|
Bush Bailout
Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:28:50 -0800, Calif Bill wrote: "Curly Surmudgeon" wrote in message . .. On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:42:41 -0800, Calif Bill wrote: "Cliff" wrote in message ... On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 04:06:58 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Nov 13, 6:07 am, Cliff wrote: 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 The dems are pilfering the money. Nothing new there. They are not running things yet. Bushco is. So you lied. Again. HTH -- Cliff You are definately confused as to how the Federal Government runs. Then explain the $2 trillion dollars that the Fed has already given out wihtout oversight and refuses to reveal recipients. The Congress is the only group who can pass a spending bill, the only ones who can say we spend this money. The Executive Branch can approve or veto the bill with their Check and Balance part of government. But it is only Congress who can first say lets spend money and tell the rest of government to spend money and how much they can spend. And the Democrats have been in control of the checkbook for nearly 2 years. Bush and the Republicans sux. But so does the Democrats and Pelosi, expecially Pelosi, and Reid. You cannot gloss over the 6 years of a Republican congress so easily and blame the next class for their bending over and dropping their trousers for Bush/Cheney. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RIP -- Robert Lee Burnside 11/23/26 - 9/1/05 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Did not say the Republicans were angels. I stated the facts of life re our government and who actually gets to vote to spend money. And yes, if the spending bill passes, the money HAS TO BE SPENT. A Democrat Congress got that ruling years ago. Used to be the Executive branch controlled a lot of the pork overspending, by just not spending the money. But Congress did not like fiscal responsibility. http://www.auburn.edu/~johnspm/gloss/impoundment is a decent explanation. We need an Executive Branch to take the ruling to the Supremes. The problem for at least the last 8 years, is a President who did not veto overspending. And the $5 trillion, not $2 trillion is not money spent, so no appropriation bill was required. It is what we committed to cover and keeps growing. We are screwed. Absolutely screwed, the only solution is massive inflation. Got your bug-out bags packed? Congress could have stayed the Treasury and let all the weak banks and investment houses fail. There would have been an abrupt downturn with firings, etc. In about a year the derivative and mortgage losses would have surfaced and largely worked their way through the system. Congress could have reinstated the Glass-Spiegal Act and those responsible for the fraud would be prosecuted. In about two years it would have ended with the system intact and the economy rebounding. ----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Bush Bailout
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:28:50 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote: The problem for at least the last 8 years, is a President who did not veto overspending. Like the stuff in HIS budget or what he demanded, such a ths "bailout" (now 5 trillion at least it looks like). Note that congress only signed off on about 750 billion of that 5 trillion. For an "emergency". Suckers. -- Cliff |
Bush Bailout
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 04:30:28 -0800 (PST), wrote:
Cliff is not confused. Curly is not confused. They know how it works... and choose to lie about it. They are part of the disinformation assault on America. Found those "WMDs" yet? That deficit "free money" you've been warned about so many times? Why did you NOT expect the chickens to come home to roost? Some winger lied to you again? -- Cliff |
Bush Bailout
|
Bush Bailout
"Cliff" wrote in message ... On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:28:50 -0800, "Calif Bill" wrote: The problem for at least the last 8 years, is a President who did not veto overspending. Like the stuff in HIS budget or what he demanded, such a ths "bailout" (now 5 trillion at least it looks like). Note that congress only signed off on about 750 billion of that 5 trillion. For an "emergency". Suckers. -- Cliff Thank the Fed for the extra money. The same Fed who's previous head, said they were superior to any Federal agency. No Federal Control! |
Bush Bailout
On Nov 15, 8:09*am, rand mair fheal wrote:
In article , wrote: Cliff is not confused. *Curly is not confused. *They know how it works... and choose to lie about it. They are part of the disinformation assault on America. actually the confusion is all yours congress authorizes spending but its the president that actually does the spending so any complaint about spending all goes to shrub until 20 jan 2009 - end of an error He endorsed the check that the democratic congress just wrote. He could have not signed the bill, but the dems would have found another way to pilfer the country. Thanks for the clarification. |
Bush Bailout
|
Bush Bailout
|
Bush Bailout
In article ,
Cliff wrote: but the dems would have found another way to pilfer the country. It's bushco's program. THEY run it. its simpler than that the treasury is part of the executive they have to get permission to spend money from congress but actually spending the money is done with the presidents authority who decides exactly what to spend and when and who to pay and usually congress leaves many details unspecified which the president makes specific so if there is disgruntlement on how money is being spent until 20 jan 2009 its all up to shrub the only real responsibility that can be laid on congress is if they dont authorize enough spending arf meow arf - cats and dogs living together - who ya goin call its the end of the world as you know it - filler text goes here this is how the world ends - not with a whimper but with a bang this is how the world ends - not with a whimper but with a bang |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:37 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com