« The Sacred and the Profane | Main | Why Pelosi Couldn't Muster the Votes »

September 29, 2008

Bailout

rainbow.jpg

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
Taking, as He did, this sinful world
as it is, not as I would have it;
Trusting that He will make all things right
if I surrender to His Will;
That I may be reasonably happy in this life
and supremely happy with Him
Forever in the next.
Amen.

--Reinhold Niebuhr



Posted by Cassandra at September 29, 2008 07:32 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2429

Comments

So...uh...yeah.

That maybe wasn't too smart.

Posted by: Pile On at September 29, 2008 08:21 PM

Ya think? :)

It's OK, Pile. We will be all right.

I don't think that we can fix it in the short term. But we will deal.

Americans always deal. But God help us. This was monumentally stupid. But there is no point in going on and on about it. We just need to move forward.

Posted by: Cass at September 29, 2008 08:28 PM

Hey - Cass solved the crisis! Just find the source of the rainbow, and presto: Pot-o-Gold for everyone;)

Posted by: Boquisucio at September 29, 2008 08:47 PM

Well, at least it was the right vote on this bogus bailout package, and one which may well have saved quite a few Republican seats this November, as well.

Doesn't say too much about the leadership of Bush or of McCain, however. Perhaps John should have sent Sarah in, to bring the rank and file into line. . .

Posted by: pogo at September 29, 2008 09:14 PM

Yes America will deal with this. McCain took some heat for saying the fundamemtals of the economy are strong but in many ways it is true. Anyone who says otherwise perhaps needs to visit a few other countries.

I will deal with this, I still have quite a few years that I can work even if I am wiped out. This sucks if you are already retired. Congress must hate senior citizens because the market crash hurts them the most.

Posted by: Pile On at September 29, 2008 09:15 PM

Pogo, Bush can't force anyone to vote in any particular way. I didn't see old Barack Obama delivering the votes of the House Dems, now did he?

*crickets chirping*

So why don't you knock off the petty partisan sniping. I could have launched into that, but I really think it's pretty pointless. And partisanship is what we have to thank for the stock market crash today. Nice work from our "public servants".

As far as the Republicans, today they lost this former Republican's vote. I won't vote for Barack Obama, but I sure as hell will never register as a Republican again in my lifetime.

Never.

Posted by: Cass at September 29, 2008 09:24 PM

You're right, Cass, Bush can't *force* anyone to vote one way or the other, nor can McCain. It's not a question of force, but of leadership. That's what was lacking. And as for Obama, he didn't clinch the deal either, but then again, contrary to McCain, he didn't hold himself out as the white knight -- "suspending his campaign" to rush in and solve the crisis. (Not that I admire Obama's leadership on the issue at all, by the way; in case you didn't catch it, my views on the bailout proposal were otherwise).

So, you'll never register Republican again. I'm sure the GOP is in mourning.

And for you to say the GOP's "lost your vote", well, oh Princess, forgive me for sharing that that is a statement I do not believe for a minute, either as far as this Presidential election, or any other election to come. Be real, Cass; you can't vote Democrat, and you can't not be political . . .


Politics is messy, huh?

Posted by: pogo at September 29, 2008 09:55 PM

That is not what she said Pogo. Good night now.

Posted by: Pile On at September 29, 2008 10:14 PM

Yes, today's drop in the stock market was the largest point drop in history, but if you look at the drop as a percentage, the crash in '87 was worse. Pelosi, when she called for the vote, apparently didn't make sure she had the votes.

Not to rehash this whole thing, but I think there are other completely reasonable alternative to today's bill that were never allowed to be considered. Getting rid of mark-to-market, for one. Maybe now, those alternatives will have a chance.

Posted by: Miss Ladybug at September 29, 2008 10:14 PM

So, you'll never register Republican again. I'm sure the GOP is in mourning.

Are you always this charming, or are you making a special effort tonight for some reason?

I've been an Independent most of my life, pogo. However, I have no particular need to convince you of anything. You believe whatever it makes you happy to believe.

Posted by: Cass at September 29, 2008 10:30 PM

Reasonable is a matter of opinion, Miss Ladybug. I consider myself "reasonable" and I don't share that opinion.

