~ House Republicans New Conf ~

[spoon]

It's on at least CNN now, and it's a fucking political tactic so it's obviously pissing me off. Oh and Eric Cantor from Virginia is 100% gay. My dear lord I hope he's not one of those loud anti-gay repubs.

As for the meeting, I'm so sick of hearing "what's best for main street" from both parties. And they truly looked like the stereotypical bankers in the WAMU commercials all lined up there looking soooo uncomfortable. I'm big on them going against Bush, but too little too late (fucking October 2008)!!

[spoon]

My favorite line was, "we must protect the taxpayer". Again, too late and since when!? Unless they mean all 6 of the company heads still in the US taking home 25+ million salaries. If so, I AGREE! We need to protect them.

[scottinnj]

I started streaming this from fox, and after the 10th time I heard "crisis" closed the window.

[K.C.]

How is this not the death rattle of the Republican Party???

Their sitting President, and the current leader of their party who's running for President both press the party hard to pass this thing in the face of catastrophic consequences.

More than 2/3rd of the party vote against it, after GUARANTEEING they had the votes to Pelosi.

Unreal.

[foodcourtdruide]

How is this not the death rattle of the Republican Party???

Their sitting President, and the current leader of their party who's running for President both press the party hard to pass this thing in the face of catastrophic consequences.

More than 2/3rd of the party vote against it, after GUARANTEEING they had the votes to Pelosi.

Unreal.

I'm waiting for Blowhard to tell us how this is the ACLU's fault.

[Tallman388]

How is this not the death rattle of the Republican Party???

Their sitting President, and the current leader of their party who's running for President both press the party hard to pass this thing in the face of catastrophic consequences.

More than 2/3rd of the party vote against it, after GUARANTEEING they had the votes to Pelosi.

Unreal.

Or she could have just gotten 20 colleagues from her own party to vote in favor of it. Unfortunately it's election season and some of them have to worry about their image at home.

[K.C.]

Or she could have just gotten 20 colleagues from her own party to vote in favor of it. Unfortunately it's election season and some of them have to worry about their image at home.

She was told, on the record, by the House Republican leadership they had 80 votes. It's a crisis. As soon as you have enough votes to pass it, you bring it to a vote.

They would have never brought it to a vote, if they hadn't been told that.

The Republicans only delivered 68 or 67.

It's not like she can go muster more votes after they already voted.

The House Republicans screwed up royally.

[Dougie Brootal]

kevin sux sack
:lol:

[JPMNICK]

it kind of makes sense the republicans would vote against this, it really does go against what the party believes in.

[Zorro]

She was told, on the record, by the House Republican leadership they had 80 votes. It's a crisis. As soon as you have enough votes to pass it, you bring it to a vote.

They would have never brought it to a vote, if they hadn't been told that.

The Republicans only delivered 68 or 67.

It's not like she can go muster more votes after they already voted.

The House Republicans screwed up royally.

Disagree...last time they believed their President and rushed though legislation 4,000 Americans died. There's no reason why this had to be done today. The Bush Admin and Dem ldrs are trying to gin up a crisis so they can look like they're doing something.

[JPMNICK]

I think it is better this is not done, I think letting the markets figure this out is the best way to go. In the end, months or years down the line, the Government can step in and handle somethings. For now the markets are adjusting to a totally new world

[Freitag]

it kind of makes sense the republicans would vote against this, it really does go against what the party believes in.

Correct. The Republicans believe in personal responsibility. A bailout is the direct opposite of this.

[Recyclerz]

Disagree...last time they believed their President and rushed though legislation 4,000 Americans died. There's no reason why this had to be done today. The Bush Admin and Dem ldrs are trying to gin up a crisis so they can look like they're doing something.

Couldn't agree more on the first part and disagree more with the second part. I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure this is a real financial crisis which could easily turn into a real economic crisis. If the foreigners think we can't run our own shop anymore and stop lending us money because of this, things are going to get pretty bad pretty quick.

FWIW, this is coming from somebody who has spent pretty much all of the last 7.5 years complaining/whining about The Decider. You could look it up! :wink:

[K.C.]

Correct. The Republicans believe in personal responsibility. A bailout is the direct opposite of this.

Which is fair enough.

But, since they're against it, and have offered no viable counter-proposal, they forfeit the right to all bitching about the ensuing corporate collapses, job loss, higher unemployment, etc.

