Bail out doesn't pass!

[The Mystery Machine]

This needed to be a 50/50 VOTE. Quit blaming DEMS.

This is a CLEAR REPUB FAILURE.

 

[corndog]

This needed to be a 50/50 VOTE. Quit blaming DEMS.

This is a CLEAR REPUB FAILURE.

Hmmm. I'm unfamiliar with that constitutional provision. Could you provide a link to it?

 

[UConnJack]

And to all those b****ing about whether it was the Dems or Repubs fault the bill was killed, your acting just as childish as they are.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

Your own PARTY doesn't support the President. It is sad.

 

[sandy6879]

Agent JAY: "Why the big secret? People are smart, they can handle it."

Agent KAY: "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals. You know it.."

In light of the recent events, I think this is going in my signature.

I've been saying this all week. It's actually derived from a political theory - and I think it's never been more true in our lifetimes.

 

[JimFitz]

Dems are using the news conference to make this a partisan issue and throwing jabs!?????? Both parties should be ashamed of themselves!

They all need to go with Pelosi at the front of the line.

OUR GOVERNMENT JUST SCREWED US.

We are all going to be working for China~

 

[singingpixie]

[QUOTE="Got Disney";27875201]Ummm which means that half the Dems did not and half the rep did....

Also how do you know what they are putting in the pot as for ideas....how do you know that the REP have not come up with anything better

you are being or at least sounding very one sided on this whole issue. you dont sound like you want bipartisan support ...you sound like you feel like the DEMS have brought forth a plan with no help from any REP and because many DEMS say it is okay than it must be. And the hell with those that dont agree....because the DEMS are always right no matter what and the REP have not a clue about anything.[/QUOTE]

Basically, the point was for the bill to pass with half of the votes from each side of the aisle- that way they could pass what was best for the country without worrying about hurting their political chances (both sides supported it, so can't blame one or the other if it doesn't work as well/fast as hoped). The Republicans voted it down in order to try to force the Democrats' hands, and then be able to place blame in their laps if it doesn't work out well in the short-run. It was a political maneuver. The question isn't why the bill didn't pass- the democrats could have passed it if they wanted to do it that way. But the goal was to pass a bill that had support from both sides.

 

[marybet]

This is so false!! All Pelosi needed was 11 more Dem votes and it would have passed. She failed by not getting enough support from her own party and then running her mouth.

You keep missing the point, in order for it to be bipartisan it needed as many Republicans as Democrats. Two-thirds of the Democrats voted for it, only one-third of the Republicans voted for it. The Republicans could not deliver their part of the deal.

 

[UConnJack]

I'm trying to figure something out. The Republicans are using a speech by Pelosi as a reason to vote against it? Honestly? That's the reason? Boo Hoo, she said something we didnt like, so we're picking up our votes and going home. What are they, 5 year olds?

I can understand if they have true concerns about the bill, I understand they might be against the bill for what is contained in it. But to say they aren't voting for it simply because of a speech? That's just really childish.

ITA! (but SHE started it!)

 

[corndog]

They needed to have half of the Republicans vote for it in order for it to be bipartisan. What would be the results if only the Democrats [sic] voted for it?

It would have passed? It party-affiliation of the representatives voting for the bill have no bearing on its authority. The bill would be the same whether only Democratics voted for it, or if all Democratics and all Republicans voted for it.

 

[SwedishMeatball]

I'm trying to figure something out. The Republicans are using a speech by Pelosi as a reason to vote against it? Honestly? That's the reason? Boo Hoo, she said something we didnt like, so we're picking up our votes and going home. What are they, 5 year olds?

I can understand if they have true concerns about the bill, I understand they might be against the bill for what is contained in it. But to say they aren't voting for it simply because of a speech? That's just really childish.

I agree. So now let's see Pelosi act like the adult and go apologize for her childish stunt and perhaps this can still be salvaged.

 

[Amlee]

Open mouth, Insert foot!

Pelosi said "$700 billion [is a] a staggering number, but only a part of the cost of the failed Bush economic policies - policies that were built on budget recklessness ... combined with an anything goes economic policy, [that] have taken us to where we are today."

I blame both parties!

If this was such a problem for the Dem's and then why didn't they do something sooner?

If what Pelosi said caused the Rep's to cry, then they should have settled it later!

 

["Got Disney"]

I'm trying to figure something out. The Republicans are using a speech by Pelosi as a reason to vote against it? Honestly? That's the reason? Boo Hoo, she said something we didnt like, so we're picking up our votes and going home. What are they, 5 year olds?

I can understand if they have true concerns about the bill, I understand they might be against the bill for what is contained in it. But to say they aren't voting for it simply because of a speech? That's just really childish.

I am sure that is not the reason...the news is just showing what was said by pelosi.....there have been many against it from the beginning. Don't forget how the news will put a spin on anything it can for ratings....they dont do munch journalism work anymore....seems they are more into being commentators....

 

[ladyjayhawk]

It was the President that sent this bill to the Congress, it was the Democrats that worked to make the bill more responsible to the taxpayers, it was the Republicans who did not pass it.

Actually it was the Dems that added the pork, the Dems that wanted the taxpayers to fork over 700 billion rather than explore the insurance option, and it was the Dems that did not pass it. Pay attention.... 94 Dems voted NO! The Dems are the majority, they didn't even need the Repubs. The Dems blew this up, especially Pelosi.

 

[captaincrash]

Be VERY careful what you wish for.

