Rolling US Economy Into The Shitbin Thread

My Dem congresswoman, Nancy Boyda, voted nay. I wouldn't call her an infant. The DCCC doesn't.

as I've been saying since '06, the GOP is going to run against "the Democratic Congress" because it's all they can do - now they've simply replaced Iraq with the economy as the purported substance

did she blame Pelosi for the bill's failure, Euler?

Here's a roll call that was recently posted on Ron Paul's site:
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=647#more-647

is it possible Pelosi gave her leave to vote nay on the (false) assurances of Boehner that he had enough votes?

I haven't heard yet, but I wouldn't be surprised. (xpost on Pelosi)

If I honestly thought that the bill needed to be passed and my congressperson voted no simply because they were offended by a speech given by a member of the opposition party, then I have to conclude that my congressperson is either (a) 7 years old, or (b) mentally unfit for higher office.

hm my local rep voted Y but my hometown rep voted N... they're both Dems

LOL at that boohoo 'McCain-Palin' statement

if you really want something passed, get rid of the infants who are willing to hold the credit markets hostage

that's rich. Give those 94 Democrats that leadership couldn't hoodwink a pacifier while you're at it.

no one was offended on the other side. They were just happy to leap on Pelosi's retard moment.

if this really is her speech i don't see what the big fucking deal is

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/09/rep_pelosis_remarks_on_floor_a.php

"then I have to conclude that my congressperson is either (a) 7 years old, or (b) mentally unfit for higher office"

Can I vote both?

It looks like my guy votes Yes, even though I wrote him an email last week telling him to vote No (though that was before the amendments were made).

He ignored your email! *SHOCKED*

the GOP fucked up the last 8 years, and because they have no record to run on, all they can do is run against "the Democratic Congress" America decided it wanted 2 years ago - Pelosi's bog-standard statement is a drink-stirrer for a desperate party to grasp

is Bill O'Reilly gonna have a coronary?

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/swing-district-congressmen-doomed.html

He ignored your email! *SHOCKED*

I guess I'd be surprised if anyone representing a NY, northern NJ, or CT district didn't vote yes, seeing the high proportion of the economies of those states that depends on the finance industry.

Pelosi won't be the big story if this keeps up (S&P 500 down almost 8% today, e.g.).

Unless people blame Congress for failing to act

which they won't

right.

Isn't there a do-over on the vote later anyway?

As if a last minute speech - by anyone - is gonna change a lot of minds anyway. It's a bogus accusation.

of course it is. It's SOP for the GOP.

Pelosi didn't need to open her speech by laying a turd but she just couldn't resist. Dumbass.

i'm sure you said the same about Newt back in the day, Don

you're not allowed to point out that something is one party's fault!

politics are ok... if you're a Republican

I think that the plan is deeply unpopular with most voters. If it passes, it's a case of elected representatives forcing the people who elected them to swallow their medicine, on the theory that the representatives know better. That's a dicey proposition if your seat is vulnerable.

thx for the link deej, i was having trouble sorting this thing ideologically. maybe it isn't, so much. xps

from the paul site:

Tony F Says:

September 29th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
HELL YEAH ! My rep BILIRAKIS voted NO! I just sent a fax to his office thanking him and letting him know that I appreciate his vote and I will tell all my neighbors what he did for us. (You think we could get CANNABIS legalized like this?)

seriously hav u read the speech. its take your medicine but in no fing way egregious.

i'm sure you said the same about Newt back in the day, Don

err, Google dat but I'm pretty sure I didn't. Although maybe I did, but probably back in 94. I never liked him much.

I think it's fine to play hardball--where's Rahm when you need him? I just don't see why she'd give the GOP any cover whatsoever. Unless she didn't care if the bill passed or not.

"I think that the plan is deeply unpopular with most voters."

It should be. Most people think the plan sucks.

Roubini hates it, which is enough for me at this point.

That's cool and all, the We The People thing. But now what?

Posted by: jsb at September 29, 2008 03:17 PM

More negotiations, more safeguards for the taxpayers, disbanding Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, telling banks that if they lend, they have to lend responsibly and that Uncle Same will not bail them out, incentive for government and Wall Street to never do it again, etc., etc. The Senate votes Wednesday so we still have a couple of days.

Posted by: George L. Moneo at September 29, 2008 03:24 PM

Is it really wrong for me to hope everything completely dies tomorrow?

I live in Western North Carolina, weird mix of extremes at on both sides. My House Rep is a Dem; my Senators are Republicans. I called all three today. Senator Elizabeth Dole's people told me they were taking a phone poll today, and that it was 91-0 against the bill.

That said I'm not sure most people are aware enough of the details (I can say for certain I'm not) to care one way or another. Apparently its popularity is varying wildly based on the way poll questions are asked.

rescue yay! bailout boo!

(You think we could get CANNABIS legalized like this?)

here's how to rebuild the economy

what dandy don said

Alex, sorry for the confusion. This wasn't a true poll. It was merely them keeping track of the morning phone calls on this topic.

I have to say that I am already pretty sick of hearing about "Main Street"

main street around here is basically where skid row starts

Is it really wrong for me to hope everything completely dies tomorrow?

nope, sadly your are wildly otm

or however one spells "you"

Kudlow despairs:

A number of Republican House members and staff, along with others who are plugged in, are telling me that Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats will come back with a new bill that includes all the left-wing stuff that was scrubbed from the bill that was defeated today in the House.

As this scenario goes, the House Democrats need 218 votes, and they have to pick up a number of black and Hispanic House members who jumped ship because the Wall Street provisions, in their view, were too benign. So things like the bankruptcy judges setting mortgage terms and rates, the ACORN slush-fund spending, the union proxy for corporate boards, stricter limits on executive compensation, and much larger equity ownership of selling banks through warrants will all find itself back in the new bill. Of course, this scenario will lose more Republican votes. But insiders tell me President Bush will take Secretary Paulson’s advice and sign that kind of legislation.

I'm glad they're blaming 'socialism' because right now the only reason we don't have a free national health care plan like every other country in the world is that it's 'socialist'. So at least they aren't hypocritical. They wanting neither bailouts for greedy, wealthy opportunists nor doctors for poor, sick people.

i think it's clear that, as people originally suspected of McCain, Boehner was playing fast and loose with his votes here and basically lied to Pelosi

so stfu about what kind of speech you'd like the little lady to give

so basically is it a good thing that i'm back in school for the next four years, training for a job that will always be useful?

or should i be terrified about the debt i'm accruing? most of the details of the crisis are above my pay grade \(°_o)/