Posted by: Cass at September 29, 2008 10:35 PM

I wouldn't look for it in our fat, dumb and happy land, Milady, but I think a true Conservative Party might be good for what ails us.

The enduring problem has always been the neat dovetailing of the socialist redistributive drive with the politician's classic method - buying A's vote with B's money.

Democrats, of course, have no problem with this evil synergy; it is their overt program.

Unfortunately, enough Republicans can be subverted by the need for political success to make deadly concessions to that same synergy under a short-term outlook.

We will only solve that by the majority going back to remembering and transmitting the ancient goal - building the future for the children.

Posted by: socialism_is_error at September 29, 2008 10:51 PM

Oh well - I guess that being so independent and all, Cass has always forced to sit on the sidelines on every primary election out in The Free State.

Posted by: Boquisucio at September 29, 2008 10:56 PM

Cass~

My point is - what alternatives were considered? Or, did they just going along with (most) of what Paulson initially proposed? I have been watching FNC all evening (as I tend to do a lot), and Greta reported on something about some potential funny business with Paulson, Goldman-Sachs, and the AIG bailout. Makes one wonder if he's keeping the best interests of the American people top on his priority list...

And, upon hearing that a Treasury person actually said the $700 BILLION dollar figure wasn't based on any actual calculations, but was picked to be (paraphasing here) "really big to scare people"... Doesn't inspire confidence in me about their motives.

Posted by: Miss Ladybug at September 29, 2008 11:02 PM

This has been a strange moment.

I was at the bank the other day, trying to move money around so that everything would be FDIC insured. People in the lines to see the teller were shouting at each other -- not in disagreement, because they all seemed to agree -- in outrage about this bailout.

"Who is going to bail me out if I fail?" I recall one man demanding. "These guys fail, and we're all supposed to ride to the rescue. If I fail, nobody cares."

That's why this went down, ultimately. The vast majority of those Americans who work hard and make up those "fundamentals of the American economy" don't want to do it.

They won today, in the political sense: the little guy got what he wanted, though all the big guys in the world -- whether Democrat or Republican -- were united against him.

That doesn't mean they were right, or that they really understood what they were doing. It may be we will all wish they had lost, or kept to the things they knew and left politics to the professionals, before the reckoning is paid.

Yet in a sense it is astonishing: I never thought they had a chance. This is the America I thought I knew -- and believed might have passed away.

So: we've had our Boston Tea Party. Now we pay the reckoning. OK. I can live with that.

Posted by: Grim at September 29, 2008 11:18 PM

Why not let the failing businesses fail? Maybe we need to let this take it's "natural" course. We need this adjustment!

Is it possible that this is a good thing? Is it possible that we need to readjust how we view and spend money. We have too much debt and now the government wants to take on a ton more?


Posted by: PHP Developer at September 29, 2008 11:25 PM

Cass -

I've been listening to Hugh Hewitt discussing the failure of this bill. He lays it at the feet of Pelosi, because she's speaker and she didn't make it a party loyalty vote. They could have passed it without a single Republican, but 65 or so voted for it. Beldar wrote a good explanation and posted it at HughHewitt.com.

Final paragraph:

This is the Democratic Congress' bill, but when it came to a roll-call vote in the House, the Democratic leadership wouldn't do what it took to get it passed even though (a) they have a huge majority and (b) a full one-third of Republicans in the House went along. Anyone who calls this "Bush's bill" or "a GOP bill" is either deliberately lying or abysmally informed about the basic workings of Congress.

Go here to read it if you like.

Pelosi torpedoed her own bill, according to Hewitt, because of pressure from the Michael Moore wing of the lunatic fringe. Karl Rove had a clear annotation of Democrats who didn't vote for it. After watching her rant about how horrible the Republicans are and how this credit crisis is their fault, I wonder if there is a God. If there were, he would strike her with lightning on the floor of the House. What a lying, incompetent, sack of $#!+.

Posted by: MathMom at September 29, 2008 11:53 PM

And, apparently, while she was giving her screed before the vote, some Dem was on the radio saying they (the Dems) were going to use the passage of this bill against the Republicans this fall. Nice way to play politics there, folks...

And, it was originally 95 Dems Nay, then after the arm-twisting, House Dem Leadership only got one Dem to change...