[JPMNICK]

Which is fair enough.

But, since they're against it, and have offered no viable counter-proposal, they forfeit the right to all bitching about the ensuing corporate collapses, job loss, higher unemployment, etc.

no matter what people are going to bitch, but i honestly think this is the best move FOR NOW. i think re-evaluating the situation in 6 months is fine. this was a knee jerk proposal.

[K.C.]

Saw this on Andrew Sullivan's site, and found it appropriate.

Just substitute 'prime minister' for 'president' and it's a fit.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QpZhugomNJE&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QpZhugomNJE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[K.C.]

no matter what people are going to bitch, but i honestly think this is the best move FOR NOW. i think re-evaluating the situation in 6 months is fine. this was a knee jerk proposal.

Six months from now, who knows how many institutions will have collapsed. Wachovia bit it, today.

[JPMNICK]

Six months from now, who knows how many institutions will have collapsed. Wachovia bit it, today.

a lot will collapse, the smaller regional banks will strengthen, and in a 10 years the regional banks now will be national. it is just the life cycle of the economy. This really is a good thing long term, just eats balls right now

[pennington]

She was told, on the record, by the House Republican leadership they had 80 votes. It's a crisis. As soon as you have enough votes to pass it, you bring it to a vote.

They would have never brought it to a vote, if they hadn't been told that.

The Republicans only delivered 68 or 67.

Some of the Republicans in the House balked after Pelosi gave this speech before the vote. She has to be the worst Speaker in the last 40 years, she already started the next campaign before she had the legislation she supported. Can you imagine Tip O'Neill doing something like this before a vote?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ey3ZlsmIkz4

[spoon]

Something HAS to be done to address this. Sorry, just letting it get figured out could cripple the US for decades vs. a tough patch with adjustments along the way. Sorry, if we can throw money away on a bullshit war, we can spend some money to help ourselves. We also need to hold those responsible accountable.....and since repubs are so big on "personal responsibility" this should be easy right!?!?!? Don't make me laugh.

Both parties are trying to turn this into a political gain and it makes me fucking sick. They continually play this off on each other's bad moves for election one-liners.

[JPMNICK]

Something HAS to be done to address this. Sorry, just letting it get figured out could cripple the US for decades vs. a tough patch with adjustments along the way. Sorry, if we can throw money away on a bullshit war, we can spend some money to help ourselves. We also need to hold those responsible accountable.....and since repubs are so big on "personal responsibility" this should be easy right!?!?!? Don't make me laugh.

Both parties are trying to turn this into a political gain and it makes me fucking sick. They continually play this off on each other's bad moves for election one-liners.

i think it is to soon to throw this much money out there. I am not against a bailout, I am against it right now. WAAAYYYY to much is going on right now to even predict where we will be in 6 months. Letting the banks scoop each other up and pick up the debts of other banks is a good thing for the economy and the country. once they consolidate the books, we will have a better idea of what bad loans are really out there.

[spoon]

a lot will collapse, the smaller regional banks will strengthen, and in a 10 years the regional banks now will be national. it is just the life cycle of the economy. This really is a good thing long term, just eats balls right now

Amazing greed, lack of regulation and "personal responsibility" in government and business is a good thing/natural? I disagree.

[K.C.]

Some of the Republicans in the House balked after Pelosi gave this speech before the vote. She has to be the worst Speaker in the last 40 years, she already started the next campaign before she had the legislation she supported. Can you imagine Tip O'Neill doing something like this before a vote?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ey3ZlsmIkz4

The rationale 'she hurt our feelings' is not a good enough rationale for how to vote on a measure that will determine the immediate economic future of this country.

[spoon]

i think it is to soon to throw this much money out there. I am not against a bailout, I am against it right now. WAAAYYYY to much is going on right now to even predict where we will be in 6 months. Letting the banks scoop each other up and pick up the debts of other banks is a good thing for the economy and the country. once they consolidate the books, we will have a better idea of what bad loans are really out there.

The problem is that our economy will be crippled. There will be NO loans of almost any kind available, on top of not being able to even draw on your own fucking money even if FDIC protected. Sure it's still yours, when they have it and want to give it to you. The housing market would be done, as if it isn't in bad enough shape right now already. The market will also be crushed.....way more than now, along with the dollar being worthless. We won't even be able to afford shit on the world market, and gas....well, $5 /gallon will look like a bargain. Then these things all start their own domino effects.

