White House Critical Of "B"-Word Use

By: Mark Knoller
Topics: Capitol Notes

Mark Knoller is a White House Correspondent for CBS News.

To hear the White House tell it, one factor in the House vote yesterday against the administration's bailout plan – was the word "bailout."

"It's really unfortunate shorthand for a very complicated issue." says White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto.

He says the administration plan to rescue the financial markets is "not a bailout for Wall Street" and "certainly not a bailout for Wall Street CEOs."

Okay then – what should we call it?

"It's an effort to fix this problem of a frozen asset class that has implications over our entire economy," said Fratto at the daily White House press briefing.

That certainly rolls off the tongue: "an effort to fix the problem of a frozen asset class."

If so, that means all of today's headlines are off the mark. It's not "House Rejects Bailout." It should be "House Rejects Effort To Fix Problem Of Frozen Asset Class." That'll sell a lot of newspapers.

Fratto says he's not one to bash the media, but he says reporters are using the language of the plan's critics when we call it a "bailout."

You may have noticed, President Bush is careful not to say "bailout." In his statement to reporters this morning, he said he wants "legislation that decisively addresses the troubled assets now clogging the financial system."

He avoids the "B" word because he's on record saying "bailouts" are bad.

At his news conference on July 15, he was asked if he would take government action to help a company or industry crucial to the economy?

"If your question is, should the government bail out private enterprise, the answer is, no, it shouldn't," he replied.

"And by the way, the decisions on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – I hear some say 'bailout.' I don't think it's a bailout. The shareholders still own the company," Mr. Bush said.

Of course, now the government is the principal shareholder.

A year earlier, in announcing steps to help homeowners unable to pay their mortgages, Mr. Bush decried the idea of a "bailout." He said "a federal bailout of lenders would only encourage a recurrence of the problem."

"It's not the government's job to bail out speculators, or those who made the decision to buy a home they knew they could never afford," he said with conviction.

And that mirrors the view of many of the House members who voted against the bailout plan yesterday – reflecting the wishes of their constituents.

So based on his tough words about bailouts, President Bush could hardly be advocating one for the financial markets.

Instead, he's trying to fix the problem of a "frozen asset class."

Remember that the next time you discuss the "B"-word.

Mark Knoller
Mark Knoller is a CBS News White House correspondent.
Follow on Twitter »

25 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 25 Comments


by ala_frosty October 2, 2008 9:50 PM EDT: I think we need to call a spade: "a spade"! When your boat is sinking, you bailout the water. This is not pejorative, it is descriptive. The financial institutions bet on debt that went bad and now, to remain solvent, they need someone, by hook or by crook, to remove it from their books. The analogy fits perfectly.

If the shoe fits, wear it!

I''m running out of platitudes here .. quick, someone pass me a shrub.; Reply to this comment


by uscitizen-mi October 2, 2008 7:29 PM EDT: US TAX PAYERS BAILING-OUT FOREIGN BANKS %u2013 PROVIDE FOREIGN JOBS. I am truly frustrated with both our news reporting and our government. First, the news media is not informing the people of this $700 Billion bail-out. Do we, the people, know that a good portion of the money for this bail-out will help Foreign Banks and people in foreign countries maintain their jobs and their life style while we, the American people, pay for it? Yes, this bail-out is not for U.S. citizens %u2013 it is for the Fat cats- the people with lots of money so they can keep it. It was reported on National News that Treasury Secretary Paulson lost $300-$400 million in value on the stock market; if passed, Sec Paulson will recovery most, if not all of his losses. According to the MSNBC news web site, U.S. Representative John Culberson R-Texas balked at the idea of bailing out Foreign Banks. YES, this is not just a rescue for USA banks this is for everyone %u2013 including FOREIGN Banks. We have already bailed out AIG employees, the greatest portion are NON-USA citizens. Do we, the people, have any say in this or are the FAT cats and people that take our jobs overseas going to not only get our jobs NOW but we are going to PAY for them TOO. STOP America and stand up to anyone who votes for this, they should not stay in office %u2013 we need not to lose our homes, we need to have jobs, we need to not be charged predatory interest rates (sometimes over 20%) when we send our money to other countries; Reply to this comment


by uscitizen-mi October 2, 2008 7:28 PM EDT: US TAX PAYERS BAILING-OUT FOREIGN BANKS %u2013 PROVIDE FOREIGN JOBS. I am truly frustrated with both our news reporting and our government. First, the news media is not informing the people of this $700 Billion bail-out. Do we, the people, know that a good portion of the money for this bail-out will help Foreign Banks and people in foreign countries maintain their jobs and their life style while we, the American people, pay for it? Yes, this bail-out is not for U.S. citizens %u2013 it is for the Fat cats- the people with lots of money so they can keep it. It was reported on National News that Treasury Secretary Paulson lost $300-$400 million in value on the stock market; if passed, Sec Paulson will recovery most, if not all of his losses. According to the MSNBC news web site, U.S. Representative John Culberson R-Texas balked at the idea of bailing out Foreign Banks. YES, this is not just a rescue for USA banks this is for everyone %u2013 including FOREIGN Banks. We have already bailed out AIG employees, the greatest portion are NON-USA citizens. Do we, the people, have any say in this or are the FAT cats and people that take our jobs overseas going to not only get our jobs NOW but we are going to PAY for them TOO. STOP America and stand up to anyone who votes for this, they should not stay in office %u2013 we need not to lose our homes, we need to have jobs, we need to not be charged predatory interest rates (sometimes over 20%) when we send our money to other countries.; Reply to this comment


