On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:38:30 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:33:32 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:22:38 -0500, wrote:

This is the Library of Congress,. not another opinion site that you
googled up.

an opinion site?? uh..since when is a record of which members of
congress voted for/against a bill an 'opinion'?

Bob the vote you referenced was NOT the bill that passed the senate.
Read the activity. Whole sections of that June bill were thrown away
and replaced with Senate language.,
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


do you know what an opinion IS??

I know what spin is. They want you to believe the democrats voted
against the bill when they voted FOR the FINAL bill in greater numbers
than the republicans. That is simply a lie that you gobbled up.

the lie is that deregulation works.

it doesnt. the facts are quite clear to everyone EXCEPT conservatives
who are quite willing to sacrifice the US as long as the rich stay
rich

and let's look at what the consensus of economic opinion is regarding
the financial meltdown is, shall we??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Gramm

Changing the subject again?

gee. kind of like saying you're in favor of rat poison as long as it's
proven not to hurt anyone

ignoring the consequences of your ideolgy, arent you?



In its 2008 coverage of the financial crisis, The Washington Post
named Gramm one of seven "Key Players In the Battle Over Regulating
Derivatives", for having "[p]ushed through several major bills to
deregulate the banking and investment industries, including the 1999
Gramm-Leach-Bliley act that brought down the walls separating the
commercial banking, investment and insurance industries".[16]

True but the DEMOCRATS voted overwhelmingly to support BOTH bills
after Gramm was done with them.

the bill was sponsored by conservatives

cosponsored by conservatives

supported by conservatives AND

even though we are living TODAY...right NOW with the consequences

conservatives STILL SUPPORT deregulation



Snip more opinion

you can run but you can't hide. the fact is this dolchstoss had the
greedy right wing...gramm and greenspan, as its authors

Gramm, Greenspan, Rubin and Summers. Three of 4 of those were Clinton
appointees.

and who did greenspan work for after clinton?

oh. george bush

kinda forgot that didnt you?

On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:45:34 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:35:13 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 21:29:13 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 16:53:10 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

oh. the GOP did.

and clinton? he'd been impeached you moron. congress had his ass tied
in knots

even for a right wing fringe nut you're incompetent


As usual you fell for an editorial from some opinion site and did not
go look at the real facts from the Library of Congress.

?? since when is a public record of a congressional vote a m atter of
'opinion'? you seem not to know what an opinion is

The opinion was representing that vote as THE vote on the FINAL bill.

the bill lovingly shepherded through congress by the GOP leadership,
ALL of whom supported it

AND conservatives supoprt it TODAY even AFTER it was shown to have
wrecked the economy

there is NOTHING conservatives wont support, no matter what the
cost...even if it destroys the US

as long as the rich get richer

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 11/25/2011 12:02 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 22:03:21 -0500, 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 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.
Next, bob will be calling you a negro hater.

--
1-20-13 The end of an error

On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 09:50:27 -0500, Drifter wrote:

On 11/25/2011 12:02 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 22:03:21 -0500, wrote:


Those republicans did not hold a gun to the head of 157 democrats 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.
Next, bob will be calling you a negro hater.

negro? you just get out of a time machine from the 1950's?

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 01:17:45 -0500, wrote:

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

yeah. i quote official govt websites

No you don't

From that "hobby" site's "about us" page

Launched in 2004 as a hobby of Joshua Tauberer, GovTrack.us was the
first website worldwide whose primary goal was to provide free
comprehensive legislative tracking for everyday citizens and to
embrace Web 2.0 and open data for government information.


My question, why not just use the LOC site? Too stupid to actually
think for yourself and see the facts without having them spoon fed to
you? thomas.loc.gov will give you the actual congressional activities
as reported to the Library of Congress, not some regurgitated excerpts
that someone wants you to read.

this is the guy who says, after looking at unemployment figures, that
cutting taxes on the rich CREATED 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'?