Not good at all.

[spoon]

The rationale 'she hurt our feelings' is not a good enough rationale for how to vote on a measure that will determine the immediate economic future of this country.

She's right.

Yet Clinton did continue the deregulation train in some areas however minor compared to Regan and W.

[Recyclerz]

i think it is to soon to throw this much money out there. I am not against a bailout, I am against it right now. WAAAYYYY to much is going on right now to even predict where we will be in 6 months. Letting the banks scoop each other up and pick up the debts of other banks is a good thing for the economy and the country. once they consolidate the books, we will have a better idea of what bad loans are really out there.

The only banks that are getting scooped up are those with some government guarantees attached. Lehman couldn't get one and hello bankruptcy. If the commercial paper markets freeze up there won't be much of a debate whether we're in a recession or not inside of a week's time.

EDIT:

The problem is that our economy will be crippled. There will be NO loans of almost any kind available, on top of not being able to even draw on your own fucking money even if FDIC protected. Sure it's still yours, when they have it and want to give it to you. The housing market would be done, as if it isn't in bad enough shape right now already. The market will also be crushed.....way more than now, along with the dollar being worthless. We won't even be able to afford shit on the world market, and gas....well, $5 /gallon will look like a bargain. Then these things all start their own domino effects.

Not good at all.


Seconded.

[spoon]

I also don't understand how this financial crisis is such a shock to the leadership on both sides. I'm not even in finance in any form and have seen the writing on the wall in all different areas.

Hell, look at consumer safety for example. How many cranes have fallen, toys are Pb tainted, food are contaminated, mines have collapsed? It's just more examples of greed versus humanity and the erosion of the middle class, it's values and it's worth. In their eyes, we're just pawns to make them profits at almost any cost. This didn't happen overnight, but it's amazing how far we've fallen. Credit is the big illusion people in this country have been wrapped up in, now the curtain is pulled.

[FezsAssistant]

Everyday, my theory that GWB is a liberal is supported more and more.

[spoon]

Everyday, my theory that GWB is a liberal is supported more and more.

nice try, he's ur fuck up

[epo]

At its core this is a bi-partisan problem and it demands a bi-partisan solution. Yes it was Phil Gramm that wrote the 1999 banking bill, but President Clinton did sign it...so fuck it we're all in this shithouse.

How about a root cause? How about a fix? How about a long-term solution?

Its shit like this stunt today that makes people hate government. And honestly, that's what this bullshit today was....a goddamn stunt. I'm sure the bill sucked, but the tactics used by house republicans suck just as much, if not more.

:wallbash:

[pennington]

The rationale 'she hurt our feelings' is not a good enough rationale for how to vote on a measure that will determine the immediate economic future of this country.
The point is this was to be bi-partisan legislation. To make a partisan speech like that right before the vote is incompetence. She's got no one to blame but herself.

This isn't going to go away. The house will work through this and come out with new legislation that I bet will look a lot like this legislation.

[K.C.]

The point is this was to be bi-partisan legislation. To make a partisan speech like that right before the vote is incompetence. She's got no one to blame but herself.


So, you call her a cunt, or whatever the political equivalent of that is.

But to change your vote based on THAT not only raises questions of incompetence, but show that whoever these 12 were that jumped ship are some the most out of touch douchebags in Congress.

Make no mistake. They're going to shoulder the blame for it in the end, anyway. Not Pelosi.

It was a ridiculous attempt at grandstanding that fucked a lot of people in the real world today. Like I said, Wachovia tumbled. Who knows who's next.

[Kevin]

I blame Gvac for all of this. Every since he told a few of us that he was moving to Tennessee, all of this happened.

[epo]

Some of the Republicans in the House balked after Pelosi gave this speech before the vote. She has to be the worst Speaker in the last 40 years, she already started the next campaign before she had the legislation she supported. Can you imagine Tip O'Neill doing something like this before a vote?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ey3ZlsmIkz4

At the end of the day, this is NOT a Nancy Pelosi problem, this is a George Bush problem. This legislation has been pushed by him and he couldn't get a 1/3 of his party to back him. It shouldn't matter if Nancy Pelosi slapped each of them with a dirty tampon, Bush simply didn't deliver his own party.