Posted by: Miss Ladybug at September 30, 2008 12:04 AM

After the markets reopened following the Sept 11 attacks, we eventually lost half our net worth on paper. We didn't sell anything, just held. By the end of three years we had regained it all, plus another third.

Another point to try to put a happy face on this situation - when I was doing research for a project before I graduated from college in 1999, I found that if you take any 10-year slice of time, including the Great Depression, over 10 years the stock market has always come out ahead. Even through the Great Depression!

A steady hand is required now.

Posted by: MathMom at September 30, 2008 12:13 AM

An expert isn't seeing doom and gloom:

…it would be unwise to read too much into the Dow plunge, or to link it exclusively to the political circus in Washington. Stocks appeared to be heading lower no matter how Congress voted. Indeed, from the moment congressional leaders announced Sunday they had a deal, filled with anti-market schemes and regulation, stock prices began falling in Asia and Europe. Early yesterday, when it was expected the bailout would be approved, the Dow was down 500 points.

Bailout or no bailout, the stock markets were heading lower as financial markets continue to undergo massive asset revaluations. No matter what elaborate new rescue packages Congress, the Bush administration and the U.S. Federal Reserve bring to the party, the market is going to continue marking stock prices and other assets down until values reach realistic levels.

This is not, nor can it be, the beginning of the end of the U.S. or world financial system. It’s simply how the financial market works, how it should work. And it is working, whatever the games being played out in Washington and whatever their belief that governments can resolve the crisis.

Banks all over the world are being knocked down, their stock prices falling and their balance sheets under revision. Troubled institutions are being taken over - Citigroup is taking over Wachovia, AIG is being sold in parcels to groups all over the world, Bank of America bought Merrill Lynch, Lehman is in bankruptcy, Washington Mutual is being taken over by the namesake of the man who held capitalism on his shoulders back in 1907 - JP Morgan Chase. The Japanese banking giant, Mitsubishi, yesterday bought 20% of Morgan Stanley.

None of these deals or markdowns could, would or should have been avoided under Washington’s so-called bailout law. By the time any new version of the law is passed in the days or weeks ahead, more such transactions and takeovers will have taken place.

Doomish comments typically follow such deals. “It just seems that there are only going to be two types of banks in existence now,” said one portfolio manager, “the ones that survive and get market share, or the ones that get gobbled up and have to be euthanized.” That’s true enough, but not much help.

Allowed to run their course over time, these market workouts would eventually render the bailout package redundant. As George Bush said of the congressional legislative process, watching markets revalue assets “isn’t pretty.” Markets, over time, will do a much better job of reaching sustainable and realistic values more quickly than any giant state-run rescue effort backed by however many trillions of taxpayers dollars…

…Now wonder investors were bailing out on the bailout. They had better things to do, such as trying to figure out what the world’s banks and financial institutions are really worth - without getting any help from government.

Posted by: Miss Ladybug at September 30, 2008 12:55 AM

FWIW, I don't have any money in the stock market, MathMom.

Not one dime. So my concern there is not personal. And I never moved one cent out of my money market funds, which were well diversified in any case.

My concerns were otherwise, I laid them out and I'm not going to rehash them over and over again. There is already far too much of that going on. That is why I stopped writing about this. People (as Grim said) made up their minds long ago.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 01:09 AM

Hmmmm, you're not going to write about politics, and you're not going to write about the economy.......
judging from the picture that paints, I'd be willing to bet the winnings from a caption contest or three that you'll now have time on your hands to catch up on a few *things* around here......
*snicker*
0>;~}

Posted by: DL Sly at September 30, 2008 02:28 AM

Hey! Maybe you could do a book review or something!

Posted by: Snarkammando at September 30, 2008 02:29 AM

Dr. Sowell has the proper prescription, as he so often does.

"Phasing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would make much more sense than letting politicians play politics with them again, with the risk and expense being again loaded onto the taxpayers."

Posted by: socialism_is_error at September 30, 2008 04:59 AM

I don't really know what I am going to do, Sly.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 05:57 AM

Well Cass,

I gotta disagree that this is a Republican failure. No one party is responsible for causing this mess and no one party will be responsible for solving or failing to solve it.

