The news this morning is not very good.  The Bush Administration is now consulting with law firms on how to go about partial nationalization of some of the country's banks:

The Bush administration said Monday it is moving quickly to implement a $700 billion rescue program, including consulting with private law firms on how to buy ownership shares in banks to help thaw frozen lending and get the economy moving again.
...
Neel Kashkari, the assistant Treasury secretary who is interim head of the program, said officials were developing the guidelines that will govern the purchase of bad assets and had consulted with six specialist law firms on how the government will take partial ownership of banks.
...
"We are moving quickly - but methodically - and I am confident we are building the foundation for a strong, decisive and effective program," Kashkari said in a speech Monday to the Institute of International Bankers.

Kashkari, however, provided few details about how the program will actually buy bad assets and ownership shares in banks. He focused mainly on the nuts and bolts of getting the program running.

Because really, when discussing the socialization of the American banking system, the details really don't matter right?  All that counts is that we take bold, decisive action.  What I want to know is, how did bold decisive action become the gold standard of government good?  Bold and decisive also generally means poorly thought out, and overbearing.  A mob boss shooting someone in the head for snitching is bold and decisive as well.  Does that mean those crimes will never be punished?

When governments do things which are "bold and decisive", but also greatly expand government power with little thought of oversight or planning, that immediately brings to mind the actions of Hugo Vasquez in Venezuela and Fidel Castro in Cuba.  Dictators act boldly and decisively, with little public debate and few details.  But of course, this is America.  And barring something even crazier like martial law in the coming weeks, we will have a Democratically elected dictatorship.  I'm not sure that makes me feel any better.

People often times incorrectly think that Communism and Socialism are synonymous.  They are certainly related, but not the same.  Communism is a political ideology, while Socialism is an economic scheme.  Just like Capitalism and Democracy are not identical, both sets of ideologies compliment each other.  But even Karl Marx thought that Socialism could take hold in countries like the United States and Great Britian though non-violent means, while he theorized (correctly) that revolution would bring it to other countries.  We may indeed be seeing this come to fruit here finally.

The country that I love is losing everything that makes it something to love... and I don't know how to stop it.