Some leader.

Now let's get over ourselves and get something done.

[epo]

Interesting analysis from 538.com on this. (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/swing-district-congressmen-doomed.html)


From the solid districts of representatives that essentially don't have to worry about their seats: 197 for, 198 against.
From the "swing districts" of the House: 8 for, 30 against.


While 538 blames the swing districts, I would look at it differently. I guess my question would be about the 198 solid "against" votes. What the hell was their problem?

[Tallman388]

So, you call her a cunt, or whatever the political equivalent of that is.

But to change your vote based on THAT not only raises questions of incompetence, but show that whoever these 12 were that jumped ship are some the most out of touch douchebags in Congress.

Make no mistake. They're going to shoulder the blame for it in the end, anyway. Not Pelosi.

It was a ridiculous attempt at grandstanding that fucked a lot of people in the real world today. Like I said, Wachovia tumbled. Who knows who's next.

So 12 republicans have to shoulder the blame? How about spreading it on both sides? 13 Democrats up for re-election who have been deemed vulnerable voted nay, so did 17 vulnerable republicans. Maybe the bill stunk just enough that they didn't want to risk it. Or maybe they're just sissies. My Congressman voted no and basically said in a conference call that the bill didn't go far enough in terms of regulation and reform. I don't necessarily like it, but I see his point.

[HBox]

people really need to stop calling this a bailout, It isn't. We are buying troubled assets from these banks. They are worth something. The reason they are crushing the banks is because they can't put values on these assets and therefore value them at zero, crushing their balance sheets. The government would take these assets and give them breathing room. And then we would collect the value on these loans. The real cost of this could be anywhere from $100 billion to us actually making money off of this. One thing I can guarantee is that it won't cost the taxpayer $700 billion in the end.

And if anyone thinks their job is immune to the the worst case scenario here I can tell you this: YOU ARE WRONG.

And just to keep this all in perspective: How much value did the markets lose today? $1.4 trillion. We lost twice the amount of the financial relief bill just today.

[Zorro]

Doesn't this all feel very WMD...crisis, danger etc. Sorry, but I just don't think that you can solve a problem years in the making in three or four days.

[HBox]

Doesn't this all feel very WMD...crisis, danger etc. Sorry, but I just don't think that you can solve a problem years in the making in three or four days.

This isn't a solution. There is going to be a bad recession no matter what. This bill is simply trying to stop it from being even worse than that.

Bush finds so many new, original ways to fuck this country. Now despite every financial analyst warning of extreme danger even is they disagree with this particular bill Bush warning of the same thing eclipses all that and has people doubting it.

[K.C.]

So 12 republicans have to shoulder the blame? How about spreading it on both sides? 13 Democrats up for re-election who have been deemed vulnerable voted nay, so did 17 vulnerable republicans. Maybe the bill stunk just enough that they didn't want to risk it. Or maybe they're just sissies. My Congressman voted no and basically said in a conference call that the bill didn't go far enough in terms of regulation and reform. I don't necessarily like it, but I see his point.

Absolutely, the Democrats bear some blame.

But the reason I put more on the Republicans' shoulders is their justification for it.

Whoever led the House Republican press conference today walked right out, held up a copy of Nancy Pelosi's speech, and said they lost 12 votes, and the speech was why.

That was THEIR rationale.

It's not something I made up...it's not spin from the Democratic side.

So either the Republican leadership is lying, and they never had the 80 votes, and are using this as a cover, or 12 people who were in favor of an economic relief bill changed their mind because Nancy Pelosi hurt their feelings.

It's just a completely ridiculous notion.

Yes, the Democrats who voted against it probably did so largely for electoral considerations. It's shitty, and if I had a Congressman who did that for that reason, I would not vote for him.

I imagine the majority of Republicans did it for a variety of reasons, that included.

But the bottom line is that the 12 who jumped ship at the last minute with 'hurt feelings' killed this bill.


On a side note, could John McCain look any weaker? He suspends his campaign to deliver the House Republicans on the bill, and not only 2/3rds of them vote against, but even the 80 that pledged to vote didn't hold up.

[HBox]

Absolutely, the Democrats bear some blame.

But the reason I put more on the Republicans' shoulders is their justification for it.