I keep thinking back to Instapundit's running comment: I'll believe it's a crisis when the people telling me it's a crisis *act* like it's a crisis.

As I'm sure is rather obvious, it rather offends my sensibilities to bail out people who made bad decisions at the expense of those who didn't. I am, however, willing to be convinced that failure to do that will be even more detrimental to those who didn't screw up. But Pelosi using the 'crisis' not as a call to action to solve a important problem, but as simple and rank political opportunism screams to me that she doesn't really think the situation is a crisis.

So, I agree there is a problem, but it's not a "WE'RE ALL GONNA DIEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!" crisis. We can probably take a few days, weeks, maybe a month and hammer out the fine details instead of pushing though an incomplete bill with corrections and improvements (that will likely be forgotten to be made) to come later.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at September 30, 2008 09:17 AM

I don't think I said it was a Republican failure.

I said I was unhappy with the Republican party for voting against it. I get to think that way. It is a free country.

And the fact that people who haven't acted responsibly for all this time STILL aren't acting that way is supposed to IMPRESS me?

Who warned about this? Bush and the treasury dept. Repeatedly. And yet you all distrust them and think because the folks who said there was no problem while they were creating and perpetuating it *still* don't think it's an emergency, there must not be an emergency?

Oh, and these are also mostly the folks who don't believe we ought to be fighting the war on terror either.

Somehow, the logic of that argument strikes me as less than compelling :p

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 10:00 AM

Oh.

And by the way, earlier when Bush proposed the new regulatory agency to oversee Fannie Mae?

Who controlled Congress?

We did.

*crickets chirping*

But you see, there was no emergency. And the last thing we needed was "more government".

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 10:02 AM

As of 10:21 am, Sept. 30, DJIA is up 231 points (about 2.6%) on the day. Most of the major indexes are up 1 - 3%.

The end of the world has been temporarily postponed.

Okay, back on my head.

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at September 30, 2008 10:24 AM

“There are risks and costs to a program of action, but they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction”

Posted by: Drive-by JFK at September 30, 2008 10:25 AM

Well, to turn that back, I never said you didn't get to think that way.

But I also get to think you are wrong. It is a free country.

But like I said, when I'm already disposed to believe that a bailout is unnecessary, being beaten about the head and shoulders in an obvious attempt at political posturing isn't going to convince me that it is.

The fact is, I *am* unconvinced. I think I could argue both sides of the case almost equally well. I'm leaning on the side of rescue, but I'm not fully on board yet.

And while "the fact that people who haven't acted responsibly for all this time STILL aren't acting that way" isn't supposed to impress you. So, you have people who were irresponsible then, are being irresponsiple now, and somehow, (magically, I guess) have been responsible in creating this plan.

Seems much more likely that these people who have always shown themselves to be irresponsible will continue to do so. But that's just me.

The New Deal was passed in response to a financial crisis, but most economists today think it prolonged the Great Depression and a few think it was what make the depression 'Great'. I would like to not see us do that again.

'We must do something, this is something, so therefore, we must do this' is bad logic. I want to see us do the *right* thing. But I have a hard time believing these irresponsible people have got it all figured out in just 5 days.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at September 30, 2008 10:32 AM

Gahh, that 5th paragraph is horridly written. Let me start over:

And while "the fact that people who haven't acted responsibly for all this time STILL aren't acting that way" isn't supposed to impress you, I'm supposed to believe that these people who weren't acting responsibly then, aren't acting resonsibly now, have somehow (magically, I guess) created a responsible plan?

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at September 30, 2008 10:39 AM

On the MSN home page, right underneath the listings for the stock indexes, is an ad for refinancing "NOW!" by Countrywide, "at really low rates!". If you click on the add, it is also in Spanish.

Now, there is a sense of urgency.

Okay, now I'm REALLY going back on my head. Fer sure.

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at September 30, 2008 10:41 AM

No, the irresponsible people didn't create the plan.

The Treasury dept. created the plan, and the treasury dept were the ones who tried to fix this in the first place. So, you know, I'm sort of more inclined to trust them than the fools who said there was no problem. They are only going along now b/c their butts are toasted if they don't, and also b/c they are ideologically inclined to like bailouts.

