See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #201
   On September 29th, 2008 at 1:46 pm, ChrisFromGermany said:

   Looks as if it really might not pass…

2. #202
   On September 29th, 2008 at 1:46 pm, Red Ted said:

   failure

3. #203
   On September 29th, 2008 at 1:46 pm, John Deaux said:

   On September 29th, 2008 at 12:29 pm, rightwingrocker said:

   Our forefathers didn’t know what a depression was.

   That’s a foolish assumption if I ever heard one. As if the Founding Fathers had never experienced tough times economically. In fact, the Founders deliberately avoided government intrusion into economic matters because socialism had already been proven a failure over a hundred years before.

   Exactly which Socialist country would that be? The Marx/Engels Socialist model didn’t exist until the mid 1800′s.

   Remember that one of the things we declared independence from was the concept of debtor’s prison, which is why bankruptcy is included in Congressional powers under Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

   And this is relevant to the government trying to micromanage the economy exactly how?

   It is pertinent to their views on the ability to clear debt for a fresh start, rather than being forced to bear the burden of that debt to the detriment of the individual and, by extension, to the family, community, and country.

   To say that being able to establish bankruptcy laws equates to being able to legally delve into matters of economic affairs is a serious stretch, to put it lightly.

   Not when it’s combined with the ability to borrow money, coin money, and regulate the value of said money.

   Also one could successfully argue that between that section’s authorization of Congress to borrow money on the credit of the U.S. and regulate commerce between the states and foreign countries, combined with the Federal Reserve Act, the concept of loans to failing companies, rather than a full on bailout, is 100% constitutional and consistent with the intentions of our forefathers.

   Except that the Founders had nothing whatsoever to do with the illegal Federal Reserve Act.

   If it’s illegal, then why hasn’t it been found to be unconstitutional?

   Furthermore, the US government is extorting this money from the taxpayers, not borrowing it. You are a fool if you believe any of those clowns in Washington has any intention of giving any of it back, much less with proper interest.

   The bailout as presented is exactly what you say it is. That’s why I was saying that the money needs to be lent, rather than purchasing bad debt. That would be completely covered under Article 1, Section where it states: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States. If keeping us out of a depression isn’t promoting the general welfare, then what is?

   This is NOT an example of regulating Commerce. It is a blatant redistribution of your money into the pockets of people who have been irresponsible with theirs. THAT happens to be exactly what socialism is.

   Again, that’s why they loan the money, not purchase bad debt.

   You are showing yourself to be quite the liberal.

   Funny. That’s not something I’ve ever been accused of before. You are not being tolerant of someone who disagrees with your point of view. You are a neo-bigot.

4. #204
   On September 29th, 2008 at 1:47 pm, ChrisFromGermany said:

   Can they switch votes? Because if they can not, the bill just went down in flames…

5. #205
   On September 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm, PhredE said:

   Yes 203
   No 227

   To vote 4

6. #206
   On September 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm, MarcoPolo said:

   Are they yelling “point of order” to try to get them to close the vote?

   They need to chant it over and over.

   Let it die. Let it die.

7. #207
   On September 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm, ChrisFromGermany said:

   202 YES to 222 NAY and 7 votes left! EPIC FAIL! Unbelievable…

8. #208
   On September 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm, Freddy said:

   They killed the bill! YEA! Now, they need to pick up the 2 items that make sense today!

   1) Adjust the mark to market acct rules
   2) Adjust the FDIC limit to 500k

   Then step back and think about it all a bit more.

9. #209
   On September 29th, 2008 at 1:49 pm, PhredE said:

   Yes 205
   No 228
   NV 1

10. #210
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:49 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    There are 60+ Republicans that need to feel the wrath

11. #211
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:49 pm, changer1701 said:

    So it lost, right?

12. #212
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:49 pm, ChrisFromGermany said:

    The bill is dead!