Whoever led the House Republican press conference today walked right out, held up a copy of Nancy Pelosi's speech, and said they lost 12 votes, and the speech was why.

That was THEIR rationale.

It's not something I made up...it's not spin from the Democratic side.

So either the Republican leadership is lying, and they never had the 80 votes, and are using this as a cover, or 12 people who were in favor of an economic relief bill changed their mind because Nancy Pelosi hurt their feelings.

It's just a completely ridiculous notion.

Yes, the Democrats who voted against it probably did so largely for electoral considerations. It's shitty, and if I had a Congressman who did that for that reason, I would not vote for him.

I imagine the majority of Republicans did it for a variety of reasons, that included.

But the bottom line is that the 12 who jumped ship at the last minute with 'hurt feelings' killed this bill.


On a side note, could John McCain look any weaker? He suspends his campaign to deliver the House Republicans on the bill, and not only 2/3rds of them vote against, but even the 80 that pledged to vote didn't hold up.

When you made that comment on that Blair video you posted you really should have replaced "President" with "Republican Candidate." McCain did everything he could to inject himself into this. If his spokespeople are to be believed he was working House Republicans on this bill all weekend.

That video is the best thing ever. The way Blair stares Major down at the beginning like "You SON OF A BITCH" then turns back to his party and is like "You believe this dipshit?" and then just stares him down and goes "WEAK WEAK WEAK." British politics rule so much.

[underdog]

And if anyone thinks their job is immune to the the worst case scenario here I can tell you this: YOU ARE WRONG.

No, I'll be fine.

My wife's job, however, I'm actually worried about. Especially seeing that one of the companies that purchased her company already declared bankruptcy.

Also, I've been putting off setting up my 401K at my new job for a little while and I'm starting to think it was one of the best ideas I've ever had.

[HBox]

No, I'll be fine.

My wife's job, however, I'm actually worried about. Especially seeing that one of the companies that purchased her company already declared bankruptcy.

Also, I've been putting off setting up my 401K at my new job for a little while and I'm starting to think it was one of the best ideas I've ever had.

I don't care where you work, if the shit hits the fan the chaos will spread to every industry everywhere eventually.

[K.C.]

When you made that comment on that Blair video you posted you really should have replaced "President" with "Republican Candidate." McCain did everything he could to inject himself into this. If his spokespeople are to be believed he was working House Republicans on this bill all weekend.

I don't why it should still surprise me, but I'm just astonished that Bush has so little pull with his own party at this point.

As bad as McCain looks on this (and I hope next time McCain talks about bipartisanship in Washington, Obama throws it in his face he doesn't even hold any sway with his own party), this illustrates more so what a colossal failure the Bush presidency has been.

I think it's pretty much unprecedented a sitting President can't deliver a majority of his own party on one of his economic plans.

[underdog]

I don't care where you work, if the shit hits the fan the chaos will spread to every industry everywhere eventually.

I make my living off of filthy rich college kids buying cheap furniture. If they stop being filthy rich, they'll still be rich and still looking for cheap furniture. Until colleges start going under, I'm fine.

[PhilDeez]

Absolutely, the Democrats bear some blame.

But the reason I put more on the Republicans' shoulders is their justification for it.

Whoever led the House Republican press conference today walked right out, held up a copy of Nancy Pelosi's speech, and said they lost 12 votes, and the speech was why.

That was THEIR rationale.

It's not something I made up...it's not spin from the Democratic side.

So either the Republican leadership is lying, and they never had the 80 votes, and are using this as a cover, or 12 people who were in favor of an economic relief bill changed their mind because Nancy Pelosi hurt their feelings.

It's just a completely ridiculous notion.

Yes, the Democrats who voted against it probably did so largely for electoral considerations. It's shitty, and if I had a Congressman who did that for that reason, I would not vote for him.

I imagine the majority of Republicans did it for a variety of reasons, that included.

But the bottom line is that the 12 who jumped ship at the last minute with 'hurt feelings' killed this bill.


On a side note, could John McCain look any weaker? He suspends his campaign to deliver the House Republicans on the bill, and not only 2/3rds of them vote against, but even the 80 that pledged to vote didn't hold up.