The irresponsible part that I can't excuse is on the Rethug side. I see it as a refusal to want to take their medicine. They could have rammed the reforms through in 2003/2005, but they didn't. They get partial credit, some of them, for trying.

The administration gets full credit.

The Dems get no credit.

IMO, all the delay did was allow more crap to get piled onto the bill and all further delay will do is increase the eventual cost to the taxpayer. A bailout is inevitable, as is our defeat in November. All we are doing is increasing the margin.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 10:49 AM

Countrywide has been trying to get customers to refinance for months now to get the fees and allow them to adjust the maturity dates on their loan packages, I'm guessing. My son told me why but my head is like a sieve.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 11:06 AM

On a brighter note, 29 years ago today at 1:08 in the afternoon, my oldest boy was ushered into the world after nearly two days of putting his Mom through all sorts of fun and games.

Ten pounds, 8 oz. of adorable brown eyed, red headed baby boy. The light of my life. God is good.

And next month The Burrito will be one.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 11:13 AM

No, The Treasury department may have proposed the plan, but the congress critters get to jack with it first. As I understand it, the plan went from 3 pages to 110. While I too, am more inclined to trust the Treasury than congress, 107 pages is a heck of a lot of room to be irresponsible with.

When the treasury gets less that 3% of the plan I don't really consider it the Treasury's plan anymore. It's congress' plan. If they had left it largely alone and added only a handful of stipulations, I'd be more accepting, but they didn't.

Additionally, I'm not convinced that haste makes better laws. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that the reason the bill ballooned up is everyone thought "No one will object to my petty crap, this bill is too urgent to be rejected. It *has* to pass".

Like I said, I agree there are major problems, many of which are systemic. But I do not agree that we are hours or days away from a finacial system collapse. Some bailout plan is most likely necessary, but I do believe we have time to do it right, the first time. We going to have to take our medicine, but taking chemo for pneumonia isn't going to help matters.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at September 30, 2008 11:21 AM

Well, I tend to disagree with you, but we'll have to agree to disagree.

I have already changed my long term plans and I know many, many others who have done the same thing. I don't think we're going to do it right the first time and I think by the time we do do it, it will have even more added onto it b/c there will be more damage to address and more leverage for those who want to add pork. That is the effect of delay.

I think you just saw the Democrats make a genuine effort to be conciliatory.

It won't happen again.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 11:25 AM

In fact, many lenders beside Countrywide, are trying to refi current customers. By extending the terms or lowering the interest rate you reduce the payment amount. This should help consumers from defaulting on their loans. Lenders get paid, consumers keep their homes, it's a win-win.

I'd be shocked as helk if they were extending these deals to people who didn't already have their loan with them unless they had spectacular credit quality.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at September 30, 2008 11:27 AM

If they had left it largely alone and added only a handful of stipulations, I'd be more accepting, but they didn't.

The consensus I was reading around here over the weekend was that the plan was "improved" for Congress having saved us from Paulson's disastrous plan.

Extrapolate from what happened in just a few days, add on the effects of the Dems trying to work a deal and having the Republicans not produce the promised votes, and do the math.

There will be no attempt at bipartisanship on the second round, and no urgency. And no leverage. We frittered away any advantage we may have had.

I am not sure what we gained.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 11:29 AM

So why are they trying to refi my loan? It's on automatic payment, I always pay extra (over the minimum amount) and there's no way in Hades they're worried I won't pay?

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 11:30 AM

Reading through the list of who voted how from the House yesterday, then reading the after-action battle report, it seems evident that the Speaker could not rally her own party, and allowed some Democrat Congresspeople to "vote their conscience", i.e., vote "No!" to save their phoney-baloney jobs for two more years.
And where was most of the Congressional Black Caucus on this? Where was Obama trying to "lead" to a "yes " vote? Heh.

However, when a Republican chooses to do the same, i.e., vote their conscience to save THEIR phoney-baloney jobs, they are "bad people!"

Many questions, many data points, but it seems that the answer still eludes us.

And now, back on my head again.

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at September 30, 2008 11:41 AM

*That* was an effort to be conciliatory?

It didn't seem any different than the last 7 years, to me. Holy Helk if they ever decide to be combative!