13. #213
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:49 pm, right4life said:

    I’m stunned, GREAT NEWS!!

14. #214
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:50 pm, PhredE said:

    Yep, it failed.

15. #215
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:50 pm, changer1701 said:

    60 + that voted against or for??

16. #216
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:50 pm, ChrisFromGermany said:

    So much for “the ayes have it”… And to think that this “vocal vote” almost went through…

17. #217
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:50 pm, PhredE said:

    Interesting stats:

    95 Dems voted against it.
    65 Reps voted FOR it.

18. #218
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:51 pm, MarcoPolo said:

    The vote isn’t closed, and the Dow is tanking.

    Point of Order!

19. #219
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:51 pm, Bill Grant said:

    Has it occurred to anyone else that this “crisis” with has been years in the making has just been forced to come to a head in order to benefit the very people who caused it? The democrats?

    In terms of impending financial Armageddon; I just helped someone polish up a business plan and do the paperwork to get a small business loan… She went in at 9 am Thursday and got a yes an hour ago for a substantial loan. That tells me that there isn’t a “credit crunch” for non-morons. Morons shouldn’t have been getting credit to begin with.

    I feel like a fool because I passed up on real estate deals because I crunched the numbers and came to the conclusion that it would have been irresponsible to take out a loan that would be difficult to pay back under the terms offered. I should have just grabbed and grabbed some more and screwed everyone else with the bill.

    The worst part, the most exasperating, fist clinching part is the exact people who caused this are going to be the ones who benefit most. Barack Obama is going to profit from the financial melt down that the democrats caused, and they DID cause it.

20. #220
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:52 pm, Cadman said:

    When do we get the names?

21. #221
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:52 pm, sambo said:

    I’m waiting until an official announcement…

22. #222
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:52 pm, California Red said:

    now what folks?

23. #223
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:53 pm, right4life said:

    now what folks?

    maybe they should try eliminating CRA and sox which got them into this mess…

24. #224
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:53 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    She went in at 9 am Thursday and got a yes an hour ago for a substantial loan.

    There’s money here in Hawaii for home loans from solvent banks. You need good credit of course…

25. #225
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:53 pm, Cadman said:

    Now we wait for Matt Damon’s approval.

26. #226
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:54 pm, cyrebus said:

    Votes are being switched to yeahs…

27. #227
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:54 pm, MarcoPolo said:

    Look! The most ethical Congress in history refuses to take “NO!” for an answer!

28. #228
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:54 pm, right4life said:

    dow is going back up…from down 650 to down 396….

29. #229
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:54 pm, ChrisFromGermany said:

    Why don’t they close the vote? Who is the one guy stalling? And what’s the point? Point of Order, anyone?

30. #230
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:55 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    Look! The most ethical Congress in history refuses to take “NO!” for an answer!

    “Barney has photos of you”

    “Ok, ok, I’ll vote ‘Yes’”

31. #231
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:55 pm, b-cat said:

    And they were telling us that the House GOP couldn’t stop this. See what happens when you stick to principles and try?

32. #232
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:55 pm, right4life said:

    down 356 now…

33. #233
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:57 pm, Cricket24 said:

    I think Nancy Pelosi ticked off a lot of Republicans with her little speech!

34. #234
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:57 pm, sambo said:

    MarcoPolo said:
    The vote isn’t closed, and the Dow is tanking.

    cyrebus said:
    Votes are being switched to yeahs…

    right4life said:
    dow is going back up…from down 650 to down 396….

    surprise surprise

35. #235
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:58 pm, PhredE said:

    Dow down -459 (10:56am PT) via CNN.

36. #236
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:59 pm, right4life said:

    its a rollercoaster!! yee haaa!

37. #237
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:59 pm, Joy said:

    Michelle has posted that it has failed. Has it or not?

38. #238
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:59 pm, bluedog said:

    It hasn’t failed yet. They’re leaving it open to allow for arm-twisting (supposedly longest open vote was three hours).