I agree with you. However, Barny Frank can't deliver 12 of the 36 dems that sit on the committee he chairs, and then he wants to call out the 12 Republicans?
I have listened to some Rep. spin that they truely didn't believe in putting the burden on the tax payer, that's great but you have to say that first, not blame Pelosi's bullshit, which it was.

[HBox]

I make my living off of filthy rich college kids buying cheap furniture. If they stop being filthy rich, they'll still be rich and still looking for cheap furniture. Until colleges start going under, I'm fine.

If you sell anything on credit start getting worried very soon. If not you'll be OK for a while.

[Zorro]

This isn't a solution. There is going to be a bad recession no matter what. This bill is simply trying to stop it from being even worse than that.

Bush finds so many new, original ways to fuck this country. Now despite every financial analyst warning of extreme danger even is they disagree with this particular bill Bush warning of the same thing eclipses all that and has people doubting it.

I'm not saying there isn't a problem. What I am saying is that a bill thrown together in the middle of the night and not fully debated is not the way to solve the problem. Everytime this country rushes headlong into a solution it makes the situation worse.

[Friday]

it's always fun being at work and listening to the president of the company talk about finding someone to help with his assisted suicide... lol

real estate development is not a comfortable business right now!

[HBox]

I'm not saying there isn't a problem. What I am saying is that a bill thrown together in the middle of the night and not fully debated is not the way to solve the problem. Everytime this country rushes headlong into a solution it makes the situation worse.

I hope we have time. We can't take too many more days on the market like today. Forget even the Dow which has ravaged today. The S&P 500 is a much more representative example of how all businesses are doing and that was hit even harder than the Dow, falling 9%.

[Zorro]

I hope we have time. We can't take too many more days on the market like today. Forget even the Dow which has ravaged today. The S&P 500 is a much more representative example of how all businesses are doing and that was hit even harder than the Dow, falling 9%.

If I said to you 6 months ago that the former head of Goldman-Sachs was going to come up with a plan to fix the economy. You'd have told me I was nuts, but that's exactly what's going on here. The guys that led us down this tunnel are now the ones that are going to dig us out?

[HBox]

If I said to you 6 months ago that the former head of Goldman-Sachs was going to come up with a plan to fix the economy. You'd have told me I was nuts, but that's exactly what's going on here. The guys that led us down this tunnel are now the ones that are going to dig us out?

Well Jon Corzine was a former head of Goldman Sachs and he can........ ummm.............


































































nevermind.

[KnoxHarrington]

What I think happened was that these Congressmen have been having their phones ring off the hook with angry voters screaming at them to not give Wall Street a bailout. They panicked, and voted no. But I think that the stock market absolutely shitting the bed today -- and it probably won't be much better tomorrow -- might outweigh the anger some voters have about giving those fatcats on Wall Street money.

I do blame Bush in this regard: rather than actually getting out there, and trying to explain this, and why we need to go ahead and do this thing, he immediately went into the "BEND TO MY WILL AND IF YOU QUESTION ME YOU HATE AMERICA" tone he's used so much in his term. It reminded me a lot of the way they ramrodded through the Patriot Act, really. But you can't do that shit with a 26% approval rating, Dubya. he probably fucked it up from the start, much more so than any Pelosi speech (which I do think didn't help.)

[epo]

Robert Reich has a prediction on his blog (http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/09/stalled-deal.html) about this mess:

Prediction: A scaled-down bill will be enacted by the end of the week. It will provide the Treasury with a first installment of $150 billion. Treasury can use it to back Wall Street’s bad debts with lend no-interest loans of up to two years, until the housing market rebounds. Or to invest in Wall Street houses directly, in exchange for stocks and stock warrants. There will be strict oversight. Congressional leaders will promise further installments, but with conditions calling for limits on salaries and relief to distressed homeowners.

Not too shabby if that goes down.....

[Tenbatsuzen]

HBox, I market 401Ks. Should I be worried about MY job?

[JPMNICK]

Robert Reich has a prediction on his blog (http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/09/stalled-deal.html) about this mess:



Not too shabby if that goes down.....

that is an awesome plan, and will benefit everyone. instead of brute forcing this problem, they are going to finess it which makes so much more sense

[HBox]

HBox, I market 401Ks. Should I be worried about MY job?

Long answer no with a but, short answer yes with an if.........

[Dan 'Hampton]

Why couldn't Pelosi deliver more Dem's? Seems like the simple answer.