On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 12:30:11 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:58:06 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

BTW it is interesting that the DEMOCRATS voted overwhelmingly positive
AFTER the Bob Gramm amendment was added and, as you pointed out, they
voted against the bill BEFORE the Gramm amendment.

it's interesting to note you ignore the wholesale sponsor of the bill
by republican conservatives, the support given to it by conservatives,
the fact it was part of a MUCH larger bill AND the continued support
of deregulation...a failed policy, BY conservatives.

conservatives are completely immune to evidence

You are the one who denies that the house democrats voted against the
bill in June until it got the Gramm language, then they voted for i in
higher numbers than the republicans.(in December)

who was gramm?

oh. a republican

who supported it in the GOP congress?

oh. ALL the committee leaders...ALL of whom happened to be republicans

who opposes regulations TODAY...after the greatest depression since
29...who opposes regulating banks?

the republicans.

you guys just hate the US.

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 00:02:36 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 22:03:21 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

conservatives are completely immune to evidence

You are the one who denies that the house democrats voted against the
bill in June until it got the Gramm language, then they voted for i in
higher numbers than the republicans.(in December)

who was gramm?

oh. a republican

who supported it in the GOP congress?

oh. ALL the committee leaders...ALL of whom happened to be republicans

who opposes regulations TODAY...after the greatest depression since
29...who opposes regulating banks?

the republicans.


Those republicans did not hold a gun to the head of 157 democrats

you mean other than controllin both houses of congress and having
impeached a sitting president??

and
2 independents to get them to vote for this bill AFTER Gramm added his
amendment. As you noted, they virtually all voted against it BEFORE
the Gramm amendment.

It sure sounds like they supported the Gramm amendment.


you guys just hate the US.

I just hate lying hypocrites.

then commit suicide if you hate yourself so much

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:36:24 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 02:14:49 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

Those republicans did not hold a gun to the head of 157 democrats

you mean other than controllin both houses of congress and having
impeached a sitting president??

That has nothing to do with the DEMOCRATS who voted for this bill, in
fact only 9 voted against it. 51 republicans voted against it. You
keep ignoring that part.

the GOP wrote the bill

the GOP leadership SUPPORTED the bill

CONSERVATIVES CONTNUE to support it EVEN THOUGH IT DESTROYED THE
ECONOMY...


I notice you have given up on that vote 297 thing. That was simply
misleading, if not a bold faced lie when they represented it as a vote
against the CFMA. The CFMA language was not even in the bill when vote
297 was taken. So much for the quality of the sites you link.

yeah. i quote official govt websites

what do they know

and i notice you IGNORE the fact the right CONTINUES TO SUPPORT
DEREGULATION

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 01:10:51 -0500, wrote:

2563.10 On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:59:27 -0500, bpuharic
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:36:24 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 02:14:49 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

Those republicans did not hold a gun to the head of 157 democrats

you mean other than controllin both houses of congress and having
impeached a sitting president??

That has nothing to do with the DEMOCRATS who voted for this bill, in
fact only 9 voted against it. 51 republicans voted against it. You
keep ignoring that part.

the GOP wrote the bill

the GOP leadership SUPPORTED the bill

Well it turns out more democrats supported this bill than republicans
but you can't handle the truth.

turns out they supported the WHOLE bill of thousands of pages

gee. who woulda guessed.

and it was written by and for conservatives and pushed by
conservatives


CONSERVATIVES CONTNUE to support it EVEN THOUGH IT DESTROYED THE
ECONOMY...


I notice you have given up on that vote 297 thing. That was simply
misleading, if not a bold faced lie when they represented it as a vote
against the CFMA. The CFMA language was not even in the bill when vote
297 was taken. So much for the quality of the sites you link.

yeah. i quote official govt websites

That was not a "government" web site. It was a COM, not a GOV.
I gave you the real activities on the bill from the Library of
Congress site (thomas.loc.gov)
It was very clear that not only was vote 297 on a bill that never made
it to the Senate Floor, it was also a vote BEFORE the CFMA language
was in the bill, yet you think it was a vote on the CFMA

so you're ignoring the fact right wingers TODAY...NOW..continue to
support socialism for wall street

yeah. you True Believers do that. evidence shows deregulation DESTROYS
economies

your repsonse? great! let's do it because the rich get richer


.

what do they know

and i notice you IGNORE the fact the right CONTINUES TO SUPPORT
DEREGULATION

It sure looks like more democrats supported this bill than
republicans. 51 republicans voted against it only 9 democrats voted
against it.
The democrat in chief signed it too.

yep. he signed a bill CONTAINING the CFMA...had LOTS of stuff in it

and today...conservatives DEFEND the destruction of our economy in the
name of the rich

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 11:01:46 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 07:02:43 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

turns out they supported the WHOLE bill of thousands of pages

gee. who woulda guessed.

They supported most of it. The Clinton financial team told them to.

ah, yes, the bill AUTHORED and SUPPORTED by the right wing

the bill SUPPORTED by the RIGHT WING TODAY

EVEN with the MASSIVE evidence of FAILURE

Have you seen the signing statement Clinton made when he made this the
l;aw of the land. It is on You Tube ... but I suppose it would be
too hard for you do find that.
It would certainly be hard for you to listen to it and still say this
was all the republican's fault.

tell you what. i go with evidence. the EVIDENCE shows the right wing
failed. you guys are wrong. deregulating markets DOES NOTWORK

cutting taxes DOES NOT WORK

but none of this affects your True Believer status in the wall street
cult

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 13:53:04 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 12:22:22 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 11:01:46 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 07:02:43 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

turns out they supported the WHOLE bill of thousands of pages

gee. who woulda guessed.

