bi-partisan DISagreement

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

bi-partisan DISagreement

Postby pennsyltucky » Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:58 am

haha ive never seen anything like this. im watching c-span while doing billing.... there are no partisan lines on the bailout issue.... republicans both agree and disagree, and dems agree and disagree too.. :rofl: chickens without heads

anyone else see this?
muleskinner wrote:you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth and a benalli in the other.
User avatar
pennsyltucky
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 2:21 pm
Location: stoneboro, PA


Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:14 am

There is very little thought being put into what is good for America. It is almost all about what is going to get me reelected in November.

Even McCain going to Washington had both sides playing what is good for me. McCain should have known that as soon as he said he was going to help, the Democrats said we guarantee to hold this bill hostage until you leave. Whether it was a political stunt or honest effort, McCain should have know the Democrats would sabotage his efforts.

Those in safe districts or not running for reelction are trying to get what they believe is good for America. Liberals want all these handouts and conservatives don't want big government.

Democrats in conservative districts don't want to look like liberals. Republicans in liberal districts don't want to look like conservatives.

Another half-assed bill that doesn't address the issue squarely and includes things that will have no tangible benefit, but they feel good, from a bunch of self-centered politicians.

All the more reason we need to start beating the term limits drum.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16303
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby Pacific Fisher » Tue Sep 30, 2008 10:15 am

SpinnerMan wrote:There is very little thought being put into what is good for America. It is almost all about what is going to get me reelected in November.

Even McCain going to Washington had both sides playing what is good for me. McCain should have known that as soon as he said he was going to help, the Democrats said we guarantee to hold this bill hostage until you leave. Whether it was a political stunt or honest effort, McCain should have know the Democrats would sabotage his efforts.

Those in safe districts or not running for reelction are trying to get what they believe is good for America. Liberals want all these handouts and conservatives don't want big government.

Democrats in conservative districts don't want to look like liberals. Republicans in liberal districts don't want to look like conservatives.

Another half-assed bill that doesn't address the issue squarely and includes things that will have no tangible benefit, but they feel good, from a bunch of self-centered politicians.

All the more reason we need to start beating the term limits drum.


Spinner,

You have failed again to do your homework on this issue (again). Please go back and look at the vote totals of Republicans and Democrats who supported the bi-partisan developed bill that President Bush put forth as desperately needing passage.

The Democrats delivered 60% of their member (135 votes) and the Republicans delivered only 95 votes.

McCain personally assured the country yesterday morning that as a result of his suspending his campaign (again) and rolling up his sleeves, his efforts had assured the Republican support needed to pass the bill.

The Republicans did not deliver and blocked passage.
So now it is back to the negotiating table for both sides.
Oh and yes, the stock market lost a trillion dollars in value yesterday in the wake of the failure to act.
Pacific Fisher
hunter
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:36 am
Location: Gualala, CA

Postby pennsyltucky » Tue Sep 30, 2008 11:57 am

Pacific Fisher wrote:The Republicans did not deliver and blocked passage.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: R's "blocked" it huh? same as i could block the steelers line.... your partisan hat is evidently drooping down over your eyes again :rolleyes:
muleskinner wrote:you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth and a benalli in the other.
User avatar
pennsyltucky
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 2:21 pm
Location: stoneboro, PA

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Sep 30, 2008 12:05 pm

Pacific Fisher,

How does that disagree with anything I said? Democrats were 41% of the no votes.

For the measure was 60/40 in the Democrats and 33/67 in the Republicans. There were 75 more Democrats voted with President Bush than Republicans and 38 more Republicans voted against President Bush. It was bipartisan both for and against. Which is exactly what I said it was going to be. I did not predict passage or failure.

As far as McCain, all I said is nothing was going to happen one way or the other while he was in DC and he should have known that. That was an actual criticism of McCain. We do criticize "our guys" unlike the other side.

If it was so critical, why did the Messiah allow 40% of the Democrats to vote against it. The real screw up here is Pelosi bring a bill to a vote when it didn't have the votes needed. That is her job.

Could you please tell me what you are criticizing me for? You blanket statements don't help me. I appreciate constructive criticism, so help me out.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16303
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby Pacific Fisher » Tue Sep 30, 2008 12:49 pm

Spinner this is not hard to understand.