    Two votes have changed already to Y, one D and one R. They only need 10 more to strong-arm.

39. #239
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:59 pm, sambo said:

    sambo said:
    I’m waiting until an official announcement…

    Is it?

40. #240
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:59 pm, PhredE said:

    Dow down -500 (10:58am PT) via CNN.

41. #241
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:59 pm, MarcoPolo said:

    What are the odds they’ll recess after this? Just go home, and let the chips fall.

42. #242
    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:59 pm, right4life said:

    rush just said they’re browbeating 11 members to change their votes….it ain’t over till its over..

43. #243
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:00 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:52 pm, California Red said:

    now what folks?

    Now maybe all of these politicians can take some time and actually do their jobs rationally instead of voting under fake pressure.

44. #244
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:00 pm, PhredE said:

    The votes haven’t changed much in the last few minutes, as it stands:

    No: 226
    Yes: 207
    NV: 1

    Few, if any votes have shifted.

    *It is going to fail*

45. #245
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:00 pm, Joy said:

    How can they do that??? Isn’t a vote a vote???????????????

    I don’t believe in hating anyone, but these guys are really pushing me.

46. #246
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:01 pm, MarcoPolo said:

    rush just said they’re browbeating 11 members to change their votes….it ain’t over till its over..

    Of course they are. We just have to hope that those 11 stand strong.

    This is our money!

47. #247
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:01 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    I THOUGHT THE AYES HAD IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

48. #248
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:01 pm, mike.musculus said:

    melt the phone lines to have the NAYs hold firm until the vote is closed!

    I was once told that a vote could be held open for a few days, if they didn’t get the result the leadership wanted. If it is possible, and they did that here, even those asleep would notice the duplicity.

49. #249
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:01 pm, PhredE said:

    Now, Dow at -421 (coming back up quite a bit) at 11:00am PT.

50. #250
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:01 pm, sambo said:

    Bloomburg has it down 341

51. #251
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:02 pm, MarcoPolo said:

    Freaking Boehner’s probably leading the “please change!” contingent.

52. #252
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:03 pm, Bill Grant said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 1:52 pm, California Red said:

    now what folks?

    Now we get to start making payments on Franklin Delano Raines ski chalet in San Moritz and his mistresses’ umbrella holders condo on 5th avenue.

53. #253
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:04 pm, PhredE said:

    Votes appear to be unchanging at 11:02am PT

    Dow at -459 (at 10684)

54. #254
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:04 pm, sd6104 said:

    When do we find out who voted which way?

55. #255
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:05 pm, right4life said:

    along with a financial collapse, all we need is syria to attack israel, israel nukes damascus, and russia and iran invade…..

    things are getting interesting…

56. #256
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:05 pm, oldcollegeguy1980 said:

    Call your rep and tell them to stand firm on no to this cover-up/bailout!

57. #257
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:06 pm, sambo said:

    Will the Dem’s leave Frank ‘hanging dry’ or will they switch and give him a hand?

58. #258
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:06 pm, PhredE said:

    for sd6104:

    Later check:
    http://thomas.loc.gov/home/rollcallvotes.html

59. #259
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:06 pm, Salt said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:01 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    I THOUGHT THE AYES HAD IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    That confused me for a second. The “ayes” previously mentioned were to start the vote, not on the bill itself.

60. #260
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:07 pm, MarcoPolo said:

    Reconsider??? No! No!

61. #261
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:07 pm, alamedaman said:

    YESSS it failed
    (btw cspans website is crashing)

62. #262
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:08 pm, PhredE said:

    The debate is proceeding to other bills.

    For now, it’s done. 11:07am PT.

63. #263
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:10 pm, sambo said:

    I’m not happy until I hear this thing is Dead!

64. #264
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:10 pm, rightwingrocker said:

    Exactly which Socialist country would that be? The Marx/Engels Socialist model didn’t exist until the mid 1800’s.