They supported most of it. The Clinton financial team told them to.

ah, yes, the bill AUTHORED and SUPPORTED by the right wing

... and voted for by 157 democrats. You tried to say all but 3 voted
against it, citing the wrong piece of legislation. I am not sure
whether that was simply being ignorant of the facts or an intentional
lie.

irrelevant. it was part of a LARGER bill but that section was AUTHORED
and PUSHED for by right whiners

as to corporate profits?? you whiners whine corporations arent making
enough money??

WRONG

RECORD PROFITS

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast....te-profit.html



but none of this affects your True Believer status in the wall street
cult

Why did your messiah cut taxes too

because he wanted to cut ONLY the middle class taxes BUT the TRUE
BELIEVERS insist the RICH have to get a tax cut

and do ALL of the deregulation? Why
did his financial team tell us all of this deregulation was the
answer? You still haven't admitted Clinton told us all 3 deregulation
packages were the best thing since sliced bread when he was signing
them. If it was so horrible, they would have fought them in the Senate
where ONE person can stop just about anything and Clinton would have
vetoed it. Nope, the democrats marched along with the flag. 9
democrats and 51 republicans voted against CFMA yet you keep blaming
it on republicans.

RECORD CORPORATE PROFITS
LOWEST TAXES ON RECORD
NO UNIONS

WHERE ARE THE JOBS???

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 01:10:51 -0500, wrote:

2563.10 On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:59:27 -0500, bpuharic
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:36:24 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 02:14:49 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

Those republicans did not hold a gun to the head of 157 democrats

you mean other than controllin both houses of congress and having
impeached a sitting president??

That has nothing to do with the DEMOCRATS who voted for this bill, in
fact only 9 voted against it. 51 republicans voted against it. You
keep ignoring that part.

the GOP wrote the bill

the GOP leadership SUPPORTED the bill

Well it turns out more democrats supported this bill than republicans
but you can't handle the truth.


CONSERVATIVES CONTNUE to support it EVEN THOUGH IT DESTROYED THE
ECONOMY...


I notice you have given up on that vote 297 thing. That was simply
misleading, if not a bold faced lie when they represented it as a vote
against the CFMA. The CFMA language was not even in the bill when vote
297 was taken. So much for the quality of the sites you link.

yeah. i quote official govt websites

That was not a "government" web site. It was a COM, not a GOV.
I gave you the real activities on the bill from the Library of
Congress site (thomas.loc.gov)
It was very clear that not only was vote 297 on a bill that never made
it to the Senate Floor, it was also a vote BEFORE the CFMA language
was in the bill, yet you think it was a vote on the CFMA

.

what do they know

and i notice you IGNORE the fact the right CONTINUES TO SUPPORT
DEREGULATION

It sure looks like more democrats supported this bill than
republicans. 51 republicans voted against it only 9 democrats voted
against it.
The democrat in chief signed it too.

Are you even 52% sure you're *not* debating with 'de'plume'?

On 11/26/2011 8:15 AM, John H wrote:
On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 01:10:51 -0500, wrote:

2563.10 On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:59:27 -0500, bpuharic
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:36:24 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 02:14:49 -0500, wrote:

Those republicans did not hold a gun to the head of 157 democrats

you mean other than controllin both houses of congress and having
impeached a sitting president??

That has nothing to do with the DEMOCRATS who voted for this bill, in
fact only 9 voted against it. 51 republicans voted against it. You
keep ignoring that part.

the GOP wrote the bill

the GOP leadership SUPPORTED the bill

Well it turns out more democrats supported this bill than republicans
but you can't handle the truth.


CONSERVATIVES CONTNUE to support it EVEN THOUGH IT DESTROYED THE
ECONOMY...


I notice you have given up on that vote 297 thing. That was simply
misleading, if not a bold faced lie when they represented it as a vote
against the CFMA. The CFMA language was not even in the bill when vote
297 was taken. So much for the quality of the sites you link.

yeah. i quote official govt websites

That was not a "government" web site. It was a COM, not a GOV.
I gave you the real activities on the bill from the Library of
Congress site (thomas.loc.gov)
It was very clear that not only was vote 297 on a bill that never made
it to the Senate Floor, it was also a vote BEFORE the CFMA language
was in the bill, yet you think it was a vote on the CFMA

.

what do they know

and i notice you IGNORE the fact the right CONTINUES TO SUPPORT
DEREGULATION

It sure looks like more democrats supported this bill than
republicans. 51 republicans voted against it only 9 democrats voted
against it.
The democrat in chief signed it too.

Are you even 52% sure you're *not* debating with 'de'plume'?

I do think we found out where bob was all that time.... Same idiot, same
old ****...

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 08:20:54 -0500, JustWait
wrote:


I do think we found out where bob was all that time.... Same idiot, same
old ****...

this from guys who insist the current economy is great and at full
employment because we cut taxes on the rich

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 11:05:49 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 08:50:44 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 08:20:54 -0500, JustWait
wrote:


I do think we found out where bob was all that time.... Same idiot, same
old ****...

this from guys who insist the current economy is great and at full
employment because we cut taxes on the rich

We are just finding out who the incompetent people are. They are still
importing engineers from India because our kids chose not to take any
substantial courses in college. There are plenty of jobs for QUALIFIED
people, even in the construction business.

funny the market seems to disagree.

but what do they know. they dont watch faux news.