Democrats have votes to pass Bailout Bill

The Paperboy

Times Square
Aug 26, 2008
1,837
117
48
Times Square
The Democrats have majorities in both the Senate and the House and a President willing to sign their bill. Then why don't they vote on the "deal" they had and get it to the President? If the world is suppose to end by the end of business today why not have the courage to pass the bill? Why should they care whether the House Republicans are on board or not?

The answer: They need to cover their behinds if it fails.
 
And because so many of them are neck deep in this.

Heads will roll and there will be people thrown in jail. Including lots of dem senators and some of Obama's nearest and dearest.
 
And because so many of them are neck deep in this.

Heads will roll and there will be people thrown in jail. Including lots of dem senators and some of Obama's nearest and dearest.

:confused: jail? how do you figure that?

but yeah, they dont want to make this a party issue in case it fails. theyre trying to spin it like they want unity, but theyre just afraid to take a move so unpopular with the american people
 
The American people hate this bailout... Look at all of the polls... They know if they do it this could affect the election...bottom line...
 
They don't want to be left holding the smoking gun when this bill is passed, and when it leads to bigger problems down the road.
 
The Democrats have majorities in both the Senate and the House and a President willing to sign their bill. Then why don't they vote on the "deal" they had and get it to the President? If the world is suppose to end by the end of business today why not have the courage to pass the bill? Why should they care whether the House Republicans are on board or not?

The answer: They need to cover their behinds if it fails.

Damn Dems...how dare they not allow you to walk all over them...

:eusa_hand:

You want us to clean up your mess, time to take some responsibility. Isn't that what you guys are always talking about?

And why aren't you posting today's polls?

index.html
 
yeah they need to have the republicans on board so they can't use it as campaign issue... it sucks but that's the reality.

the republicans got us into this and now they'll sit back and watch the Dems try to fix
 
Damn Dems...how dare they not allow you to walk all over them...

:eusa_hand:

You want us to clean up your mess, time to take some responsibility. Isn't that what you guys are always talking about?

And why aren't you posting today's polls?

index.html


Watch the video in the thread: Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis?
 
Damn Dems...how dare they not allow you to walk all over them...

:eusa_hand:

You want us to clean up your mess, time to take some responsibility. Isn't that what you guys are always talking about?

And why aren't you posting today's polls?

index.html


my ass, you Dems own this mess right along with the Republicans
 
The Democrats have majorities in both the Senate and the House and a President willing to sign their bill. Then why don't they vote on the "deal" they had and get it to the President? If the world is suppose to end by the end of business today why not have the courage to pass the bill? Why should they care whether the House Republicans are on board or not?

The answer: They need to cover their behinds if it fails.

So you see what the Republicans are doing to them. Good. Now see where McCain is positioning himself:

John McCain roared into Washington yesterday and reportedly broke up an agreement on the bailout deal. In doing so, he went against not only Democrats but the Republican president, the panicked Republican Treasury Secretary and Fed Chairman, and Republican Congressional leaders. Instead, he sided with a small band of outraged Republicans grousing about violation of free-market principles.

So was this idiotic McCain self-destruction, as most people are suggesting? Or was it a brilliant populist move?

We think the latter.

Americans hate the Hanke-Panke plan, which they accurately view as a bailout of the financial-services companies and executives that helped get us into this mess. The plan is now a lot better than it was originally--mainly because the government will now take equity in the banks it saves (thanks to the democrats)--but this message hasn't gotten out there yet.

Some Americans are so angry, in fact, that for now they'd rather see "this sucker go down"--as Bush put it yesterday, referring to the U.S. economy--than support a financial-services bailout. By aligning himself with a small band of Republicans who are refusing to go along with the Hanke-Panke plan, McCain not only appears to be standing up for this outrage but is reinforcing his desired image as a maverick.

Given the ongoing crisis in the credit markets, a bailout plan will likely be struck today or Monday--whether McCain plays ball or not. Assuming this happens, McCain will:

Take credit for brokering a compromise (assuming the final deal is palatable to Americans)
Crow that he was the candidate who tried to stand up against the bailout of Wall Street fat-cats
Note every five minutes in the next six weeks that the enormous sop to Wall Street hasn't saved anything (if the bailout works, it won't work until long after the election is over)
Blast President Bush, who everyone hates anyway, thus reinforcing his "change" message
Say he's the only guy with the balls and experience necessary to deal with this crisis.
And on the off chance that a deal doesn't go through in the next couple of days, McCain can just rail about the outrage of the Democrats' desire to bail out Wall Street at the expense of Main Street and say he's the only one standing up for the little guy.

In our opinion, this was a brilliant political play (and we're voting for Obama). If only it were likely to lead to a better bailout plan.

(What's a better bailout plan? One that injected equity into the banks--or, better yet, converted debt to equity--thus penalizing banks for their stupidity, not taxpayers, and actually accomplishing the desired recapitalization. The agreement on principles the Congress announced yesterday was closer to this, so McCain's bet is indeed a risky one).
 
The issue is too big to be partisan hacks. If the vast majority doesn't agree with it, there's something wrong with the bailout. I'm glad the Republicans don't have the majority, otherwise we'd be living under their bill that is even more harmful than the one the Fed came up with.
 
Lets just face it. Those pansy assed Democrats don't have to balls to stand up and be counted. Just like every other Democrat on the planet they gotta be playing the blame game. Pathetic little pussies.
 
First there was the Sec. Paulson/Whitehouse 3 page dictorial Plan.

Then there was the Compromise Plan which was both Republicans and Democrats plan who are relevent committee members, that followed Secretary Paulson's plan, with modifications....

The 3rd plan that Bohner/mccain now supports plan which was presented late in the game yesterday was ALREADY PRESENTED to Sec. Paulson and the Whitehouse and was REJECTED as not being a good plan by the Whitehouse.

There are MANY democrats that also do not agree with the Compromise plan...and some of these Democrats go along with the 3rd conservative plan and some of them do not agree to go with any plan and believe bailing the homeowners in to conventional mortgages would TRICKLE UP and save the institutions as well, and some believe we should do NOTHING....

BUT the real RIFT going on now, is between whitehouse republicans, moderate republicans who go for the compromise plan and conservative repubs that go for the 3rd plan, already rejected by bush/paulson.
 
Hooray for Bohener, he dosen't want taxpayers to get stuck for the bill to bail wall street out. I say let them fail. Hit rock solid bottom. No wall street no money, no money no business. Now those pathetic pussy Democrats who are always bitching about corporate AMerica should be just fine and dandy with that. Yes? Yes.
 

Forum List

Back
Top