    Shows what you know about history. Don’t come to a gunfight armed with a slingshot.
    

    It is pertinent to their views on the ability to clear debt for a fresh start, rather than being forced to bear the burden of that debt to the detriment of the individual and, by extension, to the family, community, and country.

    That’s not what happens with bankruptcy and that’s not what they’re trying to do now. Another foolish assumption. Also note that the Founding Fathers didn’t buy into the notion that extensions to the community and country were appropriate when it came to the federal government.
    

    Not when it’s combined with the ability to borrow money, coin money, and regulate the value of said money.

    There is no authority for the federal government regulate the value of any money. You are twisting things quite a bit here.
    

    If it’s illegal, then why hasn’t it been found to be unconstitutional?

    Because the courts are in on it. This is nothing more than a ploy to take more power from the people and the states.
    

    The bailout as presented is exactly what you say it is. That’s why I was saying that the money needs to be lent, rather than purchasing bad debt.

    Either way, the taxpaer must pay it back. This is nothing more than a tax increase, plain and simple. Further, I can’t think of anything more risky than trusting an entity that’s already billions in the hole to borrow more money and have the creditor (taxpayer) expect to get back one red cent of it. Are you THAT foolish?
    

    If keeping us out of a depression isn’t promoting the general welfare, then what is?

    Promoting the general welfare does not mean Congress has carte blanche to just do whatever the hell it wants. It must adhere to its limits. This very concern was brought up and responded to by James Madison:
    

    It has been urged and echoed, that the power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases.

    Of course, the Anti-Federalist’s concern here has come completely to fruition, and you are sitting here advocating more of it.
    

    Funny. That’s not something I’ve ever been accused of before. You are not being tolerant of someone who disagrees with your point of view. You are a neo-bigot.

    The position you have taken is liberal, period, and so is your tendency toward name-calling. For defending the Founding Fathers and calling you on the carpet for your foolishness, I’m being called a neo-bigot.
    

    bigot – a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices

    Well, if standing up for the basic tenets of the Constitution, under which all of Washington is required BY LAW to run, makes me a bigot, then I will wear that label like a badge of honor.

    However, I will ALWAYS stand up and fight those who stand against the Constitution, either purposefully or inadvertently. You may be a case of the latter, but that doesn’t make you right.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

65. #265
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:11 pm, happyscrapper said:

    What now, folks? Do we tank on Wall Street? Maybe they should take Newt’s suggestion and suspend taxes on capital gains. I don’t know much about economny, but I hear that would pretty much take care of the problem without going into socialism. At any rate, the people have spoken…we are not ready for a socialist government! Period! Take that Barack Obama!!

66. #266
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:13 pm, sambo said:

    That;s funny. Sitting at my desk here at Wachovia with a smile on my face. How ironic that smile will be at the end of next month when I’m out on my can.

67. #267
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:16 pm, Joy said:

    So the DOW started to rise when people thought the bailout failed and then started to tank when the vote was left open?

    Quite honestly, it doesn’t matter to me which it is. This situation MUST be not be dealt with via this bailout… period!

68. #268
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:18 pm, calamityville said:

    The bill failed! I felt a thrill going up my leg.

69. #269
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:18 pm, Joy said:

    This situation MUST be not be dealt with via this bailout… period!

    Should have read…

70. #270
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:19 pm, Surveyor said:

    Let them fail! Traitors, crooks and liars thou shalt not steal our 700 billion!

71. #271
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:19 pm, oldcollegeguy1980 said:

    This bailout patch is the wrong thing a the worng time.

    There has not been one word form the house or senate about what actually got us here.

    Till Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Maxine Waters, Franklin Raines, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Jamie Gorelick and others are indicted, I say not a penny of taxpayer money for any whitewash of this mess.

    I stand by that statement.