But in any case, I don't have a problem agreeing to disagree. I didn't really expect to change your mind on the bailout plan. In fact, there's probably a better chance you could convince me that I'm wrong as I already lean your direction anyway.

My real purpose was to demonstrate that there is a legitimate reasonable, principled stand against the deal just as there is a legitimate reasonable, principled stands for the deal. Either of us may be incorrect. But, I think, people's ire should be directed to those people/parties being unreasonable and unprincipled.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at September 30, 2008 11:43 AM

Well, I have a post about that but I have hesitated to publish it. I suppose I will do so. It may irritate a few people, but oh well.

Ever the contrarian.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 11:44 AM

A bailout is inevitable, as is our defeat in November. All we are doing is increasing the margin.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 10:49 AM

"Our"? Who, proud "Independents"? Oh, I see, it's "Republicans". Good to see you back in the fold. Ties once so fiercely rent, resolve with time.

And that didn't take so long either, did it? Considerably shorter than "never", anyway . . .

Cheer up. McCain may well win yet. It's a funny old world, and kinda unpredictable at times.

Posted by: pogo at September 30, 2008 11:59 AM

Don't be obtuse.

I have been a registered Independent all my life, but that doesn't mean I voted for the Independent candidate. I have voted for both Democrats and Republicans.

There is a difference between voting for a candidate and supporting a party (as in, with donations, or other types of support). You still have to eat from the menu. And I have not changed my mind.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 12:12 PM

Like I said, I'm not really trying to convince you against this particular deal (it's moreso on the Repubs are a bunch of scum sucking pigs type comment) but to answer your questions:

The consensus I was reading around here over the weekend was that the plan was "improved" for Congress having saved us from Paulson's disastrous plan.

I saw no such consensus. Most of what I've seen calls it undecided.

Extrapolate from what happened in just a few days, add on the effects of the Dems trying to work a deal and having the Republicans not produce the promised votes, and do the math.

You mean extrapolate from the BS that would get passed because no one had time to call them on it would get worse when it could be reviewed/exposed? You mean to add on the effect of the Dems trying to work a deal only to try to stab Republicans in the back and get rewarded for it? Seems to me the math isn't the problem.

There will be no attempt at bipartisanship on the second round, and no urgency. And no leverage. We frittered away any advantage we may have had.

Like I said early, there didn't seem to be much bipartisanship on the first round. It'd be hard for it to get worse on this one. As for urgency, it's my opinion that a week or two isn't going to make much of a difference at this point anyway. I'd also argue that we didn't have much leverage to begin with. It appears the only reason Pelosi needed R votes was so that she could let a ton of her own party off the hook for their own political power. She has a choice, force those in her own party to take a position that will hurt themselves or come back to the Rs with her hat in her hand and say "Guys, I know I screwed up. But we've got a crisis to solve and let's solve it".

So why are they trying to refi my loan? It's on automatic payment, I always pay extra (over the minimum amount) and there's no way in Hades they're worried I won't pay?

You sure they aren't worried? If I were them, I'd be more than OK refi'ing a good customer and foregoing short term revenue to ensure I didn't miss a bad customer who's going to hurt me a ton. If I were there Credit Risk Officer the question wouldn't be whether or not I was paranoid. Only whether I was paranoid enough.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at September 30, 2008 12:19 PM

Whatever you say, Princess. Of course.

Posted by: pogo at September 30, 2008 12:21 PM

Taking a break from the debate,

Hippo Birdie to the Eldest Son and many prayers for The Burrito. The wife and I are expecting our first in April and we couldn't be more excited and scared at the same time.

Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at September 30, 2008 12:24 PM

As much as I hate to deprive you of the pleasure of needling me, pogo, but I'm afraid my fun meter is just about pegged. Like I said, believe what you want to.

You obviously know more about me and my life than I do.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 01:00 PM

Congratulations, Yu-Ain :)

That's fantastic news. You just made my day. Babies are magic.

Posted by: Cass at September 30, 2008 01:01 PM

Post a comment

To reduce comment spam, comments on older posts are put into moderation 5 days after the last activity. Comments with more than one link also go into moderation. If you don't see your comment after posting it, try refreshing the screen. If you still don't see it, your comment is probably in the moderation queue.




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)