kallend 2,227 #26 September 30, 2008 QuoteHoly-donkey-batman... Did anyone read my post? Has anyone paid attention to the events of the past week (democrat leadership lining up alongside SecTreas, President Bush, beating the drum that something must be done or the end of the world will arrive 50B years early)? Let me put it simple terms: In light of yesterday's vote, and previous big initiatives that went down the tubes, if I were a democrat, I wouldn't be very pleased with their ability to lead. So, those that are on that side of the aisle, are you really happy with what they're doing? If I recall correctly (which I do) the GOP house and senate leadership was right there in the White House too, and the GOP failed to deliver 66% of their members' votes. So their leadership failure is even more evident.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #27 September 30, 2008 why would they vote for a bill they didn't wright, like or the people that vote for them wanted? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,227 #28 September 30, 2008 Quote why would they vote for a bill they didn't wright, like or the people that vote for them wanted? Why would the dems? Why are you holding them to a different standard? The bill came from the Bush Treasury and had the support of the GOP congessional leadership.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #29 October 1, 2008 QuoteQuoteHoly-donkey-batman... Did anyone read my post? Has anyone paid attention to the events of the past week (democrat leadership lining up alongside SecTreas, President Bush, beating the drum that something must be done or the end of the world will arrive 50B years early)? Let me put it simple terms: In light of yesterday's vote, and previous big initiatives that went down the tubes, if I were a democrat, I wouldn't be very pleased with their ability to lead. So, those that are on that side of the aisle, are you really happy with what they're doing? If I recall correctly (which I do) the GOP house and senate leadership was right there in the White House too, and the GOP failed to deliver 66% of their members' votes. So their leadership failure is even more evident. 66% are the smart ones"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #30 October 1, 2008 Lol... excuses excuses... the fact remains... your dems coulda passed it on their own. I'm glad at least 2/3 of the reps have some sense... no matter where the bill came from. Bitch about the dems for once, come on... you can do it... or can you?Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,227 #31 October 1, 2008 QuoteLol... excuses excuses... the fact remains... your dems coulda passed it on their own. I'm glad at least 2/3 of the reps have some sense... no matter where the bill came from. Bitch about the dems for once, come on... you can do it... or can you? Read the OP again, you seem to have missed an important point.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #32 October 1, 2008 QuoteQuote why would they vote for a bill they didn't wright, like or the people that vote for them wanted? Why would the dems? Why are you holding them to a different standard? The bill came from the Bush Treasury and had the support of the GOP congessional leadership. You're funny. The bill came out of the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Rep. Frank.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #33 October 1, 2008 QuoteRead the OP again, you seem to have missed an important point. The OP asked YOU (in general) if you were happy with Pelosi and the ineffective hacks on THAT side... so why are you talking about something off-topic? Seriously, just admit it. It's okay... your guys are hacks. Ineffective, blame deferring hacks. They can't get anything done even within their own party so they cry and blame the party that SHOULDN'T be voting for it in the first place.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #34 October 1, 2008 QuoteYou're funny. The bill came out of the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Rep. Frank. No, it came out of the White House. The President promised cats and dogs living together if not passed. And yet his own party took a look at it and went running. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,227 #35 October 1, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote why would they vote for a bill they didn't wright, like or the people that vote for them wanted? Why would the dems? Why are you holding them to a different standard? The bill came from the Bush Treasury and had the support of the GOP congessional leadership. You're funny. The bill came out of the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Rep. Frank. And they got the draft from the tooth fairy? Here's a hint - the WSJ calls it "The Paulson Plan" Boehner and Blunt (the GOP leadership in the House) both supported it. Looks like THEY were the unsuccessful leaders.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #36 October 1, 2008 QuoteQuoteYou're funny. The bill came out of the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Rep. Frank. No, it came out of the White House. The President promised cats and dogs living together if not passed. And yet his own party took a look at it and went running. Actually, I stand corrected, it sponsored by Charles Rangel (D-NY-15) off the House Ways and Means Committee, but Rep. Frank's committee did the inner works... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:3:./temp/~bda2ax::|/bss/110search.html|So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,227 #37 October 1, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou're funny. The bill came out of the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Rep. Frank. No, it came out of the White House. The President promised cats and dogs living together if not passed. And yet his own party took a look at it and went running. Actually, I stand corrected, it sponsored by Charles Rangel (D-NY-15) off the House Ways and Means Committee, but Rep. Frank's committee did the inner works... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:3:./temp/~bda2ax::|/bss/110search.html| It's Paulson's plan. Paulson can't sponsor it in the House, it has to be a member. The committee made adjustments to the decor, but Paulson is the architect.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #38 October 1, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteYou're funny. The bill came out of the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Rep. Frank. No, it came out of the White House. The President promised cats and dogs living together if not passed. And yet his own party took a look at it and went running. Actually, I stand corrected, it sponsored by Charles Rangel (D-NY-15) off the House Ways and Means Committee, but Rep. Frank's committee did the inner works... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:3:./temp/~bda2ax::|/bss/110search.html| It's Paulson's plan. Paulson can't sponsor it in the House, it has to be a member. The committee made adjustments to the decor, but Paulson is the architect. You're still funny...Paulson isn't a lawmaker. He may have set forth the framework, but the pork and bullsh*t that was initially rejected last week, was not the work of the SecTreas...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,227 #39 October 1, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteYou're funny. The bill came out of the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Rep. Frank. No, it came out of the White House. The President promised cats and dogs living together if not passed. And yet his own party took a look at it and went running. Actually, I stand corrected, it sponsored by Charles Rangel (D-NY-15) off the House Ways and Means Committee, but Rep. Frank's committee did the inner works... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:3:./temp/~bda2ax::|/bss/110search.html| It's Paulson's plan. Paulson can't sponsor it in the House, it has to be a member. The committee made adjustments to the decor, but Paulson is the architect. You're still funny...Paulson isn't a lawmaker. He may have set forth the framework, but the pork and bullsh*t that was initially rejected last week, was not the work of the SecTreas... You have just restated what I wrote, using different words.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #40 October 1, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote You're funny. The bill came out of the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Rep. Frank. No, it came out of the White House. The President promised cats and dogs living together if not passed. And yet his own party took a look at it and went running. Actually, I stand corrected, it sponsored by Charles Rangel (D-NY-15) off the House Ways and Means Committee, but Rep. Frank's committee did the inner works... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:3:./temp/~bda2ax::|/bss/110search.html| It's Paulson's plan. Paulson can't sponsor it in the House, it has to be a member. The committee made adjustments to the decor, but Paulson is the architect. You're still funny...Paulson isn't a lawmaker. He may have set forth the framework, but the pork and bullsh*t that was initially rejected last week, was not the work of the SecTreas... You have just restated what I wrote, using different words. That's fine...just tell me I'm right then...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,227 #41 October 1, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote You're funny. The bill came out of the House Committee on Financial Services, chaired by Rep. Frank. No, it came out of the White House. The President promised cats and dogs living together if not passed. And yet his own party took a look at it and went running. Actually, I stand corrected, it sponsored by Charles Rangel (D-NY-15) off the House Ways and Means Committee, but Rep. Frank's committee did the inner works... http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:3:./temp/~bda2ax::|/bss/110search.html| It's Paulson's plan. Paulson can't sponsor it in the House, it has to be a member. The committee made adjustments to the decor, but Paulson is the architect. You're still funny...Paulson isn't a lawmaker. He may have set forth the framework, but the pork and bullsh*t that was initially rejected last week, was not the work of the SecTreas... You have just restated what I wrote, using different words. That's fine...just tell me I'm right then... Don't need to, you've just awarded yourself a prize for agreeing with me. And the bill was pushed by Boehner and Blunt. So to reprise: Pelosi failed to deliver 41% Boehner failed to deliver 66%... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #42 October 1, 2008 QuoteAnd the bill was pushed by Boehner and Blunt. So to reprise: Pelosi failed to deliver 41% Boehner failed to deliver 66% I'm starting to worry about you. Really. Pelosi could have passed the bill on her own with her people that she couldn't deliver. These are people who are all for government "taking care" of people, economy, etc. The 66% of republicans that voted against, stood up for what is right (and in line with conservative thought). The fact that some republicans are FOR the bill doesn't make it right. Pelosi is a failure. She could have done it all from within the dem party and couldn't do it. Can you not see that? Oh well, carry on pointing the other way... even when it's irrelevant.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #43 October 1, 2008 QuoteQuoteAnd the bill was pushed by Boehner and Blunt. So to reprise: Pelosi failed to deliver 41% Boehner failed to deliver 66% I'm starting to worry about you. Really. Pelosi could have passed the bill on her own with her people that she couldn't deliver. These are people who are all for government "taking care" of people, economy, etc. The 66% of republicans that voted against, stood up for what is right (and in line with conservative thought). The fact that some republicans are FOR the bill doesn't make it right. Pelosi is a failure. She could have done it all from within the dem party and couldn't do it. Can you not see that? Oh well, carry on pointing the other way... even when it's irrelevant. At this point I am not sure she is a failure. It appears the bill failing is what she wanted. Hmmmm, we will see The only way she would have let it pass was if she had more votes from the other side."