CNN says the Senate will likely begin voting in 15 minutes or so... around 7:45 central.
Printable View
CNN says the Senate will likely begin voting in 15 minutes or so... around 7:45 central.
this will be a vbookie... please hold.
Clinton: yay
Cornyn: yay
Hutchison: yay
McCain: yay
Obama: yay
... from CSPAN2's live coverage
obviously it's a lot easier trying to find 100 people to agree about something than it is with over 400... so i'd imagine this thing passes 65-35 give or take 2 votes.
Never getting my vote again. Either one of them. Even if she's running for governor.Quote:
Cornyn: yay
Hutchison: yay
:td
More like it's a lot easier when you buy off everyone's votes with pork.Quote:
Originally Posted by jman3000
Don't panic yet... this was the vote on a US-India nuclear agreement. Thankfully the voting has yet to start on the bailout. My mistake.
Bernie Sanders (independent - Vermont) is railing for the bailout right now.
I've been tuned into C-Span-2 for about the last hour waiting for it. McCain voted no and Obama voted yes for some Amtrack legislation a bit ago.
I'm not sure, but it looks like the debate just started on the Bailout.
Yeah, they just finished the India-US vote 2-3 minutes ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Dear Harry Reid, go fuck yourself.
Someone tell the dumbass complaining about their home value out in Vegas that they live in a fucking desert - what did they expect?
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan
Vegas may be the best city in America to visit, but I sure as hell wouldn't live there.
:lmao
Apparently Harry Reid thinks if we pass this bill America will magically become the land of prosperity again. Well, I'm sold...
That's right, an amendment was voted on regarding if the test a nuke.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
What do you expect him to say? We're passing this bipartisan bill because Wall Street has been in our pockets for years?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan
What's the over/under of McCain mentioning Obama in his speech (if he has one) and also the over/under of Obama mentioning Bush in his speech (if he has one)?
Oh hell no. Reid: "This is a fine piece of legislation."
Someone get a rope.
LOL... now the obligatory mention of what the bill is technically about... mental health care.
Side note: I think this has to be the first CSPAN blog on Spurstalk in history :lol
You know they're full of it, both Dems and Reps, and they're going to pass it. I hope the House didn't spoil you, because these guys will bend over for Wall Street any day of the week and twice on Sunday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan
Biden does not vote? :rolleyes
Biden's not there.
Obama: "Present."
Just wanted to get that out of the way.
Cornyn: aye :td
Time to go figure out who's running against him.
So like I said, no vote... convenient.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Clinton: yes
Cornyn: yes
Feinstein: yes
Hatch: yes
Hutchison: yes
Kerry: yes
Lieberman: yes
McCain: yes
Obama: yes
McCain: Yes
Obama: Yes
Fuckers
/threadQuote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Biden: yes how the hell does he vote without being there?
Fuck our senate
Smith: Yes
Wyden: No
Wow... I have a newfound respspect for my liberal senator, Ron Wyden!
This was the bailout, right? or was it an amendment? I wasn't paying attention.
He wasn't there at the beginning but they just recognized him, he voted yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Passes overwhelmingly
This was the vote for our unholy, unAmerican, financially socialist, pork laden bill.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
C-SPAN rocks,
The British had it right when they burnt down the Capitol.
74-25 for it.
25 decent people in that legislative body. The rest can go fuck themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Haven't you seen it before?Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeChalupa
C-Span is for the House of Representatives. C-Span 2 is for the senate. There's also a C-Span 3. I noticed C-Span carried the same thing as C-Span 2 for this vote. Normally, the programming is different, and they each have replays or other programs when not in session.
Yep. Damn fools.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
I sent an email to Hutchison and Cornyn telling them to stand up for America and the people of Texas and vote no. Guess their constituents have no voice!
But now I'm going to send another one telling them what sorry suckers they are!
I hope the House shoots this motherfucker down again.
Fuck. I hope this doesn't end up like the worthless airline bailout that did nothing to save the jobs it was sold to the public as protection for.
So do I.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Watch the future. My senator Gordon Smith (R) in a blue state will lose this November now. I'm sure this hurts him enough with conservatives that he will be replaced by the more liberal democrat running against him!
EVERY Senator who voted for this needs to be tossed out! And that's tough for me to say considering I really like Cornyn and Hutchison. But actually, if every Senator who voted yes gets tossed out - the Republicans would probably come out better!Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Our only hope now is that the House stands strong and votes this piece of crap down.
So none of you are going to vote for McCain or Obama? They voted for it, too.
Yeah that really sucks! How can McCain still claim he isn't for earmarks when he just voted for this piece of crap? I'm very disappointed in him - now was the time to stand up and be a Maverick and say he wasn't going to vote for something that #1) had a ton of earmarks, and #2) wasn't what the people wanted.Quote:
Originally Posted by spurster
Well, since Sarah Palin isn't a Senator, she's the ONLY one who didn't vote for this - so I'll still vote McCain/Palin. Man, what a disappointing day. :depressed
Libertarian. He won't win, but it's time to send a message.Quote:
Originally Posted by spurster
Chris Dodd just reasoned that this is what the founding fathers would have wanted them to do.