by stormyhailey October 2, 2008 6:01 PM EDT: No to bail out! The gov taught us in school%u2013USA is a capitalist country%u2013it is all about the mighty $%u2013you make it any way you can. The Fannie/Freddie need to lower interest rates & stop doing the floating interest rates to set people up for failure. Recall as many foreclosures as possible & refinance the houses the honest right way %u2013 for once. Products/services should be valued for what they really are, instead of valued for greedy, selfish purposes. The gov should stop lending money out to other countries as if we got it to give. My mom always said to take care of home first. That should be the first law for USA to live by. The following should occur: CEO, etc. should invest their paycheck & 35 mill bonus that they receive every quarter back into their co. Their personal items, jets, condos, homes, etc. should be put up as collateral. Families that are in foreclosure homes should be evaluated at the correct cost-& taxes should be lowered, put what they are behind at end of note, & start them afresh on a 4.9% fixed rate for the next 15 years. Stop overpricing these matchbox homes that only cost 20,000 to 40,000 to build. When I applied for a credit card, these same banks deny others & me because of credit score. I AM SORRY STOCK MARKET - I AS A TAX PAYING CITIZEN DON''T CONSIDER YOU A GOOD INVESTMENT FOR MY TAX MONEY - APPLICATION DENIED - SEE US TAX PAYERS WHEN YOU GET YOUR CREDIT & ETHICS SCORE UP. THERE IS NO APPEAL PROCESS.; Reply to this comment


by chichilouise October 1, 2008 9:34 PM EDT: Couric:

I watched you trash Charlton Heston because he was president of the NRA. I did nothing. You never fought for our freedom as he did in WWII, but you judged him, and I just let you do it. Perky? Perky, my ***. ******. Mean. The tragic thing is you can be delightfully funny. With lefties. I watched you mock consersatives, you have a real need to make fools of them, don''t you. I won''t just walk away this time. I want you to know how despicable I think you are. You never governed anything, you never fought for your country. You just mock people for believing in God, the Bible, and saving the unborn. You tried so hard to get Sarah to say something you could pin on her, like a salivating dog. I assume women who react badly toward Sarah Palin have repressed anger from previous abortions. If she is right, then you are wrong. If the law is changed, the fig leaf cover of a legal abortion is gone, and with it the pretense of moral covering for the act. Otherwise, I don''t think it would matter so much to destroy Sarah. She has done nothing wrong, but when the witness must die, it means the killer is already very very quilty. you are giving yourselves away by hating her so much.

Chris; Reply to this comment


by kenhamlett October 1, 2008 6:03 PM EDT: ##cmcpub##

You are right about this!
We should find out exactly who can''t get credit and why. After reading your post I went and did a search for mortgages and if the advertising is to be believed there are some decent mortgages available. I am sure an applicant would have to be well qualified but somehow I think that being qualified should be a prerequisite.
Good observation.; Reply to this comment


by cmcpub October 1, 2008 3:40 PM EDT: CBS has an opportunity to do some real journalism here. Commentators this morning all said "People can''t get mortgages." Let''s find one who can''t; then let''s check his/her credit to see if normally (I know, what is normal?) he/she would get credit. Are qualified people being denied loans, or is it we''ve simply cut out the sub prime stuff? Let''s submit such an application to LendingTree.com or some such broker and see what happens. (If they aren''t lending, they are wasting a lot of money on advertising.) Other than the spreads on Wall Street, which only experts can interpret, where''s the proof? Key point: There is no investigative reporting going on here; Reply to this comment


by bichonlover2 October 1, 2008 3:23 PM EDT: Well, I like the word Sellout, but I think it should be called GREED. If they vote for this, then I''m not voting for them...no incumbents.. about time for CHANGE!!; Reply to this comment


by kenhamlett October 1, 2008 2:21 PM EDT: If he does not like the word bailout, let''s call it what it is:
Sellout
The current form of this bill and anything close to it is not going to eradicate the problems ahead so they should not even try imply the boat will stop sinking.
Even the contingency of part of the money now and part later is a farce. The last version of the bill that I saw left it to the president to decide if further funds were needed. Not the next president only, it is open to Bush to decide if he likes. Of course he will line the pockets of his masters at the earliest opportunity. Happy New year present may be the entire goal of this sellout.
See, the word sellout does sound right doesn''t it?; Reply to this comment


by jackieprep October 1, 2008 3:56 AM EDT: My my Hillary was called the B word and every bad name in the book by yourself and other Journalist during the Primary. Even Hillary''s daughter was attacked with words no lady should be called. Now the White House says that B word can''t be use. Is Sarah any different then Hillary. Are some woman ok to be called names while others aren''t. Even John McCain called his wife a name worse then the B word. I watched in horror as female Journalist went along with the attack on Hillary even some doing the same as the male Journalist. Now that Sarah as damaged 200 years of work woman have done to grow and has lowered the bar for qualifications the female news woman will suffer. Will the TV Executives hire bubble heads like Sarah for the rating and dump qualified experienced female Journalist like yourself, time will tell. At lease Sarah''s salary would be much cheaper then yours.; Reply to this comment