On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 23:11:48 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 22:13:30 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 17:43:10 -0400, wrote:



I guess all those TV clips of Greenspan and the gang were photoshopped
and they had to waterboard Clinton to get him to say this was the
greatest thing since sliced bread when he signed it.
You can try to rewrite history and say the democrats were not all over
these dereg bills but it is pure bull****. The 2000 bill passed with
unanimous consent in the senate and overwhelming support in the house.
It was mostly republicans who opposed it there.
I have posted the vote here about 6 times.

incidentally you might want to check out this discussion of gramm's
role in destroying the US economy at the behest of the free market far
right:


http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/post_140.php?page=all

Perhaps you should go to Thomas.loc.gov and read the actual bill,
actions and votes and not depend on "the alternate press" for your
propaganda.

and perhaps you should read the history of the bill and not rely on
the mainstream media for yours.

On Sun, 04 Apr 2010 00:52:14 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 23:10:51 -0400, bpuharic wrote:


uh..why? you're assuming they had an opportunity to discuss the bill,
review it and had plenty of time. none of this is true.

the fact is the far right free market fundies slipped this one under
the radar. your assessment is wrong

You are just wrong
Look at HR 5660. Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000
(Introduced in House)
That is the actual bill that deregulated the derivatives and that was
banging around since June. The fact that it got tacked onto HR4577
late does not mean nobody knew what was in it.

meaningless assertion. because if gramm DID want people to read it and
DID want them to understand it, he would have introduced it with the
11,000 page bill. the fact he introduced a 262 page bill at the 11th
hour, at the end of the session meant he was, as the law school
reference said, trying to sneak it in.


Your assessment is simply denial that the democrats could have
possibly had anything to do with it.
If that was true they would have passed real reform last year when
they did have the 60 votes. The fact is there wasn't even any
meaningful reform proposed.

uh. what planet do you live on? the bills richard shelby is fighting
against are in congress NOW.


Your idea that if there were no republicans everything would be OK is
just wrong. Again, read who voted against this bill. 51 republicans
and 9 democrats. in the house.
(roll call vote 603)
NO senators voted against it.

irrelevant. gramm snuck it in at the behest of his paymasters at the
very end of the session, knowing no one would read it.

so you are either lying or stupid. being right wing, however, i
wouldnt rule out both

On Sun, 04 Apr 2010 00:54:38 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 23:17:42 -0400, bpuharic wrote:


Perhaps you should go to Thomas.loc.gov and read the actual bill,
actions and votes and not depend on "the alternate press" for your
propaganda.

and perhaps you should read the history of the bill and not rely on
the mainstream media for yours.

I am reading the actual bill and the history. Quick quiz, what date
did they do the final vote?

fine. you go read the 11,000 page bill. you say you actually read
11,000 pages? is that what you're saying?