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,227 #44 October 1, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteAnd the bill was pushed by Boehner and Blunt. So to reprise: Pelosi failed to deliver 41% Boehner failed to deliver 66% I'm starting to worry about you. Really. Pelosi could have passed the bill on her own with her people that she couldn't deliver. These are people who are all for government "taking care" of people, economy, etc. The 66% of republicans that voted against, stood up for what is right (and in line with conservative thought). The fact that some republicans are FOR the bill doesn't make it right. Pelosi is a failure. She could have done it all from within the dem party and couldn't do it. Can you not see that? Oh well, carry on pointing the other way... even when it's irrelevant. At this point I am not sure she is a failure. It appears the bill failing is what she wanted. Hmmmm, we will see The only way she would have let it pass was if she had more votes from the other side. Still going with the conspiracy theories, eh?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,227 #45 October 1, 2008 QuoteQuoteAnd the bill was pushed by Boehner and Blunt. So to reprise: Pelosi failed to deliver 41% Boehner failed to deliver 66% I'm starting to worry about you. Really. . Didn't your dad teach you that 41 is less than 66? When it came to delivering what they promised, neither looked good but Boehner looked terrible.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Trent 0 #46 October 1, 2008 Let me make this REALLY simple for you, professor, since you're having a hard time understanding many things here today. I DON'T CARE THAT BOEHNER FAILED TO DELIVER 66% OF REPUBLICAN VOTES!!! He should have delivered 0%!! He's wrong on the bill, so's Bush, so's Pelosi, so's Obama, so's McCain... awww hell, anyone who wants this package is wrong. I DO think it is funny that your head boss lady was going to save America by getting this bill passed... and couldn't even get it passed with her own party people. Her numbers alone could have passed it. She failed. She got on her high horse, grandstanding, and it got put in her face. Just face it, it is LAUGHABLE that the people that were supposed to be for the bill, can't even get it passed. As I said before, conservatives should be against it from the start anyway so good job to the 66%ers!! Fail.Oh, hello again! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lummy 4 #47 October 1, 2008 QuoteAt this point I am not sure she is a failure. It appears the bill failing is what she wanted. Hmmmm, we will see The only way she would have let it pass was if she had more votes from the other side. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Still going with the conspiracy theories, eh? The dem leadership had made it pretty clear that this was a bill both sides would have to support. The Dem's wouldn't pass it on their own (by design) and the Rep's would have to stand behind it tooI promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #48 October 1, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote And the bill was pushed by Boehner and Blunt. So to reprise: Pelosi failed to deliver 41% Boehner failed to deliver 66% I'm starting to worry about you. Really. Pelosi could have passed the bill on her own with her people that she couldn't deliver. These are people who are all for government "taking care" of people, economy, etc. The 66% of republicans that voted against, stood up for what is right (and in line with conservative thought). The fact that some republicans are FOR the bill doesn't make it right. Pelosi is a failure. She could have done it all from within the dem party and couldn't do it. Can you not see that? Oh well, carry on pointing the other way... even when it's irrelevant. At this point I am not sure she is a failure. It appears the bill failing is what she wanted. Hmmmm, we will see The only way she would have let it pass was if she had more votes from the other side. Still going with the conspiracy theories, eh? Wow you are really desperate I simply made a statement of a report I heard. Never said well here you go. You know, like you do. If one thinks about it, it makes sense given all that has happened before and then during the voting. In any event, your tin hat is tooooooo tight. Maybe you can relax a little if you let it off a bit"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #49 October 1, 2008 Quote Quote Quote And the bill was pushed by Boehner and Blunt. So to reprise: Pelosi failed to deliver 41% Boehner failed to deliver 66% I'm starting to worry about you. Really. . Didn't your dad teach you that 41 is less than 66? When it came to delivering what they promised, neither looked good but Boehner looked terrible. Did your dad teach you that 41% of a 1000 is more than 66% of 500? I know it is an exageration but I did it to make the point that THE DEMS NEEDED NO REPUBLICAN VOTES TO PASS THE DAM THING IF THEY WANTED TOO!!!!! But, that fact is one you like to ignore, huh? "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #50 October 1, 2008 Quote Quote At this point I am not sure she is a failure. It appears the bill failing is what she wanted. Hmmmm, we will see The only way she would have let it pass was if she had more votes from the other side. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Still going with the conspiracy theories, eh? The dem leadership had made it pretty clear that this was a bill both sides would have to support. The Dem's wouldn't pass it on their own (by design) and the Rep's would have to stand behind it too While I agree with you , why do you suppose this is the case?????? There is a political reason if you think about it"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