No it isn't you idiot, they would have revolted against you and all your corrupt ass buddies in D.C. long ago. Go fuck yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan
I am glad someone caught that. this bum is out. I bet the lobbyists(banks)promised all these fuckers $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to vote for this thing whether or not they get re-elected. but I am with you this loser is gone.
Damn - we need another Boston Tea Party. Only instead of tossing crates of tea, we should toss all these bozos into Boston Harbor - or the Potomac since it's closer to Capital Hill! :bangQuote:
Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan
Rick Noriega
what is sad is that Cornyn himself said he was getting emails 100-1 against. The race was a statistical tie, until tommorrow. How fast do think it will take Rick to put up a commerical about this shit?
McCain sucks ass for voting for this after saying he'd veto any pork and make em famous. Stupid move especially since he could have voted against it and it would have still passed...that's going to be used against him now. What an idiot.
And no I'm not voting for Obama because of it. The enthusiastic socialist is still much worse than the reluctant one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
This guy is a socialist, that is his admitted political affiliation. The first one ever elected to the Senate in American History. I bet he's supportive of it.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ie_Sanders.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders
Bernard "Bernie" Sanders (born September 8, 1941) is the current junior United States Senator from Vermont. Sanders was elected on November 7, 2006, and is currently a member of the 110th United States Congress. Before becoming Senator, Sanders represented Vermont's at-large district in the United States House of Representatives for 16 years.
Sanders is a self-described democratic socialist, but because he does not belong to a formal political party he appears as an independent on the ballot.
But not the last.
McCain is a fucking idiot. This asshole is trying to throw the election. I'm convinced. :lmao
One minute he's against it, the next for it. Then he voted against it.Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
I thought it was McCain on a landslide... :rolleyesQuote:
Originally Posted by whottt
Actually it's exactly what Alexander Hamilton did do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aggie Hoopsfan
I think Krugman put it well...
I think it has a chance to fail the house, but its really small. The "audible" reaction that congress was hearing before this was that the general public hated the bill. After the 777 drop the other day, the general public does NOT oppose the bill in the same manner. I still think its hard to tell exactly what the public feels, but I think after the Dow drop more people are scared of what might happen and are thus in favor of voting for this bill.Quote:
Here’s the thing: it’s very hard for Congress to originate complex financial rescues, so it’s normally up to the executive to put things together. Unfortunately, Paulson came up with an awful plan. Ideally, the Dems would have ripped the thing up and started over, but that was never realistic. So instead they made it significantly better, but still building on the original, misconceived structure; it became better than nothing, but not good.
And then it failed in the House, so the Senate has larded it up, with stuff like SEC. 503. EXEMPTION FROM EXCISE TAX FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROWS DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN.
I think that Congressional leaders know that it’s a bad bill, but feel compelled to defend it, because they’re (rightly) scared of the financial consequences of a second rejection. And to some extent economists like myself are in the same position; I think I called it the “hold your nose caucus.”
So am I for the bill? Yuk, phooey, I guess so. And I’m very angry at Paulson for putting us in this position.
That being said, if the House members voted against this figuring that this sway in public opinion would happen then I'm pretty damn impressed since that was a genius political move. I'm not sure that's the case, but if that was discussed behind closed doors then some people are on the (political - not necessarily economic) ball.
It's ridiculous that people are saying the wealthy aren't going to eat it on a collapse...I can't believe anyone believes that shit. You notice it's mainly the wealthy saying we need to do it for the people?
All these people thinking they've saved their IRA's major loss are in for a rude awakening when they market finally does collapse....and they get a total loss.
I suggest all you guys that were in favor of this to save your 401k or IRA's see what you can do to better protect your assets. It's easy to do with a 401K...
Sanders was actually giving a speech about an amendment that he proposed to the bill ("The Sanders Amendment"), that would have paid for much of the bailout by taxing the rich.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
Quote:
Sanders’ amendment calls for a 10-percent tax surcharge on individuals who make more than $500,000 annually and couples earning more than $1 million.
Sanders will not vote for the broader Senate bailout bill unless it contains the amendment he authored, said Will Wiquist, the senator’s spokesman today.
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/a...EWS03/81001041
You know it's sad that we've gone from fighting about which President will make the better candidate to, "Oh well, it doesn't matter, they both fucked us over and now our economy is going to tank because of it."
...
Sad day to be an American. :(
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cry Havoc
Hey, look on the bright side, if you got more than 100K in a single bank account you're now insured for up to 250k.
I know I lose sleep at night over losing that 100k I keep in my checking account :tu
Sweeeet. 250k might be enough to buy a month's worth of groceries soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt