmire, also contributed to our current financial plight.

Next time Dick Cheney says that 'deficits don't matter', don't believe him!
That ten Billion per month being burned in Iraq could come in pretty handy right now for other -better- purposes, don't you think?

But not to worry, the next administration will clean up the mess.
And, our children will have to pay for it.

We can do so much better!
And we must.
-----------------