This could get really ugly very fast. I am talking $10 for a loaf of bread ugly.

People seem to forget that the ONLY reason we are dealing with this right now is because the foreign nations have threatened to cut off the spigots and not loan the US government any more money.

I know on the surface that sounds good. But it is BAD. We are talking 50 million unemployed, 30 to 40% foreclosure rate, rioting bad.

Be very careful what you wish for.

The above might not happen, but the fact that it is very possible is scary as hell.

Some of the Republicans where upset that the Dem put in the help for home owners and restricting CEO compensation.

All you don't over look the word "Some". Not all Republicans voted against it and the President was for it.


Either way if they don't get their thumbs out of their butt and stop the BAMing, we are all screwed.

Interesting. Where did you hear that?? Because yesterday that specific issue was one which Pelosi was able to say that they were all in agreement on. I don't think people are bombarding their representives like mad based on that. The majority of people are not sold on this bill. So from that aspect, it is political. But I want my representatives to react to the will of the people, and I don't care if they need to be threatened with being booted out of office to do what is in our best interest. Yes, a bill needs to be passed pronto, but not the wrong bill.

Perhaps while you at it, you can also get ticked at the 40% of Democratic house members that voted against it. It's freaking mind boggling that people still try to hoist the notion that it's one party's fault that it didn't pass because of "this" provision or "that" provision.

Perhaps there's a simple reason why so many Representatives are voting against it: They ALL are up for re-election in a couple of months and the data indicates that the bailout is very unpopular with voters.


(ETA: Clarification on what I meant by "Reps".)

Geez. Now what!?! Listening to radio.Does it still go before the Senate Wednesday? So, now do the Dem.s and Rep.s go and try to rewrite their own bills (?) since the bipartisian one didn't fly. Is there a backup plan?
Pelosie (sp?) still has it open.
Both sides saying bill "political suicide. either way."
Not only does it "shut down the spigot" but what about the countries we already owe? We are in up to our ears to China. They have to be watching/listening, also.
I don't think we should just "bail them out" but something has to be done. CNN radio saying passing bill may not save us from an "economical pearl harbor".

Looks like the 700 B bail out bill was stopped in congess today by the Republicans 60% and Democrats 40%

And yeah - it definately is bi-partison resistance to the current form of the bill.

Is it REALLY certain that this is realy necessary or not (some think?) ...

... however, ALL the commentary is sensational and compelling.

Which breeds suspicion - and points to the urgency of the matter.

I tend to think we need something to be done - however the most recently voted upon bill is NOT suitable yet. That much seems certain. AND I disagree with working on anything that directly bails out individuals... as any ONE or THOUSAND individuals is/are NOT threatening our entire economy - but what is being discussed is a threat exists to our entire economy here... so we need a solution that addresses the ENTIRE economy... and financial system.

I understand the banking network liquidity issues being touted - however I want to see something tangible - something quantitative to consider in rendering an opinon. I don't "buy" into the broadcast media "sound bytes" and 30 second explanations. However, I am VERY interested in bringing greater stability and liquidity to our financial system.

Anyone who's seen a good technical discussion of this - please post a link as I've read a lot that seems less than conclusive IMO. Enquiring minds want to know more in a substantive manner - if any article is both insightful, supported with good data and balanced in it's explanation - please post a link.​

Absolutely agree. I've been watching CNBC during the day for the last couple weeks, and the commentary has repeatedly mentioned the fact that Bush and others have had multiple opportunities to explain this to the American People in a way that brings it home to them. It's like they don't trust us to understand this - well at least TRY TO EXPLAIN IT IN LAYMAN'S LANGUAGE!!!

Watch the credit markets closely, and listen for signs that small business is having trouble with credit for their day to day operations. If that happens, be very very very afraid.....

 

[LakeAriel]

What kind of people would vote against a bill they thought would save the American economy because their feelings were hurt? Please!!

It is absolute BS! A smoke screen!

 

[corndog]

You keep missing the point, in order for it to be bipartisan it needed as many Republicans as Democrats. Two-thirds of the Democrats voted for it, only one-third of the Republicans voted for it. The Republicans could not deliver their part of the deal.

If one party holds a majority, a bipartisan effort is not need to pass a bill. If passage of this bill was really the right thing for the country, wouldn't all the Democratics have voted for it?

 

[joviroxx]

I have yet to hear why the Republicans did not vote for it. I don't think they wanted to take the chance that it might not work but I think they will have to accept the blame when the economy fails. It was the President that sent this bill to the Congress, it was the Democrats that worked to make the bill more responsible to the taxpayers, it was the Republicans who did not pass it.

This needed to be a 50/50 VOTE. Quit blaming DEMS.

This is a CLEAR REPUB FAILURE.

Well, if its such a good plan, The Democrats should have no problem calling it their own and getting 11 more votes. Then they could have all the glory, right? Fact is, its NOT a good plan and a very "iffy" policy and I , for one, am glad that politicians are listening to their constituents.

Pelosi and crew want the bipartisan agreement because they KNOW it might not work and then can share the blame. IMO, this plan will have us right back in the same place 5 years from now

If they want bipartisanship, then figure it out and stop casting stones to the other party.

 

[ladyjayhawk]

Your own PARTY doesn't support the President. It is sad.

Like you really care!

 

[NY Disney fan]

What kind of people would vote against a bill they thought would save the American economy because their feelings were hurt?

The kind of people who think a bailout will only lead to yet another economic crises becuase no one would have learned a lesson with the previous one.