72. #272
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:23 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:19 pm, Surveyor said:

    Let them fail! Traitors, crooks and liars thou shalt not steal our 700 billion (that we do not even have for them to steal)!

73. #273
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:24 pm, Joy said:

    Oldcollegeguy1980: Till Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Maxine Waters, Franklin Raines, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Jamie Gorelick and others are indicted, I say not a penny of taxpayer money for any whitewash of this mess.

    That is the only taxpayer money that should be spent, is to indict and prosecute and convinct the above felons!!

74. #274
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:25 pm, wighttrasch said:

    I agree w/Newt.

75. #275
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:27 pm, NJ-Aviator said:

    This from Fox News

    Opponents said part of the reason for the opposition from Republicans was what they termed a partisan speech by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, said one GOP source.

    “Pelosi’s partisan speech has caused our members to go berserk and may cost us any remaining chance to pass the bill,” the source said.

    Pelosi had said that Congress needed to pass the bill, even though it was an outgrowth of the “failed Bush economic policies” of the last eight years.

76. #276
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:27 pm, MtsEdge said:

    Can’t even access the House web page. Want to confirm how my Rep. voted, although I think I know.

    Woo-hoo!!

    P.S. Hearing from libs nearby how the Dow dropped 600 pts. “b/c the bailout failed the House.” Okay…but Citi bought Wachovia w/o a bailout. Can’t help but wonder, how much worse it would have been if the bailout had passed?

77. #277
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:28 pm, MtsEdge said:

    Pelosi had said that Congress needed to pass the bill, even though it was an outgrowth of the “failed Bush economic policies” of the last eight years.

    Can’t have it both ways, Madame Speaker.

78. #278
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:28 pm, oldcollegeguy1980 said:

    The market up and downs surrounding these events mean nothing to me.

    I was alive in 1987 when the market tanked, I got up the next day and went to work.

    Tomorrow I will get up and do exactly what I do every day.

    So will most of you.

    The line in the sand that needs to be drawn is on the criminals that caused this mess.

    Till then I am ready to take whatever medicine must be taken. As a father I had much rather face this now and leave my child and your child a more perfect union. Not a more socialist society.

    Till we Republicans get it, that when whatever problem faces America, Americans can handle it.

    Democrats turn to Washington and the power grabbers.

    Republicans must always turn to the American People.

    In times of crisis I look to my principles and beliefs for how to go forward. So should we all.

79. #279
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:31 pm, Southpaw said:

    In other news, another load of garbage goes down in flames:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7641915.stm

    The analogy and the timing is just toooo ironic.

80. #280
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:32 pm, happyscrapper said:

    When I heard Pelosi say that about “the failed Bush administration” for the umpteenth time, I wanted to reach into the TV and smack her silly. How dishonest she is! And clueless to think her words would not inflame the republicans. If that is the reason for the bail-out to fail, it is even more sweet!!

81. #281
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:32 pm, PhredE said:

    Here are the good guys and the bad guys:

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml

    HTH

82. #282
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:34 pm, Joy said:

    There is no way these creeps have forgetten the hearings where Waters, Frank and the rest shot down an attempt to prevent this mess.

    THEY KNOW who is responsible, and it isn’t BUSH and the REPUBLICANS!! Not this mess.

    But they stand there and LIE and of course the MSM will ignore the TAPED PROCEEDINGS that PROVE their culpability…

    I…….. am………. so…….. angry.

83. #283
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:35 pm, MtsEdge said:

    Here are the good guys and the bad guys:

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml

    HTH

    Thank you! I knew Rep. Bartlett would do the right thing.

84. #284
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:36 pm, PhredE said:

    MtsEdge – Glad to help.
    Best to keep all the details as public and transparent as possible.

85. #285
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:40 pm, John Deaux said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:10 pm, rightwingrocker said:
    Shows what you know about history. Don’t come to a gunfight armed with a slingshot.

    A slingshot is fine when your gun has no ammo. You neglected to provide an example.

    There is no authority for the federal government regulate the value of any money. You are twisting things quite a bit here.

    Article 1, Section 8
    The Congress shall have Power To … coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.

    It’s called the Constitution. Try reading it.

    Promoting the general welfare does not mean Congress has carte blanche to just do whatever the hell it wants. It must adhere to its limits. This very concern was brought up and responded to by James Madison:

    I’m pretty sure dire financial catastrophe such as a depression would have been viewed as an appropriate use of Congressional powers.

    The position you have taken is liberal, period, and so is your tendency toward name-calling. For defending the Founding Fathers and calling you on the carpet for your foolishness, I’m being called a neo-bigot.

    Liberal is what the Dems are proposing. The government owning people’s homes is liberal. Lending money is not liberal. This has been done many times in the past. Harley Davidson wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for government loans.
    

    bigot – a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
    Well, if standing up for the basic tenets of the Constitution, under which all of Washington is required BY LAW to run, makes me a bigot, then I will wear that label like a badge of honor.

    However, I will ALWAYS stand up and fight those who stand against the Constitution, either purposefully or inadvertently. You may be a case of the latter, but that doesn’t make you right.

    I disagreed with you, so you immediately named me a liberal. You are a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to your own opinion and lashed out at me because I didn’t get in lock step with you. If I were going to name call, I’d call you an idiot as I’ve done to many before. However, you are not an idiot, just intolerant to a slightly different, not opposite, point of view. I am as conservative as they come and I fully believe there is a way for Congress to help us out of this situation without turning to Socialism. Even Newt is all for a loan. Is he a liberal too?

86. #286
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:42 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    My liberal hippie Rep Abercrombie voted No. Wow.

87. #287
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:45 pm, Joy said:

    Mtsedge – What’s with the title and description of that vote? Is that the roll call for the Bailout or what the description says?

88. #288
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:45 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:40 pm, John Deaux said:

    Harley Davidson wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for government loans.

    I’m not sure what your point was with that…. is it a plus or minus?

89. #289
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:47 pm, Joy said:

    Mntsedge – That is the vote for HR 3997, “An Act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax relief and protections for military personnel,….”

90. #290
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:52 pm, John Deaux said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:45 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:40 pm, John Deaux said:

    Harley Davidson wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for government loans.

    I’m not sure what your point was with that…. is it a plus or minus?

    Rightwingrocker believes in a 100% lassez-faire approach where the markets correct themselves. I’m saying that a loan, rather than this Dem-backed gateway to Socialism would accomplish the goal without changing our government. As an example I mentioned that if the government didn’t loan HD money back in the late 70s or early 80s, the would have failed and some foreign manufacturer would have bought the name, closed the factories, laid off the workers, and the HD name would be just a fond remembrance.

    My point is that we can loan the money without marching towards communism, so I provided a successful example from the past. HD even paid the loans off ahead of schedule.

91. #291
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:55 pm, rightwingrocker said:

    A slingshot is fine when your gun has no ammo. You neglected to provide an example.

    Not neglected, refused. I’m weary of reminding people of what they should already know.
    

    The Congress shall have Power To … coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.

    “regulate the value thereof” does not mean the government has the authority to just mosey on in and tell people what their money is worth. Get a life.
    

    I’m pretty sure dire financial catastrophe such as a depression would have been viewed as an appropriate use of Congressional powers.

    And I’m DEFINITELY sure it wouldn’t. The founders knew that government would never be able to do anything but hinder any recovery. Again, I refuse to show you what you should already know.
    

    Lending money is not liberal.

    Lending money is not liberal, but THE GOVERNMENT lending money is.
    

    I disagreed with you, so you immediately named me a liberal.

    I called you a liberal because you advocate the government stepping into an area where it has no business, and where it can and will do nothing but harm. That is what liberals do, and that’s why I called you a liberal. If the shoe fits …
    

    I am as conservative as they come and I fully believe there is a way for Congress to help us out of this situation without turning to Socialism.

    … yet what you advocate can be defined as nothing else.
    

    Even Newt is all for a loan. Is he a liberal too?

    If that’s his position, then on this issue, he’s just as liberal as the rest of the Republicrats that are doing the same thing.

    Why is it that people assume that Republicans are conservative when they’re merely Democrats belonging to different party?

    Are you really going to sit here and tell me John McCain is a conservative?????

    Please.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

92. #292
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:55 pm, RabbidSquirrel said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:52 pm, John Deaux said:

    OK, thanks!

93. #293
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:57 pm, oldcollegeguy1980 said:

    I submit there is a giant difference in that Loan to H-D and this whitewash.

    This whitewash addresses none of the underlying causes which led to this debacle. And impowers many of the same people who helped cause this to oversee the so-called recovery.

94. #294
    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:57 pm, atheling said:

    “The power given to Congress by the Constitution does not extend to the internal regulation of the commerce of a State (that is to say, of the commerce between citizen and citizen) which remain exclusively with its own legislature, but to its external commerce only; that is to say, its commerce with another State, or with foreign nations, or with the Indian tribes.” –Thomas Jefferson: Opinion on Bank, 1791. ME 3:147

95. #295
    On September 29th, 2008 at 3:00 pm, MtsEdge said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:47 pm, Joy said:
    Mntsedge – That is the vote for HR 3997, “An Act to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax relief and protections for military personnel,….”

    OOPS. My bad…I didn’t see today’s vote stats posted on the web page, yet. Should have read the link more closely.

96. #296
    On September 29th, 2008 at 3:02 pm, rightwingrocker said:

    Rightwingrocker believes in a 100% lassez-faire approach where the markets correct themselves.

    Yup. And it works every time. Your “loan” (tax increase) isn’t needed.
    

    My point is that we can loan the money without marching towards communism, so I provided a successful example from the past. HD even paid the loans off ahead of schedule.

    Just because one tiny venture into socialism worked out ok doesn’t make it legal or right. HD would have been forced to either stand on its own two feet or go under – exactly what should be happening with these companies. The government (and specifically Congress) caused this problem. What exactly makes you think they’re equipped to solve it?

    It is an undeniable fact that this country has been dabbling in socialism for nearly a hundred years. If it is not stopped soon, the entire concept of freedom is at risk.

    I guess one more little attempt at it isn’t going to hurt?

    BULLCRAP.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

97. #297
    On September 29th, 2008 at 3:02 pm, John Deaux said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:55 pm, rightwingrocker said:

    Prosecuting Attorney: We ask the jury to find this man guilty of murder, but we’re not going to provide evidence, because you should already know.

    I would tell you what I think of you right now, but I’m pretty sure you already know.

98. #298
    On September 29th, 2008 at 3:02 pm, Surveyor said:

    RabbidSquirrel said:

    On September 29th, 2008 at 2:19 pm, Surveyor said:

    Let them fail! Traitors, crooks and liars thou shalt not steal our 700 billion (that we do not even have for them to steal)!

    your right rabbid, perhaps I should have said:
    thou shalt not take out another line of credit with communist china on the backs of my kids.

    there….that pretty much sums it up.

99. #299
    On September 29th, 2008 at 3:07 pm, rightwingrocker said:

    I would tell you what I think of you right now, but I’m pretty sure you already know.

    I honestly couldn’t give a f$%^.

    I’d kick your sorry tail anyway.

    By the way, do some reading. You may learn something:

    The Federalist Papers
    The Anti-Federalist Papers
    First Harvest (Bradford)

    You may get a little insight into the Founders’ thinking.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

100. #300
     On September 29th, 2008 at 3:08 pm, rightwingrocker said:

     The First Harvest chapter is from The History of Plymouth Plantation.

     Read up.

     RWR
     http://www.rightwingrocker.com