The Republicans could not even deliver 1/2 of their members to vote yes. This is after the public was assured by John McCain that he had delivered the necessary Republican support of this bi-partisan developed bill.
The Republican's hurt themselves in this politically and McCain took a big hit by "showboating" (again) by his false assurance.

The Republican leadership came out of lengthy bi-partisan negotiations without they or President Bush being able to deliver.

The Republicans blocked passage.
Pacific Fisher
hunter
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:36 am
Location: Gualala, CA

Postby dudejcb » Tue Sep 30, 2008 1:02 pm

Spinner,

you again acuse the "liberals" of wanting handouts. That's getting old. The R's up for election bolted, and then used the lame excuse that Pilosi hurt their feelings. Cry me a river.

The reality is that middle America is tired of bailing out rich scamsters... If we are going to bail out the big boys, what's wrong with getting something for the little guys as well, and limiting how much more the big boys can scam out of the rescue package.

A tax credit for student loan interest would be a step in the right direction. Renegotiating mortgages that came with balloon interest payments and setting a reasonable interest rate... so they don't have to foreclose would be another good idea... so long as the home is the promary residence and not an "investment" property.

This isn't about liberal handouts. It's about what good for the country and fair to all, not just the rich!
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Sep 30, 2008 1:07 pm

Pacific Fisher,

I never said McCain could deliver anything. I did my homework because I was right. I didn't exactly go way out on a limb with this prediction.

The Democrats were a large part of the no vote. I'm glad to see that you made up your mind and thought this was a good bill and it should have passed. How does it feel to agree with President Bush? Maybe you'll be agreeing more and more in the future.

I guess you finally realized that the Republicans think for themselves and don't blindly follow their leadership. If you ever noticed, I don't like the Republican leadership. They are the guys that ran the party into the ground and gave the Democrats control of Congress. That's worked out well for the country :no:

I really don't understand what you criticized me for.

Pacific Fisher wrote:You have failed again to do your homework on this issue (again).
Because the Republicans can't deliver a half-assed compromise bill :huh:
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16303
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Sep 30, 2008 1:12 pm

dudejcb,

The sole purpose of these emergency bill is to add liquidity to the financial markets.

What they hell do any of the things you mention have to do with an emergency bill to add liquidity to the market?

You can call these off topic provision whatever you want. They are trying to take advantage of a crisis and blackmailing the other congressmen to vote for things that cannot stand on their own.

I said awhile ago that I feared congress would lose focus and this would degenerate. I'm not exactly shocked at the current situation.

These damn Republicans should have just bent over for the Democrats again. Sounds kind of gay to me. I guess they were too homophobic to bend over one more time.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16303
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby dudejcb » Tue Sep 30, 2008 1:38 pm

hold on Spinner,

just who is trying to take advantage of a crisis? The original proposal from Bush was to give $700 Fillion in spending authrity to Whathisface without any oversight or right of review by any court or congress. That's an attemot to take advantage of a crisis situation that was created by these same people, and attmepting extortion using a spector of another great depression if we don't move really really fast and hand over the money. Give me a break.

The idea of providing some relief for others as well as banks and brokers is not blackmail. It's a recognition, as I said before, that middle America is sick and tired of being screwed by big wigs who then get bailed out and screw us again! So in recognition of that (and it has some merit) they broadened it to include some relief for those already suffering economic discomfort, but who aren't already connected to big money or big politics.

BTW: If we expect our kids to pay this off, the least we can do is give them interest free (in terms of tax credit on loan interest) student loans so they can make enough to pay it off.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Sep 30, 2008 2:05 pm

So why did the majority of the Democrats buy into the Bush scaremongering again? Will they never learn.

If you noticed, a majority of the Republicans said it's not that bad and voted against the bill. Remember, I just got criticized for that.

The issue before Congress was that we needed to add liquidity to the financial markets and we need to do it quickly. Then the Democrats went of onto a bunch of tangents about golden parachutes, helping bankrupt homeowners, etc.

Do we need to add liquidity to the financial markets or not?

I do not know. It seems that we do.

Do we need to do it quickly?

I do not know. Again, it seems that way.

Was the Paulson plan a good plan or the only plan?

It seemed reasonable, but there are many ways to skin a cat. However, it was focussed on a single issue that may be an emergency based on the number of banks that are going belly up.

Do we have to rush through anything else?

