"Keith nuttle" wrote in message
...
John R. Carroll wrote:
"Bay Area Holdout" wrote in message
...
"Cliff" wrote in message
...
Another three trillion down the drain.
Does the phrase "Miserable Failure" ring a bell?

OTOH AIG had another nice party and someone
is getting a lot of taxpayer money .... well, debt to
the taxpayer, anyway. THEY got the money.

No accountability either AFAIK. Just
free money ... How did this get started
again?
--
Cliff
Well CONGRESS and Bush decided something had to be done. Paulson
proposed the bailout, they wrote it up and sent it to CONGRESS.

The HOUSE votes and rejects it. Let the games begin!
Pelosi in her brillant leadership role blames the Republicans(surprize!)
but 96 Dems vote NO the first time as well. If as LEADER of the HOUSE
Dems she got 20 or so of those 96 to vote YES, it would have PASSED
first time!
But no she blames the Republicans......great leader that she is.

A few days later, what was sent to CONGRESS as a THREE PAGE Bill
becomes a FOUR HUNDRED PAGE Bill loaded with PORK. And now it PASSES!

Sent to Bush and he signs it as he said he would.

And that is how this got started!


Nice fairy tale but that's what it is.

JC
Now that the facts have been given and the only response is its a fairy
tale despite the fact that the information has been published in the media
for the last two month and can not be disproved, assassination of the
poster will commence.

No, no "facts" have been given, only misleading factiods that misrepresent
the truth. What's been "given" is an accusation that the Democrats voted
against the bill, when in fact they voted in favor of it by a margin of 45
votes. The ones who sandbagged it were the Republicans, who voted against it
by a margin of 68 votes:

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

And that was on a proposal from a Republican administration! What was that
you were saying about "leadership"?

The bill, which House Republicans said was inadequate, was picked up by the
Senate as a medium for enfolding four distinct bills, which shifted much of
the bailout from banking institutions to individuals and small businesses
(that's what's being called "pork"). This, as you may have noticed, is what
the Administration itself has been shifting to in later versions of their
plan. _The Economist_, which came out today, illustrates this with a picture
of Paulson pulling multiple rabbits out of his hat. g

The Senate took that approach to expand the bill because they're constrained
by the origination clause of the Constitution from originating revenue bills
in this area. So the bill eventually passed by Congress bears little
relationship to the original. They just used it as a subterfuge, an
opportunity to skirt around Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution. Senate
Republicans passed this version; House Republicans still voted against it,
but lost the vote; and the President signed this combined bill.

If you are a liberal and confronted with facts that are contrary to what
you believe the messenger will be killed.

John was too generous with "Bay Area Holdout." I'd say the "facts" the
Holdout presented are the product of either an inadequate mind or of an
intentionally misleading one.

--
Ed Huntress