Sorting it out

I'm just trying to embrace the logic that led Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss to vote for a $700 billion bailout for Wall Street but oppose a $14 billion bridge loan to American automakers.

Randomly throwing insanely large sums of money with little to no strings attached is apparently responsible fiscal policy, while providing a loan with considerable stipulations attached is lunacy.

Again, I'm not entirely sold on the House/White House bridge loan plan, but it's arguably more rational than TARP which Isakson and Chambliss fell all over to sign up for.

And it seems like it has a better chance of succeeding rather than TARP as here in Georgia the concept of throwing more cash at banks has not removed the risks involved with lending said cash our during times of economic crisis.