Absolutely not. Why would it be a hurry? If all this stuff is a good idea, then it can stand on its own merits after the election.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16303
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby dudejcb » Tue Sep 30, 2008 2:36 pm

Agreed! (for the most part)
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby GroundSwatter » Tue Sep 30, 2008 2:38 pm

I'm taking a screen shot and saving it. Dude and spinner agreed on something.
It's a fact that 70 percent of the people who purchase heavier tackle do so with the categorical I just lost a huge snook! Einstein Hairdo.The other 30 percent have either Tarpon Fever or are sporting a hand cramped into a claw from a deepwater grouper.
User avatar
GroundSwatter
hunter
 
Posts: 3643
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:22 pm
Location: GTMO from NE Texas

Postby dudejcb » Tue Sep 30, 2008 3:32 pm

there's more. Spinner once posited the notion of buy me a beer should our paths ever cross... and I'd like to take this opportunity to remind him of that. You are all my wtinesses!
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Sep 30, 2008 3:45 pm

The offer still stands. If you would have given me a little more warning that you were passing through O'hare, I would have stopped by the international terminal (only place you can get anything outside security) and bought you a beer.

We agree more than most might expect. There's just no point in debating the things we agree on. The love fest would be gayer than the emoticons.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16303
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby dudejcb » Tue Sep 30, 2008 3:51 pm

speaking of gay... :wink:
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 5251
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Postby Pacific Fisher » Tue Sep 30, 2008 8:32 pm

SpinnerMan wrote:So why did the majority of the Democrats buy into the Bush scaremongering again? Will they never learn.

If you noticed, a majority of the Republicans said it's not that bad and voted against the bill. Remember, I just got criticized for that.

The issue before Congress was that we needed to add liquidity to the financial markets and we need to do it quickly. Then the Democrats went of onto a bunch of tangents about golden parachutes, helping bankrupt homeowners, etc.

Do we need to add liquidity to the financial markets or not?

I do not know. It seems that we do.

Do we need to do it quickly?

I do not know. Again, it seems that way.

Was the Paulson plan a good plan or the only plan?

It seemed reasonable, but there are many ways to skin a cat. However, it was focussed on a single issue that may be an emergency based on the number of banks that are going belly up.

Do we have to rush through anything else?

Absolutely not. Why would it be a hurry? If all this stuff is a good idea, then it can stand on its own merits after the election.


So who is the Republican Party Leader, or is it every man for himself.

I have posted that I have problems with the bail out, but to listen to Bush, it has to be done right now. The loss of a trillion dollars in one day on the market was not too comforting.

But let there be no doubt that despite your false statements spinner, the Republicans are the ones who stalled the bill. Please reread your posts accusing the Dems of stalling the bill.

As you may like to forget Spinner, you posted the statement below on September 22 in response to Bush/Paulson presenting a 3 page bail out proposal asking for 700 billion US taxpayer dollars with virtually no strings and controls,

"No one will ever help you with your ignorance. Go do the research, there are a lot of strings attached. We will probably lose money on the deal, but we could actually make a profit. I'm sure you didn't realize that.

How much is it worth to stabilize the financial markets? It seems to have done that or at least settled them down."

Democrat Kucinich from Ohio has an idea that I think has great merit. Place a quarter percent tax on each stock transaction so the Wall Street bails out Wall Street. We are talking a very large amount of dollars.
Pacific Fisher
hunter
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:36 am
Location: Gualala, CA

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:38 am

Pacific Fisher wrote:But let there be no doubt that despite your false statements spinner, the Republicans are the ones who stalled the bill. Please reread your posts accusing the Dems of stalling the bill.
Temporarily until McCain left town. I was criticizing McCain for not foreseeing that.

Pacific Fisher wrote:As you may like to forget Spinner, you posted the statement below on September 22 in response to Bush/Paulson presenting a 3 page bail out proposal asking for 700 billion US taxpayer dollars with virtually no strings and controls,
What new strings have they added regarding the actual purchase of toxic paper? He has to report to Congress. He has to make himself available for hearings. All the new "strings" that have been added do not address the singular issue that should be address or reduce the likelihood that the conditions in the financial market will improve. Now they have added tax cuts and increases FDIC insurance. It's a big vote buying pile of dung.

Beside, I already said I was basically wrong on my understand of the oversight issue. You even said it was a good post.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16303
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby Pacific Fisher » Wed Oct 01, 2008 9:35 am

My apologies spinner for rehashing that point.
Pacific Fisher
hunter
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:36 am
Location: Gualala, CA


Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests