The Bailout

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Looks like Oklahoma was pretty evenly split with 1 more no than yes.

elaborate....The devil needs to pounce on the no voters who are sending us into a depression.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

They had the vote locked up for approval, but then Pelosi gave a lead-up speech that made those on the Right angry, and those on the left nervous.

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/184803.html

You go girl!

Poison the well right before the vote!

I wonder if she will ever be elected to anything ever again?

Are you KIDDING ME  Even assuming you are correct, what does that say about the house republicans?  They are so upset about a speech, they decided to risk the American economy?

Do they have any idea how petty they look?

To the House Republicans:  If you want to not vote for the bill because you don't think its necessary, you don't think it will work, fine, though I think you are wrong.  But to not vote for a bill out of some sort of political spite, well that is childish and dangerous.  You need to be thrown out of office.

Does Chatty Nancy Doll have any idea how petty she sounded?

This **** used to be done without sounding as pathetic and pedantic as the House of Commons.

To be honest, I didn't see ANY partisanship out of the speech..granted I just read it.  Even a GOP staffer agrees.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2FlNmI0YjhmMmEyMjNkZGU2ZTBkNjhhYjQ2NGE0MDU=

So, if it comes down to someone getting their panties in a bunch over perceived partisanship, it's time those someone's leave DC and let people with the big-boy pants step up.

Well, let's start with her blaming the Admin, completely for this crisis.  Anyone who is paying attention knows the Admin has a share in the blame, but only a fool or a partisan would ignore the collective incompetence of Dodd and Frank.

In the spirit of Dan Akroyd, Nancy, you ignorant slut, stop pointing fingers and take care of business.

[FOTD]

And you bozos give me crapolla for going after Palin. That's off base calling the head of the house a slut. If she's a slut, the repiglicans are pimps.

Dow down 778, worst point drop ever, after the House rejects the $700 billion bank bailout plan.

TRAGEDY how the politics superceeded the safety of our system.....more drop on Tuesday as many money managers take to their houses of worship.

You other ones might consider mass and communion.....pray for sanity over votes.

[iplaw]

FOTD: Keepin' it classy.

[B)]

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by bbriscoe

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by iplaw
Thanks for the link, but I'd have to research who's up for reelection.  I don't want to know that badly.

You are aware this was a house vote right?

What's your point?

The entire house is up for reelection every 2 years.  Know your civics/govt.

I don't seem to recall ever mentioning that ALL of these idiots were up for reelection.  I wanted to know how many who voted against the bill were up for reelection.

You should read the thread first before posting.

Please think about this.

Everyone who voted "No" is up.

That's what I was asking for.  Do you have any proof of this or are you just assuming?  I think it's a safe bet to assume so, but I wanted to know.

Either way, it shows that people who are about to be held accountable are scared of their constituents and that a GOOD thing.

Constitution of the United States

Section 2

Clause 1:

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.


Now, There may be a couple of reps who are not contested, but that is rare.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

They had the vote locked up for approval, but then Pelosi gave a lead-up speech that made those on the Right angry, and those on the left nervous.

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/184803.html

You go girl!

Poison the well right before the vote!

I wonder if she will ever be elected to anything ever again?

Are you KIDDING ME  Even assuming you are correct, what does that say about the house republicans?  They are so upset about a speech, they decided to risk the American economy?

Do they have any idea how petty they look?

To the House Republicans:  If you want to not vote for the bill because you don't think its necessary, you don't think it will work, fine, though I think you are wrong.  But to not vote for a bill out of some sort of political spite, well that is childish and dangerous.  You need to be thrown out of office.

Does Chatty Nancy Doll have any idea how petty she sounded?

This **** used to be done without sounding as pathetic and pedantic as the House of Commons.

To be honest, I didn't see ANY partisanship out of the speech..granted I just read it.  Even a GOP staffer agrees.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2FlNmI0YjhmMmEyMjNkZGU2ZTBkNjhhYjQ2NGE0MDU=

So, if it comes down to someone getting their panties in a bunch over perceived partisanship, it's time those someone's leave DC and let people with the big-boy pants step up.

Come on now, I can sign off on anything anonymously as "a concerned GOP staffer".

I could create an identity on any number of blogs and forums as "Obama Staffer" and plaster all sorts of moonbat stuff to be attributed as being from an Obama staffer.

How much more inflamatory could she have gotten?

"$700 billion. A staggering number, but only a part of the cost of the failed Bush economic policies to our country. Policies that were built on budget recklessness when Pres. Bush took office, he inherited Pres. Clinton's surpluses - four years in a row budget surpluses on a trajectory of $5.6 trillion in surplus. And with his reckless economic policies, within two years, he had turned it around. And now 8 years later, the foundation of that fiscal irresponsibility, combined with an "anything goes" economic policy, has taken us to where we are today.

They claim to be free-market advocates, when it's really an anything goes mentality. No regulation, no supervision, no discipline. And if you fail, you will have a golden parachute and the taxpayer will bail you out.

Those days are over. The party is over in that respect.

Democrats believe in a free market. We know that it can create jobs, it can create wealth, many good things in our economy. But in this case, in this unbridled form, as encouraged and supported by the Republicans — some Republicans, not all — it has created not jobs, not capital, it has created chaos. And it is that chaos that the Secretary of the Treasury and the Chairman of the Fed came to see us, just about a week and a half ago. It seems like an eternity, doesn't it? So much has happened. The news was so bad. They described a very dismal situation."

Michelle Malkin called it a "crap sandwich". [}:)]

[pmcalk]

Umm--who just voted down the bill?  I don't give a sh** what Pelosi said (I haven't watched it).  You don't risk your country as "pay back".  

The vote against the bill can be explained either one of two ways:

1.  They never planned to back the bill.  Knowing that there would be horrible economic repercussions, they decided to try to politicize the vote by killing the bill and blaming a democrat.

2.  They did plan to back the bill, but because they are so petty and insecure, they decided to risk the American economy, not to mention the global one, and changed their mind when someone made a speech.  


If they really thought it was a bad bill, why then don't they have the guts to say it?  Why are they blaming their vote on someone else?  If they thought the bill was necessary, why in the world would they vote against it?

Could we get some adults in the House?

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

They had the vote locked up for approval, but then Pelosi gave a lead-up speech that made those on the Right angry, and those on the left nervous.

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/184803.html

You go girl!

Poison the well right before the vote!

I wonder if she will ever be elected to anything ever again?

Are you KIDDING ME  Even assuming you are correct, what does that say about the house republicans?  They are so upset about a speech, they decided to risk the American economy?

Do they have any idea how petty they look?

To the House Republicans:  If you want to not vote for the bill because you don't think its necessary, you don't think it will work, fine, though I think you are wrong.  But to not vote for a bill out of some sort of political spite, well that is childish and dangerous.  You need to be thrown out of office.

Does Chatty Nancy Doll have any idea how petty she sounded?

This **** used to be done without sounding as pathetic and pedantic as the House of Commons.

To be honest, I didn't see ANY partisanship out of the speech..granted I just read it.  Even a GOP staffer agrees.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2FlNmI0YjhmMmEyMjNkZGU2ZTBkNjhhYjQ2NGE0MDU=

So, if it comes down to someone getting their panties in a bunch over perceived partisanship, it's time those someone's leave DC and let people with the big-boy pants step up.

....
Michelle Malkin called it a "crap sandwich". [}:)]

Yep, because horseface Michelle can spot a crap sandwich from a mile away.

She's no better than O'Reilly or Hannity.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

Umm--who just voted down the bill?  I don't give a sh** what Pelosi said (I haven't watched it).  You don't risk your country as "pay back".  

The vote against the bill can be explained either one of two ways:

1.  They never planned to back the bill.  Knowing that there would be horrible economic repercussions, they decided to try to politicize the vote by killing the bill and blaming a democrat.

2.  They did plan to back the bill, but because they are so petty and insecure, they decided to risk the American economy, not to mention the global one, and changed their mind when someone made a speech.  


If they really thought it was a bad bill, why then don't they have the guts to say it?  Why are they blaming their vote on someone else?  If they thought the bill was necessary, why in the world would they vote against it?

Could we get some adults in the House?

It was clear from speeches given on the House floor today that the bill wasn't popular.  The speaker knew it wasn't going to pass before they had the vote.  It was being reported ALL day that the bill wasn't going to pass.

Even if I believed those were the only two choices, you fail to give a reason why 40% of democrats voted against the bill.

I don't recall a SINGLE democrat who voted against the bill speaking out against the bill.

Why are you overlooking your party?

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by swake
Constitution of the United States

Section 2

Clause 1:

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.


Now, There may be a couple of reps who are not contested, but that is rare.

Are you really this dense?

I know that half the House is up and that all of them voted one way or the other.  

READ THE FOLLOWING VERY CAREFULLY:

I was asking how many of those up for reelection, voted AGAINST the bill.  Asked another way, did anyone up for reelection vote FOR the bill?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw



Even if I believed those were the only two choices, you fail to give a reason why 40% of democrats voted against the bill.

Those 40%?  Oh those are all DINO's.

[Wrinkle]

It's been pointed out Democratic 'leadership' asked the House to vote on this WITHOUT EVEN LETTING THEM READ THE THING!

...no wonder if failed.

I'm sure Nancy's little pre-vote 'pep' speech didn't help much, stated to be overly partisan. Can't wait to hear that one.

[bbriscoe]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by swake
Constitution of the United States

Section 2

Clause 1:

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.


Now, There may be a couple of reps who are not contested, but that is rare.

Are you really this dense?

I know that half the House is up and that all of them voted one way or the other.  

READ THE FOLLOWING VERY CAREFULLY:

I was asking how many of those up for reelection, voted AGAINST the bill.  Asked another way, did anyone up for reelection vote FOR the bill?

To answer your question in a word : YES.  There were house members up for re-election who voted FOR the bill.  

Your assumption that only half of the members of the house are up for re-election is DEAD WRONG.  By law, ALL HOUSE MEMBERS run for re-election every 2 years, and all at the same time.  The terms are not staggered.  EVERYONE in the house is up for re-election on Nov 4 regardless of how they voted today.  Please get that thru your head.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by iplaw



Even if I believed those were the only two choices, you fail to give a reason why 40% of democrats voted against the bill.

Those 40%?  Oh those are all DINO's.

Aren't they all?  I love how she conveniently forgets to mention democrats in her post completely.

I'd be interested in finding out why a democrat would oppose this bill. It had everything a good little democrat would like.  Power grabs, expanded regulation, possible new government agencies, the prospect of more useless laws, and on and on...

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

It's been pointed out Democratic 'leadership' asked the House to vote on this WITHOUT EVEN LETTING THEM READ THE THING!

...no wonder if failed.

I'm sure Nancy's little pre-vote 'pep' speech didn't help much, stated to be overly partisan. Can't wait to hear that one.

I'll summarize it for you.  Democrats good, Bush bad, give us your money.